This is an archive. Please leave new comments on my talk page. If you refer back to one of these discussions, please copy it over.
Oh, Sorry....It's one I found on a discussion page and it looks to be in some contention. Here is one of the discussions:
unlawful enemy combatant
Please stop vandalizing Unlawful enemy combatant. Thank you. Merecat 20:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
The AfD tag you placed on this article did not function as there was no page for dialog. Because you did this wrong, I have deleted that tag. Merecat 20:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks!
-Mark
Congratulations, you have an imposter, you may want to consider blocking Stif1e. -- Hetar 03:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I've added pages for some of the stations on the Maynooth-Dublin line that were missing, namely:
I appreciate that some of my contributions may be ideal and welcome advice on how to improve them.
I also have to admit that I made an error of my own - in correcting the mistake where the nonexistent Seaport railway station was in place of Seapoint railway station, I created the latter and copied over material, then corrected it. I realised afterwards that I should have looked more closely at the tabs and used "Move". I can only say one thing to this: D'oh!. At least the links on the neighbouring stations point refer to a real one now!
My caffiene levels are really low - I left out my ID & time! Autarch 19:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Even though you didn't feel I had enough experience, I appreciate your comments, and hope that I am able to demonstrate appropriate adminship with the experience that I do have. -- Nataly a 05:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde at venus 07:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually when I nominated Bertha Fox Dominguez for a speedy deletion, Ididn't know that I was supposed to do that somewhere else. I found that out a day ago, and I apologize for the error. Thetruthbelow (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Stifle. I recently bumped up against a problem in AFD, and you were the first admin that came to my mind, probably because of your advice in the past and involvement in the MD RFA. A few days ago, I nominated an article for deletion on grounds of non-notability. Its author had posted a bunch of nonsense tangentially related to its subject (the basketball player Mouhammad Faye) in AFC, and took it as an affront when I declined to create the article because he couldn't demonstrate notability. However, he is now registered, has created the article, and when I sent it through the AFD process, lo and behold: the AFD is now seriously cluttered with apparent sockpuppet and double votes, whose origin I imagine to be the author; can't say for sure though. I've tried to sort out the garbage from the legitimate votes, but am concerned that not enough people have noticed it in AFD for consensus to be apparent. If you could let me know what you think, I'd appreciate it. You can get to the AFD via the wikilink above, or check my recent edits. Thank you for your time, -- Kuzaar- T- C- 12:55, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
You wrote:
In fact, isn't it routine to reorder comments that were put in out of order, especially by new editors who mistakenly add them at the top? Fan1967 13:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Bhadani has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{ subst:smile}}, {{ subst:smile2}} or {{ subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
-- Bhadani 15:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for calling out that the page Redshirt (college sports) required additional context. I created the page but did an insufficient job of describing redshirting for those new to the term. Please take a look at the page again, as I have attempted to address the concerns you raised. ( Terryn3 22:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC))
Can I ask what you found soapbox about the article about Guantanamo detainee Abaidullah?
Was it the second paragraph? I added it, possibly against my better judgement, when User:MilesToGo nominated the article for deletion due to non-notability.
I think I have read half or more of the 6,000 pages of transcripts the DoD started releasing on March 3rd. Abaidullah's detainee ID number had two separate Combatant Status Review Tribunals. It is not my place to say that this is inexplicable -- if the administration of the documents and evidence backing up the allegations against the detainees were well-managed. I came across anomalies like this, over and over again.
If I had only come across this kind of anomaly occasionally I would not consider this one notable.
Two other detainees, Abaidullah's former partner, and an acquaintance of Abaidullah's former partner, who he happened to be sitting next to on the bus that takes passengers across the border from Afghanistan to Pakistan, were rounded up and ended up in Guantanamo based on Abaidullah's confession. Abaidullah has recanted the confession that implicated these two men, which he stated was beaten out of him at Bagram.
The original research policy doesn't allow us to draw our own conclusions. I can't say Occam's Razor suggests that the account offered by Abaidullah to his Tribunal is the truth, and he and the men implicated by his false confession should be released. But, if I am not mistaken, the information needed for a reader to draw their own conclusions about the connection between these men, and draw their own conclusion about whether they really had ties to terrorism can be stated, provided it stated from a NPOV..
