User talk:Explicit/Archive 27

Hello,

I'm writing to let you know that the article about Kurt Baker (Musician) is still available online in Spanish. Considering he is a current, active musician with notable references, I believe his page in English should be un-deleted.

^[1]

He is also a former member of a un-active group which still has a Wiki page.

^[2]

His name and link to Musician is at the top of Rugby player Kurt Baker's wiki article. ^[3]

There is no reason for his page to be deleted as it is a valuable source of information to his fans and the press.

Monchomonoman (talk) 21:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

@Monchomonoman: Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. ℯxplicit 23:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I was suprised that File:National Mario Day.png had disappeared from National Mario Day. I think I've tracked down that you deleted it as "(F7: Violates non-free content criterion #1 (TW))".

I read about #1, and I can see why you'd say that - it's a picture of a calender with MAR10 changed to MARiO, which would indeed be easy enough to make.

However, it is unique in being from a specific video made about the subject of the article, and that video is directly described within the article. Therefore, I think it does pass the criterion.

Could you reconsider, and undelete it?

Sorry for taking up your time - it probably seems quite trivial, but, there is a deletion discussion about the article - and, psychologically at least, having an image to go with it makes a considerable difference.

Best, 86.20.193.222 (talk) 17:33, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I am writing to you since you took the action of deleting the page I has written. Since this is my first article I really wanted to understand the rationale behind the deletion, and find out if the page can be restored. I was in no way trying to promote the company and would really appreciate a little assistance on the same. Thanks so much!Niharika89 (talk) 10:03, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

@Niharika89: Hi, Draft:Mithi Software Technologies Pvt. Ltd. was deleted because the nature of the page largely focused around the products and services the company offers; it was promotional in nature more than anything else. I implore you to take look at the notability guideline for organizations and companies for a better understanding of what is required of such articles. ℯxplicit 23:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I shall have a read through and modify/re-write the article accordingly. Is there a way I can get access to the article I have already written? as it did take a while to write. Niharika89 (talk) 04:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@Niharika89: I can email the content to you. Simply enable the function via the "Preferences" link at the very top of the page. ℯxplicit 00:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I have enabled the email function in my preferences, please send me the email, thanks Niharika89 (talk) 12:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

@Niharika89: I've sent you the email. ℯxplicit 23:55, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

I have received a mail, but there is no attachment or link directing me to my draft. Is there any other setting I need to enable in my preferences? Apologies for the numerous questions Niharika89 (talk) 06:49, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@Niharika89: I sent you a copy of the text that was present in the draft prior to its deletion. I've sent it again, as well as a copy to myself. It looks fine on this side. How is it now? ℯxplicit 07:11, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

@Explicit:Just received it, looking good, thanks! Niharika89 (talk) 07:13, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explict. The use of File:All India Football Federation 2016.png in Indian national football team seems the same thing as what was discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 6#File:India FA.svg. The file is technically different, but pretty much that's the only difference. Do you think it's possible for this latest version to be converted to some kind of PD? The file has been tagged as missing a non-free use rationale since October 2016. This edit shows that the fact that the file is missing a rationale is known to the editor who uploaded the file, and I have also posted about this at User talk:ArsenalFan700#File:All India Football Federation 2016.png, but still no non-free use rationale has been added. There has already been discussion about Indian team logos at User talk:Explicit/Archive 24#File:India FA.svg revistied involving this editor, so these type of non-free use issues are not something they can claim to be unaware. I was going to remove the file for not having a nfur, but there's a good chance that would probably lead to edit warring based upon previous experiences with these types of logos. Any suggestions on how to proceed here? -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: The file is a bit too complex to fall under the threshold of originality; I'd tag it without any reversations for speedy deletion at Commons if I came across it there, and it would also likely be deleted with no qualms. The addition of the file was done here by an anonymous user. I'll go ahead and remove it again, and see how it continues from there. ℯxplicit 02:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for checking this as well. I was going to add {{Missing rationale2}} to the article's talk page, but I can't seem to get the template to work right.

Just for reference, the file was added here by Arsenal700 before the IP's edit, I removed the file here and then the IP re-added it. The non-free use rationale added by Arsenal700 when they uploaded the file combined multiple uses into a single rationale. I corrected that here based upon the FFD for the previous logo, and stated in my edit sum that separate specific rationale was needed for the team article. After the IP readded the file, I added {{di-missing some article links}} to the file's page with this edit, but did not remove the file. When Arsenal700 updated the file arelier this month, they also removed that template with this edit without adding the required rationale, I reverted on the file's page but did not remove the file from the article. I then posted the above-mentioned post on Arsenal700's user talk asking them to add the rationale. When the team article was nominated for GA by Arsenal700, it showed up on my watchilist. At the same time there was also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hashim-afc/Archive#26 March 2017 going on, and the sock mentioned the GA review. So, I checked the file again and noticed it still had no non-free use rationale. That's is what led me to post on your user talk. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Arsenal700 reverted your removal of the file from the team's page with this edit. The edit sum says "Updated", but once again no nfur was provided for the file's use in the article, so I'm not sure what "Updated" is supposed to mean. My previous post above might have seemed a bit rambling and I apologize if I am starting to sound like a broken record, but I'm not sure how many more times Arsenal700 needs to be informed via edit sums or talk page posts about NFCCP compliance. This is really starting to seem like a case of WP:IDHT.-- Marchjuly (talk) 00:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I've blocked the user this time. Enough is enough, really. ℯxplicit 01:11, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. Since you were the admin who closed Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 March 18#File:Football Association of Singapore crest.svg as keep for only Football Association of Singapore, I am wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look at User talk:CO16#March 2017. The editor has been re-adding the file to Singapore national football team, despite being advised about it here. (I mistakenly referred to Graeme Bartlett as the closing admin in that post, but all of the other information was correct I believe.) Anyway, perhaps another editor will be able to explain this better than me. Please note this user seems to quickly remove posts from their use talk page, which is fine, but which means that you may have to check the page's history if the above link doesn't work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:44, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

