![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 |
If you could please help me to move the Richard aguirre article to a userification status so that I can develop the article. Mr. Aguirre is a famous San Diegan with both a political and musical back round that is of notoriety. I feel that I can get the article up to speed with all the references it will need. Thank you for your help. Wikimikesd (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to ask you to undelete my my user page, please. If memory serves, the final version prior to your deletion was non-controversial, and I would like it restored at least long enough that I might archive it off-site. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 06:48, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Your opinion on what would be the best photo for the Infobox in the Grant Morrison article is requested here. If you could take the time to participate, it would be greatly appreciated, but if you cannot, then disregard; you don't have to leave a note on my talk page either way. Nightscream (talk) 01:29, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Can you advise as to the status of this action referencing IP 24.177.120.138? Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 19:32, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The re-worded article of Balkan Holidays has got now deleted again for not being substantially different (which I disagree) from the article that was deleted following the original discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Balkan Holidays, where you deleted the first version. Could you please give reasons for the reason of deletion in the first instance? 83.244.229.226 (talk) 13:36, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Mahlon Pitney.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng {chat} 05:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Your Supreme Court list articles are fantastic! I could scarcely believe it when I stumbled across ones such as 2010 term opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States. Looking forward to helping you out next term! Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 11:58, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Any chance you could restore a version of this page just so I can save the info for my records? No problem with it being deleted again, I just wished I'd saved the info! Thanks PageantUpdater talk • contribs 23:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
This article that you deleted three months ago, Diary of a Bad Man, success and coverage has improved since then. It has been featured on BBC News back in July and over 20 million views on the channel, and regular radio interviews. Surely that should count as notable? 82.46.152.122 (talk) 13:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Hey, I saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dog's Pog, and deleted Dog's Pog, but the AfD also addressed other articles that were also related to that article as well. Just wanted to bring that to your attention in case you might have missed it. Thank you. - SudoGhost 17:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
I've seen that you have deleted a first shooter game called, "Cross Fire". Why delete it? (I have never played the game, just wondering why.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.245.57.78 (talk) 07:31, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | On 14 August 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bertha Heyman, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 19th-century swindler Bertha Heyman (pictured), known as "The Confidence Queen," conned men by pretending to be a wealthy woman who was unable to access her fortune? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template talk:Did you know/Bertha Heyman.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
Just saw your post from late July at the Village Pump regarding cemetery notavility. You may be interested in the Internet Archive's copious number of nineteenth-century Ohio county histories — the Allen County, Indiana (Fort Wayne) Public Library owns a massive collection of Ohio county histories, and they arranged for the Archive to get digital copies of them. County histories that I've used are generally careful to pay attention to at least some cemeteries. Nyttend (talk) 00:24, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Socratic Barnstar | |
I wish to award you The Socratic Barnstar for your having waded through an incredible long discussion in order to seek the consensus. Trying to follow the discussion must have been akin to chasing a reed in a whilwind. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:25, 22 August 2011 (UTC) |
You seem to be far more knowledgeable about this area of Wikipedia than I, so I shall certainly defer to you. I'm curious though, is there a naming convention guideline for court cases? NW (Talk) 18:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
hey you can delete this if you want but dont delete the fischers chameleon info please, im trying to expand it. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.82.99.249 (talk) 06:31, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
[2] I'm sure the goddess would have spanked you if she could. FuFoFuEd (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
I was about to request a New York City photo, but I see you've moved. Could I ask you to update your listing at Wikipedia:Wikipedians/Photographers? Got to admit I'm dissapointed to see I can't ask you. You've taken some wonderful pictures. Cloveapple (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
Cerejota (talk) 23:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your assistance. I've been a skeptic about whether these articles could be improved to be something other than an original compilation of some fans' favorite storylines. But it shows promise. It seems to have a much clearer inclusion criteria that's verifiable, and not just subjective opinion. I appreciate your edits to continually improve these types of lists. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:48, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Rajeshsng (talk) 12:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)why you delete as i am trying to make it in a new manner just undelete it so that i can make it in a justified manner help to improve the article not just to delete it .