FWIW I now suspect that User:MilesToGo is a sockpuppet. Most new users, a couple of days into creating their new wiki-id, don't start nominating articles for deletion. -- Geo Swan 01:34, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the article Rip This Joint, I had put a speedy delete on it because it really was gibberish, I suppose I could've put a "notability" on it, but no biggie either way. I'll slap an AFD on it if you or someone else hasn't already. V. Joe 01:41, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
If an article went on Afd and consensus was to redirect to another article, what's the best place to go for a user afterwards to get the page reinstated? For deleted pages WP:DRV would be the right place, but since the page wasn't actually deleted I'm not sure what the correct procedure is. -- Hirudo 15:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello again, Stifle. I've come to you because of how helpful and prompt you were in questions and issues I've had in the past. I've found a user who insists on inserting and keeping POV material in the above article, and according to the talk page, it's apparently at the request of the article's subject. Normally, I would have no problem at all just reverting to the more-NPOV version, but the sticky part is this: Apparently, the older version I've tried to make NPOV was originally a copyvio of something from the artist's personal site. Now, I've googled around and couldn't find any evidence of it, which leads me to think that it's not in English. I'm not sure of the best way to handle this. If I could find the original source, I'd tag it as a copyvio, but I can't, so for the time being I've reverted to the old version, which may or not be a copyvio, but is more NPOV than the one User:MiriamNader is pushing. (It incidentally contains gems such as "Ehab Tawfik is an outstanding Egyptian singer, who is endowed with a wonderful and unique voice, as well as refined artistic taste.") Anyway, if you could give me any advice as to how to handle a conflict like this, that'd be tops. Thank you, -- Kuzaar- T- C- 14:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm.. I have already declined speedy on this person, as the article asserts he is a famous architect, and slapped a verify on it... - CrazyRussian talk/ contribs/ email 14:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, Ill tag it with IfD, Also could you delete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Roflcopter.gif i tagged it more then 5 days ago but it hasnt been deleted. Thanks. Matthew Fenton ( TALK - CONTRIBS) 14:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for catching some of the copyright violations caused by this user. I agree that copyright violations must go, and I have deleted some as copyvios. However, we must assume good faith and not presume that all his images are copyright violations; instead I recommend listing images with a copyright tag that you don't believe on WP:PUI. I am doing so for the images I can find. Thanks! Stifle ( talk) 22:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I found the eigth one - the one you thought another admin handled! That would be this one: Image:St. Eunans Cathedral Letterkenny.jpg. It features the same picture as Image:St.Eunans Cathedral Letterkenny.jpg and Image:LkCathedral.jpg, both of which you have already handled. Kill off the speedy deletion nomination and wait for me to find the picture's real source to kill them all three off? ;) Jobjörn ( Talk | contribs), your very own newbie image-fragger. 22:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Jobjörn ( Talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{ subst:smile}}, {{ subst:smile2}} or {{ subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!
Re: [1], I'll suggest that you not be so ridiculous in the future.-- SB | T 10:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
You may be interested in the List of Battlefield 1942 mods AFD. It has been been nominated by the same user again. Bfelite 14:02, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi Stifle,
Sorry about that, I recall getting an image speedied a long time ago with the same explanation, I guess the rules are different now. BTW, apparently I got one of them deleted, perhaps the admin wasn't aware. Adios! — Khoikhoi 05:29, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to respectfully request your review of a page I created on the Patriot Consulting Group. Editors left me several messages detailing why they thought the page should be deleted and I addressed each and every one. This article meets the definition of a "notable company" according to the Criteria for companies and corporations found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CORP per WP:CORP, Unfortunately, the same editors that claim should be deleted because they claim it is an article about a non-notable company, the Wiki definition of notable and their definitions are in obvious conflict.
I hope a rational review of the facts will bear me out.
Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter and for your consideration. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.249.18.71 ( talk • contribs) 02:13, 17 June 2006.