You were too quick to issue an edit warring warning when user only re-added the file once. There is too little development in this situation to warrant intervention by outside parties. ℯxplicit 02:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for being frank about the edit warring warning. In hindsight, I agree that it was premature. I usually add {{uw-non-free}} the first time around and then try to add a bit more of an explanation. This time I skipped the template and just added the explanation. It would've been better off just to add another reminder the second time as well, but I assumed a bit of bad faith on the other editor's part because they re-added the file and then removed the first post I had added. Anyway, prematurely assuming something bad was likely to happen without actually waiting for it to happen was an error that hopefully I won't repeat anytime to soon. Thanks again for taking a look. Any suggestions on what to do if, by chance, the same editor re-adds the file once again? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Same editor has re-added the logo again. Please advise on how to proceed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:41, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Feyisetan Asagidigbi has played for the nigeria youth national team which makes him a professional top player recognised by fifa, caf and nigeria football federation. he was signed last month by CA Banfied of Argentina super league... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hassantaiwo (talk • contribs) 15:10, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

@Hassantaiwo: Although I deleted the article under proposed deletion, it was later deleted as a result of this deletion discussion. You should discuss that deletion with the closing adminstrator. ℯxplicit 00:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

You deleted File:David hicks full frame.jpg, after it had been orphaned for seven days. Could you please share with me the URL it was from? Frankly, it seems to me the contributor who caused the image to be orphaned was routinely overzealous in their interpretation of NFCC. Geo Swan (talk) 05:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: Sure. It was the first picture from this BBC News article. ℯxplicit 06:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 06:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

CAn you restore File:Toys "R" Us logo.svg? The logos that replaced this one were deleted at Commons. Thanks © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 20:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: I've restored the image for now, but I'm actually going to challenge that closure over at Commons. The outcome appears incorrect to me. ℯxplicit 02:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey, I have noticed you deleted the image here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mir_Muhammad_Naseer_Khan_Talpur.png As there has been no source for the image. However, this person died in 1843, which is a period of 174 years from now. Assuming the artist/photographer took the photo at an age of say, when he was born (actually impossible, but lets assume) and dies 100 years later, 74 years have passed since he died, putting the work in the public domain. Hence I please request you to un-delete the work, after which I will put the necessary licenses and tags on the image. Thanks86.97.128.114 (talk) 17:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The file description lacked an author, source, and date. Additionally, we need a source to verify its publication date, not its creation date. There isn't sufficient information right now to determine that it's in the public domain. ℯxplicit 02:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Category:Towns in Kadapa district is an empty now.--Vin09 (talk) 05:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

The author of the media in File:Revolutionary Times 1998.jpg, Loey Glover, sent an email granting permission to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and {{OTRS pending}} was added to the file description page to prevent premature deletion. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 17:09, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@The Hammer of Thor: The {{OTRS pending}} tag was removed by the OTRS member Czar with the comment: "no sign of OTRS ticket in system—re-add with ticket number or more details on finding it, or the OTRS agent can undelete the file". When was the permission email sent? Did the sender receive a ticket number? ℯxplicit 23:56, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

The date of the email was March 12, 2017. I reached out again to the author, who is a 75-year old woman, and she didn't see a reply email with a ticket number. I can forward the email, if that would help. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 00:31, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

@The Hammer of Thor: I'll drop a note to the OTRS team and see what information I can relay back to you. ℯxplicit 02:15, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Possibly Ms. Glover was unsuccessful sending the email. So I forwarded my correspondence with her. [Ticket#: 2017040510002137] I appreciate your help straightening this out. -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 02:57, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

@Explicit: Can File:Revolutionary Times 1998.jpg be restored now with {{OTRS pending}}? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 15:42, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello? -- The Hammer of Thor (talk) 01:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@The Hammer of Thor: Sorry, must have missed your comment amid those by others. Generally, once deleted, pages are not restored until permission is confirmed. This is because the permission may ultimately not be sufficient to restore it in the first place, and Wikipedia would be hosting content in violation of someone's copyright. Unfortunately, it will be a waiting game for now; the image will be restored immediately if the confirmation goes through. ℯxplicit 00:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

You marked The Wellness Network page for deletion with the following notation:

00:37, 17 February 2017 Explicit (talk | contribs) deleted page The Wellness Network (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable non-broadcast TV network. Seems to be an advertising channel but not a notable one. Article is at risk of being a spam magnet too.)

I didn't see a code to help understand why the page was deleted. The Wellness Network is not a TV network, but a private company that creates healthcare videos that are viewed in hospitals by patients, including maternity and cardiac patients. Is it possible to reverse this deletion? The company is a viable actor in its markets, no different from other private companies with informational Wikipedia pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JonVanZile (talk • contribs) 16:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@JonVanZile: Done ℯxplicit 00:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Dear Explicit,

On 22 March 2017 you have deleted the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckhoff_Automation and the redirection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckhoff. You justified the deletion with a reference to the Wiki notability standards for companies.

Beckhoff Automation is a global company with 3350 employees and technology leader in industrial automation. If Beckhoff do not fulfill the notability rules, please explain why these similar companies fulfill the rules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%26R https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAGO_Kontakttechnik https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Contact

In fact B&R, WAGO, Phoenix Contact and Beckhoff do the same. Hence it would be fair to allow all companies, or to delete all.

Best regards Zhlor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhlor (talk • contribs) 10:08, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Zhlor: Hi, first, I'd like to clarify that the article was not deleted unilaterally. Another editor proposed its deletion and it went uncontested for seven days. Please take look at the notability guideline for organizations and companies to understand the nature of why it was nominated for deletion to begin with. If you are associated with the company, I also implore you to read the conflict of interest. Please also note that approaching with a "other stuff exists" mindset will not build a particularly strong case for or against the deletion of a page, as things are reviewed individually, and the other articles you mentioned may not have been reviewed at all. ℯxplicit 00:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Good afternoon Explicit,

I would like to request the undeletion of the page I was creating for my father, Please.

The name of the page: Oswaldo Oropeza, el compositor de Latinoamerica. This page was written in English and I have done research and have not found the page.

Please let me know if I can have back my dad's page.

I will be waiting for your response.

Thank you,

Caribana10 (talk) 23:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello again Explicit!

I am waiting for your answer, let me know please if it is possible to retrieve my father's page.

Caribana10 (talk) 23:34, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Caribana10: I assume the page you are speaking of is Draft:Oswaldo Oropeza. The page history shows that you first created the draft in July 2013, and that it has been deleted three times since October 2015. As Wikipedia is not a webhost or memorial, what will you do different this time around? ℯxplicit 00:23, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Good afternoon Explicit,

I will publish the page this time.

My father, Oswaldo Oropeza was a very well know musician in Latinamerica and his music still heard today.

A lot has happened in my life since that first draft I wrote, I will submitted so that it gets to be published and I will add photos to it.

I will be waiting for your answer.