Thanks for your help earlier regarding the footnote cites in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. I was wondering if you might be willing to go back to the FA review page (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/United States v. Wong Kim Ark/archive1) and see if you might have anything additional to say. The discussion has largely moved beyond proofreading / copyediting issues and is now dealing with content / source issues. Thanks for any insights you can offer. Richwales (talk · contribs) 03:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Typewriter Eraser, Scale X.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 07:50, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Category:NBC television network, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
I'll respond on my talk page. Savidan 22:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
One week after my explanation, neither you nor anyone else has responded here. If you are not satisfied, could you please raise your concerns at your earliest convenience. Savidan 03:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi - Can you briefly explain why you deleted the Zahn Hall entry, but have left other Notre Dame residence hall entries up? Dorms are a big part of the culture of Notre Dame, and if one dorm is seen as valid, then all other dorm entires should as well.
Hi - Can you briefly explain why you deleted the Zahn Hall entry, but have left other Notre Dame residence hall entries up? Dorms are a big part of the culture of Notre Dame, and if one dorm is seen as valid, then all other dorm entires should as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Znarky (talk • contribs) 11:52, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Postdlf. I see that you commented on Gh87's ridiculousness in some of these deletion debates. Well, he or she has gotten worse. Making bizarre claims about when an article can be recreated and what is important in deletion debates about fictional characters, which I responded to.[3] And nominating articles in obvious bad-faith, which I also responded to.[4]
Will you comment on this? don't even think this editor should be nominating articles for deletion. 174.137.184.36 (talk) 14:51, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
The biggest problem with Gh87 is that he's just wasting everyone's time with AFDs. These are at best merger/redirection candidates, so per WP:ATD he should have tried to deal with them through normal editing and discussion, and I don't think he's following WP:BEFORE but is instead judging the articles based on their current state. Even in his own comments (such as in the Janet Dillon AFD), he seems to be saying that a character is "not notable enough" or whatever, which doesn't make any reasonable case for deletion. After these are all closed as something other than "delete", if he continues to dump these on AFD we'll have a decent argument that it's disruption pure and simple. postdlf (talk) 15:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Found that article Rajagopal Kamath is deleted. The person is a notable popular science author and researcher who writes in Malayalam. Request for undeletion. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.92.82.37 (talk) 17:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
It is not a self promotion article. HE is a notable popular science author and researcher who has published at least 20 books. Kindly search with an additional 'm'Rajagopal kammath by any search engine. He is a spokesman for science in Kerala for the print and visual media and a proponent of science related achievements to the new generation. If possible kindly undelete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 111.92.83.103 (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
You gave me the message in my talk page. Therefore, I don't know if I should continue anymore. Before I re-edit my arguments, I shall give you my examples and need your opinions on them:
<insert title>
is not notable. The news did not cover him/her very much, and almost no one has inserted "real world" perspectives. The fact that the article did not improve from the current status as plot-only article suggests that no one outside soap dedication is aware of this fictional character."What do you think? How long should I break myself from nominating for PROD and AfD? --Gh87 (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
causa sui (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I just wanted to voice my concern. I hope you won't take it as an accusation, as I typically respect your well-reasoned opinions even when I disagree. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:50, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
The debate resulted a delete. If you want to challenge the results, try Wikipedia:Deletion review. --Gh87 (talk) 20:36, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Category:CBS television network, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 02:11, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Re this AfD, the nominator User:Dkchana ( contribs) appears not to have placed the appropriate tag at the top of the article Jimmy Hayes (ice hockey). I know it's stale, but since I can't see the article history, could you check? I'm looking into things, due to a flurry of prods, speedies, and AfD noms. Thanks. --Lexein (talk) 18:36, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
I saw your comment at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_October_19#Network_templates_2. It looks like you are in support of Keeping the templates, but you did not say so clearly.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Postdlf! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:50, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
Hello there, I noticed you took care of deleting the Jessica Greenwalt page (which was found un-notable by consensus), but there is still a link to the deletion discussion on the page. Would it be possible to remove the link to the discussion either now or at some point in the future, to avoid unrelated parties stumbling across it and perhaps misinterpreting the mundane nature of the deletion discussion? (I'm only asking to try to help Jessica out.)