Thank you,

Caribana10 (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Jeon Jungkook is a Korean artist of the boy band BTS which is quite popular and deserves to have wikipedia pages of individual members. Please let us do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.59.1.84 (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. I noticed you deleted File:Official Köppen climate classification of Spain maded by AEMET.png as replaceable fair use. I just thought you should be aware of WP:ANI#Repeated fair use violations because it has to do with that particular file and includes some discussion as to whether the file can actually be replaced. There is also Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 March 29#File:Official Köppen climate classification of Spain maded by AEMET.png which is still ongoing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:23, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Pretty blatant violation of WP:NFCC#1, even in light of those two discussions. I supposed I should expect to be yelled at for it, but I'll clarify now that I have zero intention in restoring the file. This actually reminds me of File:2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown Turkey claim.jpg (the first black map), which I deleted under a similar basis. A free image existed (File:Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown Syrian-Turkey border.svg) as one does for this topic (File:Spain map of Köppen climate classification.svg), I deleted it under the same criteria, was taken to DRV for it, which resulted in it being listed for deletion and ultimately deleted anyway. My sound judgment there is no different here. ℯxplicit 01:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Just for reference, I wasn't implying the deletion was wrong; I just wasn't sure if you were aware that there's been some heated discussion of this file at two separate noticeboards. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:08, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Why on earth have you deleted the file??? Your response does not even have any content or argument. This is very poor behavior for an admin.Asilah1981 (talk) 11:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@Asilah1981: My deletion rationale says it all: it was deleted as replaceable fair use. It's almost impossible to justify the use of a non-free map, as free alternatives can easily be created. Pointing out a similar situation is entirely in context, as it shows: 1) how strict WP:NFCC is; 2) how you shouldn't waste the community's time. ℯxplicit 00:29, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Had you read the discussion properly, you would have realized that a free alternative cannot be created, not easily not difficultly. I suggest you reconsider your position and re-read what the issue was about. We do not have access to the AEMET data set and cannot replicate the map. In any case, this matter should be escalated. I don't think barging into am ongoing discussion and taking unilateral action is what Admins are for. Asilah1981 (talk) 04:35, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi! About the file in the subject, we received an OTRS permission. Can you confirm me that there's a photographer, different from the subject of the photograph? Thank you. --Ruthven (msg) 15:44, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

@Ruthven: Hi, no photographer is mentioned in the file's description. It simply reads: "Personal Headshot, Fair use. {{Arielle Tepper Madover}}". ℯxplicit 23:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Meanwhile, I clarified the situation, and the user had uploaded another version on Commons (Arielle Tepper Madover.jpg). Maybe you'll want to delete the talk page of the file. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 07:38, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Explicit! I think a couple of files from a recent mass deletion request were inadvertently missed - File:Dickebusch New Mil and Ext CWGC 1848216632.jpg and File:Lighting heating cooking power - Northmet Power and Light.jpg. Many thanks - Kelly ^hi! 21:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@Kelly: Whoops, taken care of. Thanks. ℯxplicit 00:13, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

This page should have not been deleted and I would have been more than happy to contest it. Many music festivals feature a layout such as this to display the lineups in an easy to read manner, and to also provide quantitative data to those looking for it (which bands played, how many played, number of times played, last played, etc.). This page should be reinstated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.168.151.103 (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

No it should not. It duplicates the article on the main page and neither is well-sourced. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:54, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Dear admin, i really would like to get back information about this page since i am quiet attached with this serial. and infact i had checked it week just before its deletion. Daily i am watching its episodes available on Metasvideos and i am interested in knowing star cast episode wise which was nicely mentioned on this page of wikipedia. Drpratikgandhi (talk) 18:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@Drpratikgandhi: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:55, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

This editor also removed the international broadcast section of Love in the Moonlight. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Love_in_the_Moonlight&diff=781441362&oldid=781179564 It's similar to the ones you've reverted by socks and has been a point of conflict in the page. I hope you can restore it as it's properly sourced. Thanks! 50.67.141.33 (talk) 05:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I think I got it all now. ℯxplicit 06:10, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

You can also visit Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bertrand101/Archive to know more about 50.67.141.33 and its sockpuppets. -112.198.73.9 (talk) 00:51, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. I just thought you should know about File talk:Einstein and Locker-Lampson.jpeg#RfC: Photo of Einstein at Locker-Lampson's guarded hideout in England. I'm not sure if an RFC is appropriate for a deleted non-free image, but if you feel further discussion of this is needed as WP:FFD or at WP:DRV, then I have no objections. I nominated the file for deletion, but you are the admin you actually deleted it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Contest deletion of Yash Aradhya as the person has "Competed in a series or race of worldwide or national interest" that is participation in WSK Series and CIK FIA ACADEMY TROPHY — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujith Aradhya (talk • contribs) 03:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

why did the ‘’variety show’’ section from infinite's page get deleted again? most of them are done together as a group, or at least with several members. this information isn’t listed on their individual pages either, nor available anywhere else, so why was it deleted? practically all groups has this list on their pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.92.230 (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Because simple television appearances do not constitute as being part of a filmography. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twice filmography, where Twice filmography was deleted for this exact reason. These types of lists are fancruft and are not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

hmm i guess i can accept that explanation when it comes to variety shows/tv appearances, but what about their own shows (like sesame player, infinite showtime, ranking king etc etc) ? those should at least ‘’constitute as being part of a filmography’’/be placed somewhere on their page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.92.230 (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit, Can you help address the issues raised by the warning tag in the article "Maryann Keller" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryann_Keller . Thanks a lot for your time and help. Cutie girly (talk) 09:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

The sockpuppet that has been ruining K-drama pages has written a message on my talk page. I don't know what to do to report him. I'm 99% sure it's him. Edit: I reported him, but I think 112.68.131.222 is his account too. It follows the same pattern of the previously banned users/IPs. Hessa94 (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

That sock is responsible for controlling and semi-protecting both Love in the Moonlight and The Emperor: Owner of the Mask pages. I believe that IP sock is the same as 50.67.141.33. -112.198.73.9 (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

112.198.73.9, contrary to your claim, Bertrand101 did not request for me to protect any page. I came across User talk:Xdeluna#Impersonation account, where Xdeluna stated that "most of the users who edit the pages (The Emperor: Owner of the Mask and Love in the Moonlight) are his socks". After reviewing the page histories, I decided to protect them. CJojoC also re-added this information back, and the edit war between several different IPs really muddled things. Additionally, as Bertrand101 is a banned editor, their edits will generally be reverted per WP:BANREVERT. What this boils down to is a content dispute, especially when WP:TVINTL does allow this information in certain cases. You should be discussing this on the article's talk page instead of just claiming it's vandalism—it's not. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Can you help protect pages like Who Are You: School 2015 and Moon Lovers: Scarlet Heart Ryeo as well? There are many socks trying to control the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.43.184 (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I frequently see you contribute to articles listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture and would very much appreciate your input on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture#Eradication of variety show sections so that a conclusion towards variety show appearances can be made. Thanks. Abdotorg (talk) 18:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Explicit, in December you deleted my page entitled Roccor. As a reminder, you're rational was: (Expired PROD, concern was: Trivial and minor mentions in these links, searches not finding anything but few local mentions in local trade publications, nothing for genuine independent notability and substance. History alone suggests paid ad...).

We are in fact a real, internationally known company of 35 employees, supplying spaceflight hardware to the DoD, NASA and Commercial companies in the US and Europe. We've been working to improve our online presence and I'd like to point you to our website www.roccor.com and this recent news article: Roccor Exec on Supporting 900-Satellite LEO Constellation

I would kindly ask that you reverse your action and restore the material I have previously written. I will make enhancements from that point forward.

Thanks for your work supporting Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bld175 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bld175: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Please take look at the notability guideline for organizations and companies to understand the nature of why it was nominated for deletion to begin with. As you are associated with the company, I also implore you to read the conflict of interest. ℯxplicit 00:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks very much for helping to close discussions at CFD.

I noticed that after Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_May_26#Organizations_based_in_Turkey, you implemented the renamings for the "option B" list, but have not yet removed the CFD templates from the "option A" list. You could either do this yourself, or list them at WP:CFDWR. Hope this helps, – Fayenatic London 21:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

You recently deleted the page 'Justin Basini' because he is "one of three co-founders of relatively minor company. no other factors for notability".

I would disagree. ClearScore has 4.5 million users, and is the most visited credit checking website in the UK. There are founders of smaller companies on Wikipedia - for example, Tom Blomfield, CEO of Monzo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Blomfield.

Is there any other sources or information you think we could add, to make this page legitimate?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucyburgess (talk • contribs) 10:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Lucyburgess: In order to establish notability, individuals must meet the notability guideline for people. Basically, the person must be subject to extensive coverage from reliable sources independent of them. Additionally, per WP:NBUSINESSPEOPLE, "Biographical material on heads and key figures of smaller companies which are themselves the subject of Wikipedia articles are sometimes merged into those articles and the biographies redirected to the company." This may be an alternative worth considering. ℯxplicit 23:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

I was surprised at the closing of Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 29#Organisations based in Bolivia because I thought I had supported 's' rather than 'z'. (With AusLondonder, who has relied upon WP:RETAIN.) I see that in fact we both said A although WP:RETAIN implies B. So I wondered if you could reopen the discussion and I will change my support to Option B. Oculi (talk) 11:46, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Oculi: I've relisted the discussion here. ℯxplicit 00:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. I tagged File:Khyatisharma2017.jpg for speedy deletion per WP:F7 as replaceable fair use, and you subsequently deleted it. It appears the the uploade is now disputing that because they've added a {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}} to the empty file's page. I'm pretty sure the image unequivocally failed NFCC#1 and the uploader is just misunderstanding how non-free images are used on Wikipedia. However, I have no problem with further discussing this if you feel such a thing is needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Please help in preventing edit wars in the page Who Are You: School 2015. Anonymous editors have been deleting information in the page's reception section (things they find unflattering as they are fans of the show) even though a reliable source was provided which explicitly states that the show did suffer from poor ratings. Thank you for your help! 36.8.61.234 (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

• There is an army of users like the one above who are hell-bent on retaining only negative information, whereas the rest of us only want to maintain a neutral POV. See: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A310:142:8680:9126:97FA:684D:8FC1 (talk) 15:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
• These are addressed per my comment here.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Could you revoke talk page access. The user doesn't look like he wants to stop... Thanks —72 _talk 00:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@72: Done and done. ℯxplicit 00:26, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for closing so many CfD discussions recently! Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I came here to say the same. I'm mightily glad you're here! – Fayenatic London 17:33, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle and Fayenatic london: I had left CFD abandoned for long enough. I took on the venue again after finding out Good Olfactory had stopped editing. ℯxplicit 23:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit,

I just went to link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_SPH-i700 as I always do when referencing Samsung's first commercially successful Windows CE Phone. I'm curious why it was deleted, and I'd really like to see it restored as the SPH-i300, SPH-i500, and SPH-i550 are all still there. I reference the SPH-i700 pretty frequently and always point to the wikipedia article.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MicronXD (talk • contribs) 01:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@MicronXD: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 04:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I think this may be notable, as anti-fans by country seems like a reasonable subarticle. I've added one reliable refs, other ones there are poor indeed. If you still think this is bad, do take it to AfD and do ping me in that case. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Piotrus: My rationale had nothing to do with notablity. I nominated it as an unnecessary content fork, as neither Anti-fan nor Anti-fans in Korean pop were long enough to justify a split. ℯxplicit 04:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I would not be opposed to a merge, but proposed deletion is not the way to go about it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I think you erred in closing this discussion. Opinions were divided about whether the image meets NFCC, which should have resulted in a "no consensus, default to keep" outcome, given that no one side's arguments seem to offer a particularly more compelling interpretation of the NFCC. Your reference to "precedent" is mistaken in that Wikipedia does not apply (binding) precedent, but looks at each case individually; this is even more so where the "precedent" is exactly one closure by your self, and took place on a notoriously poorly attended forum such as FfD, where individual discussions can't amount to much in the way of community consensus. Thanks for reconsidering,  Sandstein  06:22, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sandstein: I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Most of the keep arguments failed to address NFCC at all; the ones that did addressed points that weren't part of the concern to begin with. In your argument, you claimed that "It's normal practice to illustrate biographies of significant public figures", but failed to provide any evidence of this. In contrary, I provided a link to my January 2016 closure which established the exact opposite. It was the first of a series of images that would end up being deleted (for example, Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 21#File:Rodger small.png, closed by Stifle), which led to the establishment of this precedence. You also stated that the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting serves as the subject's biographical article, which simply not true. It is an article about event which contains biographical content—a fine distinction between the two. Not once did you mention or even allude to NFCC in your initial comment or the ones which followed.

Dennis Brown addressed one point of NFCC, but not in context to the deletion nomination. Fourthords was not arguing against its replaceability. What weight could I have given a misguided argument?