Berlinetta1492 (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I noticed you commented on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tallest buildings in Missoula, Montana. There is a related discussion on some of the buildings from that list at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Interstate Center (Missoula). Any insights and opinions you can offer would be appreciated. Thank you --JonRidinger (talk) 14:29, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
There used to be a Wikopedia article for this, and it has been deleted. I noticed that it was restored, only to be once again deleted by you. Why, and if not for a reason, can you restore it, as it seems to be a VERY linked to (in other WikiP articles) and searched up (found stats.) organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadcubed (talk • contribs) 23:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi there Postdlf. I understand you're one of the admins supervising the flow of deletion requests on deletions discussions board. May I ask you to take a quick look at the discussion on article Vrezh which is still open despite the majority to keep? It seems that the discussion may have been overlooked for some reason because it's not even recorded at 2011 October 20 archive (the date the filing party tagged it). I'd really appreciate your help. Thanks! Tuscumbia (talk) 18:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for saving this. I despair at the logic of some Wikipedia editors sometimes. :) Vexorg (talk) 02:33, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
You recently took part in a deletion discussion for this film, but given new information that the film is now on hold[5][6], would suggest a redirect to Paradise Lost#Films is more appropriate as per WP:NFF, and as per suggested by multiple editors at the deletion discussion. Would appreciate input at Talk:Paradise Lost (2013 film)#Redirect. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alana Lee is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alana Lee (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Toddst1 (talk) 19:31, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
I've noted a few items in tagging for ((Photo of art)) where based on the seeming date of installation, the use of a non-fair use tag might not actually be needed. I've tagged the small number of cases as ((Wrong license)) but would appreciate someone with your level of expertise reviewing. File:Solomon Juneau Memorial Statue from Milwaukee Dec. 2010.JPG being one such example. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:35, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Image_copyright_wizard this makes NO mention of the derivative rights issue you brought up :( Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
The media file you uploaded as File:Sunny jim.gif appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.
It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.
Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided), authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).
((subst:usernameexpand|Postdlf/Archive20))
will produce an appropriate expansion,Hi. Could you complete the author fields for File:Alexander C. Rhind.jpg and File:Anthony Comstock.jpg? Thanks. Cloudbound (talk) 23:36, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
As for the Rhind one, it is now nearly six years since I uploaded the image, something always to take account of when you're leaving such a message for an uploader. The illustration of Rhind in this 1888 book clearly derived from the photograph that I uploaded, so there should be no concern that it is not public domain even though we cannot identify the photographer. My best guess as to where I got the particular uploaded image is that it was scanned by me from a biography of Samuel Francis Du Pont (possibly Lincoln's Tragic Admiral, but I'm not sure) as that's apparently what I was working on that day and I really haven't done much else on Wikipedia in the way of U.S. Naval subjects. postdlf (talk) 00:12, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi. While I don't disagree with the ultimate result, I did want to pop by to offer my opinion that it is probably not a good precedent to have a closing administrator make the main case for a keep. Let nature take its course and then rule on the evidence — or make a defense case like everyone else and let someone else make the call — but please don't do both. Again, the call is right, I just believe closing administrators should be uninvolved in the debate. If something is closed early as Snow, there should be snow showing... Carrite (talk) 16:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for defending certain images. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 23:05, 25 December 2011 (UTC) |
Recently I started an effort to add ((Information)) to a load of older images, However because I was told not to add 'assumed' authors/sources, a large number of these images are now getting tagged by the FSII bot on the technicality of not having a source that bot recognises. Perhaps you could look over the contributions of myself and that bot, raising the issue in an appropriate forum? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:18, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Could you please consider undeleting this file? They were of different file formats (not eligible for F8), and the local one was a moving graphic. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)