Philosopher cited the arguments above, mostly addressing the image's replaceability. Once again, a misguided argument in context to the deletion rationale.

Doctor Papa Jones: "per Dennis Brown and Sandstein." Ditto.

AGreatPhoenixSunsFan: "Usually the purpose for images like this is to give a better idea as to who the perpetrator that committed an action like this was in the first place." One non-free image is allowed in the article about the perpetrator if it exists, not in the article about the incident. The aforementioned precedent established this. Additionally, this is another argument which fails to address the nominator's NFCC concern.

The delete arguments all cited NFCC; they were specific and direct, and ultimately established a foundation against the use of the image in context of the article's main subject.

For the record, I find arguments like of "a poorly attended forum" incredibly flimsy. These statements generally come from a place of vested interest. When editors take an interest of how the venue works outside of something that affects them or their work, then there might be something worth talking about. Otherwise, it really just seems like an attempt turn consensus on its head because the result isn't what the vested editor wanted. ℯxplicit 08:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed reply, which I've attempted to address at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 23. I'm not aware of any specific editor having a "vested interest"; this is in and of itself a rather divisive term because it implies that editors who have made a contribution to Wikipedia are no longer able to professionally respond to others just because of that contribution.  Sandstein  10:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sandstein: To clarify, my comment of vested interest was in regards to your statement that FFD is "a poorly attended forum" where "discussions can't amount to much in the way of community consensus". These claims against FFD (and CFD) only come as a result of a contentious discussion result, and are made more in frustration thereof and not really as a process as a whole. If a genuine problem existed, remedies would have been implemented years ago to eradicate such concerns; it's simply the by-product of some feathers being ruffled. It was not meant to disregard you or the input of others users which led to the outcome. ℯxplicit 13:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, you closed this CFD as merge Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments. It turns out that user:WP 1.0 bot requires the pages to be in that category, and there is no-one currently maintaining that bot. I pinged you during the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index#Bot_is_down_again, and am letting you know (as a courtesy) that I undid the implementation of your close for now.

As there seems to be little prospect of the bot being updated in the short term, would you consent to me removing the cfd-manual template from the category page, and de-listing it from WP:CFDWM? – Fayenatic London 21:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Yes, that's fine. I contacted the two listed bot operators in hopes of a response to no avail. ℯxplicit 00:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit, I see you removed the prod from the above article, citing the fact their was an reference. On that reference, there is no mention of the person by name. Even though there is some text which is defined as a reference, the reference must resolve to some verifiable information about the subject, which this doesn't do. There is nothing there. scope_creep (talk) 08:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Following the source, under the 'Members of the APLN' table, clicking on 'Co-Convenor' displays the names of the subjects, with Chung-in Moon being the first listed. It leads to this. ℯxplicit 23:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Well spotted! I missed it, and a distinguished professor. scope_creep (talk) 00:05, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit, I would create an article namedDamir Hadzovic and was instructed to contact you as the draft previously was deleted under G7 code. Please advise how to proceed. Thank you.CASSIOPEIA (talk)

@CASSIOPEIA: Hi, I gave Draft:Damir Hadzovic a look and there isn't much content in the text. Just an infobox, and empty sections and tables. You may proceed with creating the article if you wish. ℯxplicit 23:59, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit, Very much appreciate your reply and I will create the article. Thank you.CASSIOPEIA (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I was going through a list of pages requiring expansion and started to look at this page. I went to the talk page and noticed that it had a banner saying that it had been deleted by you. I am not an expert editor but it looks like you deleted the article and someone has come back and added it in again. On reflection your action was probably correct. This seems to be a very large article for such an unimportant thing - it is just a shopping arcade like any other. If you would like to delete it I would be supportive. I am not a supporter of using Wikipedia for business promotion. MarekJG (talk) 23:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

@MarekJG: Hi, this article was proposed for deletion with the rationale: "Fails [[WP:GNG] and WP:ORG due to a lack of significant coverage in multiple third-party sources." I deleted it quite a while ago, though—back in January 2013. You are free to nominate the article for deletion if that seems like an appropriate action. ℯxplicit 23:58, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate the deletion. – Batreeqah ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 02:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batreeq (talk • contribs)

Sorry for the poke, but in my watchlist it says you deleted File:Simon James Philby Photo 1.jpg, but I can still navigate to the file and see the image. Sorry for my ignorance, but I had to ask, why is that ? does it have something to do with the fact it's also on Commons ? - FlightTime (open channel) 00:21, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

@FlightTime: Yes. The local file was deleted, but since the Commons file shares the exact same name, it will display that one instead. ℯxplicit 00:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Greetings,

I have an email appointing me as the representative of the author and the author releasing all rights to this photo. How would you suggest that I move forward in uploading the photo correctly? I am new to this process.

Thanks,

nplusone — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nplusone (talk • contribs) 14:42, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

@Nplusone: If the copyright holder of the photo has decided to release their work under an acceptable free license, please follow the instructions found on the declaration of consent for all enquiries page. ℯxplicit 23:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Could you clarify where the discussion took place prior to deletion of page Darren Price. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macs15 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

@Macs15: Darren Price was proposed for deletion and went uncontested for seven days. A discussion is not required under this circumstance. ℯxplicit 00:30, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at File talk:PDO-Logo.svg#Previously Deleted File. Marchjuly (talk) 09:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC) -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:24, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, you deleted File:Twink.jpg. I have managed to arrange for copyright holder permission to be sent to OTRS (Ticket#: 2017062010002382). Is it possible it could be restored with an {{OTRS pending}} tag? Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wwwhatsup: Hi, could you specify which free license is being asserted? Restoring it at this point in time would just bring back a fair use claim. ℯxplicit 13:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you misunderstand. I contacted the subject of the article. He confirmed he is the rightsholder of the image (a passport photo), and I nursed him into the OTRS process. He has sent an email agreeing to release it under CC BY-SA. Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wwwhatsup: Ah, I see. The file has been restored. ℯxplicit 23:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes. OTRS does seem to be a slow business these days! Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

I just noticed you deleted Landscapes (Camel album). Please restore to my sandbox, I'll add sources. Trackinfo (talk) 01:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Trackinfo:  Done, I've restored the article under User:Trackinfo/Landscapes (Camel album). ℯxplicit 02:08, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm searching for an AfD discussion on this. I see nothing. Are you suggesting a seven year old article already with three sources should get nuked due to lack of sources? Bad policy. I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention while watching the article. Its one out of almost 12,000 I watch, its hard to catch everything 24/7. But you should pay attention to what you are doing before damaging the encyclopedia. It shouldn't be so easy. I've added to it and will take it back to mainspace. Trackinfo (talk) 04:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Trackinfo: As you can see in the page history, it was proposed for deletion, so there is no AFD. I'm paying plenty of attention, thanks. ℯxplicit 23:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Let me be clear, you did not violate any procedure. The procedure is at flaw. It requires human attention to the details. This article was poorly done, so it not to call attention to its sources. But the sources, thus the cause of the PROD, were there; meaning this did not fit the definition of the PROD. It was ill advised by the PRODing editor, an IP 68.151.25.115 who clearly was not paying attention. I can't guess to the diabolical motives of people who keep trying to delete valid content, but they do exist. Note: I have never edited this article, I just watch it as I do the entire lineage of this band. Poor editing is not an excuse for deletion. It does not invalidate the content. You as an experienced editor should, instead, have noticed the problem. You could have fixed the problem, thus saving the article. Instead, you reflexively deleted it because the time limit on the PROD expired. If you paid attention, if you were thinking, this deletion could, should have been prevented. Trackinfo (talk) 03:51, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Trackinfo: "Let me be clear, you did not violate any procedure." Okay, see ya. ℯxplicit 04:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello! This show has recently concluded and IPs are flocking to remove sourced content. I hope you can help in avoiding the edit wars and vandalism. Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Emperor:_Owner_of_the_Mask&action=history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.109.80.149 (talk) 01:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

If she isn't notable enough to have her own page on Wikipedia, please unlink the page on the pages in the Article Namespace that link to the Emma Jacobs page. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 12:04, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Explicit. Per Template:G8-exempt, will you restore the talk page for this image, in the same vein that File talk:Peyton school shooting drawing.JPG File talk:RogerHowarthToddManning2011.jpg exist? I ask because I think there is important discussion on the talk page of File:Cruiseonoprah.jpg, although I can't remember if it's just a link to the debate that took place regarding the image. If there is nothing important on the talk page, then there is no need to restore it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: The file talk page only contains the {{oldffdfull}} template. The discussion is still accessible from the page via the "What links here" tool. ℯxplicit 05:42, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Since that's all it contains, okay then. Thanks for taking a look. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 05:45, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello, could you give me the content of the Marco Lorenzi page, that you deleted on June 30, 2012? I would like to restore it since the athlete meets the criteria of encyclopedia, having won a national title and having been in the top 60 of the world's annual lists. From the date of his cancellation he also debuted in the senior Italian national team and he participated, at the individual level, at a Senior European Championship and always remain the two medals at U23 in relay race. He is also present in French and Polish Wikipedia and some thirty pages linking him. --Kasper2006 (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@Kasper2006: I've gone ahead and restored the article, you are free to improve it. ℯxplicit 02:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

many tnx ;) --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

The Roman Empire year categories have been merged manually. They are all yours to get deleted, see here. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:34, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Explicit. You have new messages at Train2104's talk page.
Message added 00:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

– Train2104 (t • c) 00:11, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB:%E9%B4%8E%E5%B7%9E%E3%82%B3%E3%83%BC%E3%83%9D%E3%83%AC%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B7%E3%83%A7%E3%83%B3%E6%9C%AC%E7%A4%BE01.jpg Thank you!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:03, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

@Kintetsubuffalo:  Done, the file is now on Commons under the same name. You can move freely licensed files from any project using CommonsHelper. ℯxplicit 07:22, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm not a tech guy, but I will figure it out!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 07:36, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Permission from the copyright owners has been obtained: Receipt #2017080110013518

If you can restore it, and re-add it to Cardiff Big Weekend that'd be great. Thanks! Liam at TicketSource (talk) 08:17, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Liam at TicketSource:  Done, image restored. The permission confirmation just needs to be added to the file's description page. ℯxplicit 00:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

You had just deleted File:Steam controller configuration screen.png. Following the history, I see @Vaypertrail: tagged it 2 days ago claiming it could be recreated from a free image. This is not correct. It was a software screenshot that shows how a user interacts with Steam to adjust the settings on the controller to customize its function, eg the software interface was the focus and not the image of the controller itself. So it is impossible to recreate that software screen as suggested. I could understand that if the goal was to point out the individual units, we definitely could take the free image and add text upon that , but that wasn't the function of this image. I'd ask that you re-instate that image, and if Vaypertrail or others have an issue, then that can be discussed at FFD. --MASEM (t) 01:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Masem: Very well, I've restored the image. ℯxplicit 00:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I will fix up the rationale to be clear about the non-replacability. --MASEM (t) 01:24, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi there,

It seems two files have been deleted as I hadnt put {{OTRS pending}}on their template pages. Both files had been confirmed by the owner in an email sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org from Drew Wilson ( the owner) on my behalf.

The files are:

1. File:D-Wilson-bike-fitting.jpeg
2. File:D-Wilson-race.png

If these can be undeleted/restored that would be great.

Thanks,

TB 11:10, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

You deleted File:Young Ismail Agha, ten days after repatriation from Guantanamo.jpg as unused. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz routinely removes NFCC images from infoboxes, saying that, in addition to other restrictions on NFCC images, our guidelines bar them from being used in infoboxes. When they make these excisions they aren't challenging whether the image in question meets our criteria for copyright images, only that it shouldn't be used in an infobox.

I moved the image from the infobox, to the section of the article that discusses Ismail Agha's repatriation. Since Hullaballoo Wolfowitz concern was the image's placement, not whether it measured up to our criteria, I request restoration.

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 12:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

In general, nonfree images of living persons fail NFCC#1. There is no argument at this point refuting this presumption in this case. That presumption is reinforced in the case of infobox images, where any reasonable image of the article subject is adequate. I was concerned with the issue of replaceability; placement of a nonfree image in a BLP infobox is, aside from recognized special cases like prisoners serving life sentences, a virtually undisputable violation, and its use anywhere else in a BLP is still a presumptive violation. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:36, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

• Guantanamo held minors, children. The actual number of minors is in dispute. DoD spokesmen, trying to offuscate this issue, released multiple contradictory statements as to how many minors were held there.

Ismail Agha was a minor, when held in Guantanamo. A purist may argue that merely saying he was a minor is sufficient. But given the given the campaign of US spin doctors, trying to fix the USA's image, so it is not regarded as a nation that generally tortures children, I think an image is really necessary. Geo Swan (talk) 13:47, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Geo Swan and Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: I feel that having the file deleted as orphaned and then arguing to keep it deleted under a different criteria, without allowing room for rebuttal, is bad form. I have restored the image, and the merit of its use should be discussed at the appropriate discussion venue. ℯxplicit 00:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Please don't cast groundless aspersions of impropriety, or any other mode of "bad form". I removed the image from the only article where it appeared on June 24, quite accurately noting that it was a nonfree image of a living person in their BLP. You originally deleted the image ten days later, on July 4. Images which fail NFCC are routinely deleted after being removed from articles where they are used improperly. To say that I am somehow shifting ground by arguing that the file has no legitimate use, for the same reason I advanced before, is a clear misrepresentation of my position and actions. There's nothing wrong or suspect about routine NFCC enforcement. When an image which fails NFCC requirements on its face is challenged, consensus must be achieved before it is restored, and it is inappropriate to use administrative authority to sidestep the normal process. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 03:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 03:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

@Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: Except Geo Swan made a case justifying the use of the image. This is not a straight-forward situation of it being a replaceable non-free image; the context of which it is used in the article matters here. Unless backed by a precedent in said context, I can not unilaterally decide to keep the image deleted. I'd rather not waste the community's time by having this file being sent to WP:DRV, which would only result in it being listed at WP:FFD, the latter of which is the approach you should have taken upon the restoration of the image.

If I have used my abused my administrative powers, I implore you to report me to WP:ANI. If your claim is true, surely I need at least to be reprimanded for my actions. Make your case there, please. ℯxplicit 11:49, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

You're talking outright nonsense. There's nothing even resembling a valid NFCC use claim here. You seem more interested in defending your own bad decision than in implementing the applicable Wikipedia policy -- a policy which here was established by the WMF and can't be weakened or be subject to exceptions by local action. The person who'll be primarily responsible for wasting community time is you. Precedent is clear: nonfree images of living persons can't be used in their bio without consensus that the image meets NFCC requirements. The image, per Geo. Swan. doesn't even relate to the subject himself, but to an extraneous dispute over "US spin doctors, trying to fix the USA's image". There is no sourced content in the bio that is germane to this issue. You don't have the authority to unilaterally grant an exemption from NFCC requirements, and bu policy the burden of proof rests on the editor wishing to retain the image. If you won't do the job right, don't do it at all. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 12:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

@Hullaballoo Wolfowitz: And how does one determine consensus? By discussion, which you've taken no interest in facilitating. WP:FFD is there, but I don't see your initiative. It is the next reasonable step. ℯxplicit 00:00, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

You don't need to re-establish consensus by discussion every time you enforce or implement well-established policy. There's no valid rationale for using this image in any article. So per NFCCE, it's removed from articles where it's used without a valid rationale. It's therefore a nonfree image not used in any article, so per NFCC it's deleted after the prescribed waiting period. WP:ADMIN doesn't entitle you to override established policy just because you have some nebulous desire to discuss it. If you want standing policy changed, you should start the discussion, not take WP:POINTY administrative action in defiance of it. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 10:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

A heads-up....

You would have seen I mentioned your name, and linked to your comments here, in several comments of my own.

If I understood you, you suggested to Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, several times, that they initiate a discussion, at FFD. Instead HB kept excising the image -- which I found very disturbing. They were joined by a contributor with a very, very short contribution history, who has devoted over half their edits to responding to my edits. I have had a relatively large number of wikistalkers, some extremely persistent, most of whom either eventually retired, or were indefinitely blocked. Whenever a new wikihounder emerges, I can't help wondering whether it is one of my earlier wikistalkers, using a new wiki-ID to evade their indefinite block, or escape their past history.

Anyhow, I eventually took the unusual step of initiating the FFD discussion myself, in an attempt to forestall HB and the SPA from repeatedly excising the image without any further explanation on their part.

I thought I would let you know of the FFD, and how it came to be initiated.

I thought you offered HB good advice. I offered them advice myself... You might be heartily sick of all this, but do you have any advice for me, about how to not be drawn in ... Do you have advice for how I should react to the emergence of a new wikihounder?

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 12:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know that an article that you deleted as an expired prod, Language of Business (TV program), has been undeleted and then listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Language of Business (TV program). Regards, -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:17, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Just want to request for page protection since there were several mass deletion and edit warring in the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Emperor:_Owner_of_the_Mask&offset=&limit=500&action=history

Thanks! 49.228.103.75 (talk) 11:05, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

• This is very likely a sockpuppet of User:Bertrand101. Always using IPs to ask you or Ad Orientem to protect pages, then using his socks like User:Dock Snappy to edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.176.75.177 (talk) 06:29, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Why are you deleting Rubaru Mr.India?? I want to modify and create with new additions because it is now the biggest Male Pageant in India... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arinkit Das (talk • contribs) 16:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Arinkit Das: Hi, can you please provide a link to the article in question? Rubaru Mr.India never existed. ℯxplicit 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for closing this CFD at June 13.

During the discussion, the category creator moved Category:Lists of ambassadors by recepting subject of international law out-of-process to Category:Lists of ambassadors by receiving country. I then deleted the redirect at the original name, which I now realise made it even more confusing for you as the closer. I have belatedly inserted the revised name into the nomination.

Please would you revisit your close to state the consensus outcome on that category? – Fayenatic London 21:17, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Ah, I see. I will modify the closure momentarily. Apologies for the late response, I was on vacation for the past two weeks. ℯxplicit 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The page is creation protected but not upload protected. Can you also upload protect the page? Ups and Downs (↕) 04:07, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@UpsandDowns1234: Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I'll modify the protection shortly. ℯxplicit 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Can you restore that page to mainspace? I'll look at the issues, but it's a clearly notable cultural idiom, which I just ran across as a red link from Between Scylla and Charybdis... I'll look at the issues. Thanks, Jclemens (talk) 07:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jclemens: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Apologies for the late response, I was on vacation for the past two weeks. ℯxplicit 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Jclemens (talk) 01:15, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hey there, I see you deleted Red Room (animation). I study urban legends like this. I might place it on RationalWiki or rebuild it later. Can you send me the content to help me do this please? :) Deku-shrub (talk) 21:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Deku-shrub: I've emailed the content to you. Apologies for the late response, I was on vacation for the past two weeks. ℯxplicit 00:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Explicit: Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deku-shrub (talk • contribs) 17:56, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello again. I checked Chuck Cunningham syndrome (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and found out it was deleted twice, once as an article and once as a redirect. Somehow, it was re-created as the same redirect, which was deleted per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 September 11#Chuck Cunningham syndrome, which you closed. What will you do about it? --George Ho (talk) 07:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: The redirect was deleted as original research. The use of the term is now cited by a reliable source and it addresses the original concern, so it is no longer eligible for speedy deletion. ℯxplicit 01:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh... Then... phew! I'll leave it as is then. --George Ho (talk) 02:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

It would be great if you could close some category discussions again, especially the old ones of February and July. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle: I strolled by CFD two days ago and saw the backlog, and I plan to clear it out a bit when I have time. ℯxplicit 00:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi there,

I started this page about a year ago. It was left uncompleted 10 months ago but now I've got some time I'd like to finish it. How can I retrieve it?

Thanks, Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mplamb93 (talk • contribs) 06:42, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mplamb93: As it was deleted via proposed deletion, a simple request to restore it will suffice. However, you should make sure to address the nominator's concern of notability. You should consider looking at the notability guideline for organizations and companies, as well as the general notability guideline ℯxplicit 00:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, can I please request to restore the page? I have read through the links you provided and ensure the page is edited accordingly. Thanks, Matt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mplamb93 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mplamb93: Very well, I've gone ahead and restored the article. ℯxplicit 23:57, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much.

You recently closed a discussion regarding the above category (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 August 18). I didn't see a consensus among the discussion, and there were concerns about Wikipedia:Systemic bias that haven't been addressed. Can you reopen the discussion? Fuddle (talk) 13:10, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

@Fuddle: In the form the category was being utilized, there was consensus to delete it. The dissenting opinions largely rested on the "other stuff exists" argument, while ignoring the concerns about original research and navigation usefulness. In fact, the discussion showed leanings of deleting the related categories as well, but that would require a separate discussion. ℯxplicit 00:27, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The "other stuff" mentioned are categories in the same tree. We now have to delete American, British, etc. Then we need to look at High school films. And at that point we need to decide whether to categorize drama by setting at all. That's a separate discussion that should happen before this deletion happens. Fuddle (talk) 00:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Fuddle: Well, no. Some settings are defining characteristics to a film, and some aren't. Category:Songs by theme operates in a similar fashion. Note the amount of themes present, but themes like Category:Songs about love, Category:Songs about divorce, and Category:Songs about drug use went through deletion discussions that resulted in consensus determining that they are not defining characteristics about a song.

In the film category discussion, you also did not argue that it was a setting, you argued that it was a genre, which is what the discussion was based on. Perhaps even more confusing is that Category:High school films is categorized as a setting and a genre. If you meant to argue the former, perhaps you may consider nominating the high school film category and its subcategories for renaming (Category:Films set in high schools, perhaps?) to firmly define its contents. Assuming that the community decides that is is a defining setting and the rename is carried through, the Japanese category can be reestablished thereafter. ℯxplicit 01:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

I am only arguing that Japanese is a keep because American is a keep. BTW, two deletes, one keep and one rename is not a consensus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuddle (talk • contribs) 02:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Fuddle: Well, considering that deletion discussions are not a vote, I fail to see how the numbers matter, especially when the basic original research policy is not addressed in any form. As aforementioned, there was a leaning of support of getting rid of the other categories as well. As I see a serious lack of initiative to get a better answer, I will nominate the remaining categories myself as I proposed above. ℯxplicit 02:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey there, I noticed that you closed this CfD but you didn't remove the CfD notices from the listed categories. I'm taking care of that now, just letting you know. Cheers. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. Could you please consider reopening the CfD for Category:Undrafted National Basketball Association players, which also included Category:Undrafted National Hockey League players, that you recently closed here? First off, your closure at the time was an understandable delete as there were no rebuttals to keep. However, new discussions by interested projects at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Archive 33#Undrafted players and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive69#Category:Undrafted National Hockey League players indicate that there are a number of supporters of the categories that were not aware that the CfD was open. Moreover, there were earlier CfDs on the same categories by the same nominator in 2010: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 26#Category:Undrafted National Basketball Association players and Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 April 26#Category:Undrafted National Hockey League players. Both were unanimous keeps at the time. Unfortunately, the current CfD process doesn't list past CfDs with new discussions like the AfD process does, which is a helpful reference for participants to make an informed decision. Thank you in advance for your consideration.—Bagumba (talk) 07:19, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

@Bagumba: Hi. Unfortunately, I am not seeing a reason to unilaterally disregard the consensus and reopen the discussion. Although not mentioned in my closure, the nom did point back to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 July 11#Category:Undrafted National Football League players, where the previous discussed were linked. The delete arguments were aware of this. Additionally, as consensus can change, citing a discussion from seven years ago which resulted in keep isn't a particularly strong argument. I think the best course of action is to take your concerns to WP:DRV, which will allow the community to determine the arguments of the related WikiProject and determine the next step. ℯxplicit 00:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I've opened the DRV at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_September_10.—Bagumba (talk) 06:35, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

hello, you deleted file File:David McAfee Houston 2014.jpg from Wikipedia under F11, but because there was no notice of impending deletion on the file I didn't get to see who uploaded it or where it came from. Is there a way to view that cached information? I thought the procedure for speedy deletion WP:F11 was to give 7 days notice for just such a reason? Thanks. Mramoeba (talk) 06:40, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mramoeba: The image was uploaded by Tacoman3005, who received notice of its deletion the day it was tagged. This file was tagged with {{OTRS pending}} since January, well over 200 days ago, and nothing ever came of it. ℯxplicit 00:53, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Great thanks, that's why I wouldn't have seen the tag anyway. Cheers. Mramoeba (talk) 23:13, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

How do you get the orphaned revisions of a file deleted?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 12:31, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Kintetsubuffalo: This appears to have been already resolved, but for future reference you can add {{furd}} ({{subst:furd}}) to the file's page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

User(s) keeps on removing sourced and notable content, repeatedly 181.28.72.82 (talk) 00:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Emperor:_Owner_of_the_Mask&offset=&limit=500&action=history

Would like to revive page 'Ken Nolan', which was earlier deleted due to creator being blocked. I believe the subject in question is notable due to his heavy involvement in high-profile media projects like Black Hawk Down, The Company (miniseries), and Transformers: The Last Knight, as well as him being the recipient of an award from the Writers Guild of America, West. Please respond as soon as possible.Ngrynintendonerd (talk) 02:57, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Ngrynintendonerd: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 08:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@Explicit: Thank you.