At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Illustration of density estimation you wrote
Can you tell me why you said that, and what your background is in the field of statistics? Was the method altogether different from the ones explained in the published papers that were cited? Michael Hardy 21:52, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
To me it doesn't look any more like an academic paper than lots of other Wikipedia articles, but I don't see how style makes it a secondary source, or why it's being a secondary souce would be an objection. Wikipedia is often a secondary souce, and that's what it's supposed to be. The prohibition agains original research is a prohibition against Wikipedia's being a primary source. How in the world does anything's being a secondary source amout to a reason to call it "original research"? A concrete example of kernel density estimation is certainly not original research. Michael Hardy 16:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. The Elvis Presley article is in quite a state. Can you give me some feedback on the user issue and the process involved? Jkelly 01:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
You may want to check your userboxes. {{user straight}} no longer is a real userbox but a message about the move of said userbox to user space. -- Hirudo 16:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry that I did not notice your request, however, I edited about 500 pages for that userbox alone. I don't have time to look at every page as I go through. Again, sorry. — Mi r a 01:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I fully accept what you say and will follow your advice. However I would just like to explain my reasoning. The image was used to replace a company logo in the article infobox. Plus it also uses that company's logo. While people can have certain points of view regarding the ethics of companies this is not the place for it (unless unethical conduct is a fact). You must surely agree that it is at the very least unecylopedic! Regards Mark83 15:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know that my speedy request for East Lake Square Mall was invalid - I should have been able to work it out for myself because it wasn't one of the categories there was a specific template for! I saw you prod'd it, I'm wasn't going to AFD it yet, because I've already nominated another mall for deletion, and if that one is a keep or no consensus then this one would probalby be acceptable too, so I'll wait and see. Thanks. Inner Earth 22:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for voting at my RFA. My Request was successful with 41 supports, 12 opposes and 5 neutrals, and even though you did not vote for me, your counsel was appreciated. As an admin, I intend to work on expanding my involvement in the project namespace. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. -- mtz206 ( talk) 02:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC) |
For the Al-Waha and Al Fakher, how do they read like ads? What can be changed? Nsterui 20:59, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
When you remove a tag speeedy delete by reason of copyvio [2] , please list as a normal copyvio. Although a source is needed to fulfill the speedy delete criteria, the lack of one does not make it any less of a copyright infringment. Thanks. -- Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 16:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I posted the file cinqueterre.jpg that I found on flickr because it seems like the photo is listed with a Creative Commons license ( http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=171751692&size=o) that allows for this. Now that I look more closely it is a 2.0 license, which seems less restrictive than 2.5. No big deal if the photo needs to come down (I just liked it), but if there is some more attribution I need to add or something let me know. Thanks
Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0
You are free:
* to copy, distribute, display, and perform the work * to make derivative works
Under the following conditions: by Attribution. You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor. nc Noncommercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
* For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. * Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.
Your fair use and other rights are in no way affected by the above.
Steveray00 23:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
My WP namespace edits have risen to above 400 since my nomination. Would you reconsider my suitability as an admin in my RFA? Thanks. -- WinHunter ( talk) 05:38, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Tony Forsythe.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that is 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.
Is now on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fruit_Machine_%28film%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderland_%281988_movie%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Forsyth
Thanks; still learning.
trezjr Trezjr 15:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, you left a message on my talk page saying that an image I had reverted to as a picture on the Saraswati page wasn't really in line with the Wikipedia copyright policy. And since I have no knowledge of or connection to that picture, I guess the image should be removed. ~ magbatz 00:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
A discussion on the use of headers for the page Category:Candidates for speedy deletion is currently being discussed at Category_talk:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion#Category_Header_Information. Your input would be welcome. — xaosflux Talk 01:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
The page below is the one in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_scheme
There is a recent attempt to make this article more inline with Wikipedia guidelines - more neutral. However, one of the other editors (Carnildo)keeps on reverting back to the original - without discussing on the Talk page. This whole article is complex, having been altered many times to create a negative 'feel' to the page. The most recent user to attempt to bring this article inline with guidelines seems to me to be a neutral party - yet his work is being vandalised. Can you or someone else please examine and perhaps intervene?
Cybertrax) 26 June 2006
Hey, just a temporary note to say thanks for pointing me in the right direction re: copyright tags (in this case "Albumcover"). Everything's sorted now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johnny Sumner ( talk • contribs) 15:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC).
Hi I wrote the Horace Tuck page. The image of the painting is mine - I own the painting and I took the photograph of it. I just didn't really know which copyright box to use. Also, someone removed the reference to the book about this artist - yet I was told I had to give references. So why did that happen? Thanks! Lizzybeth -- Lizzybeth 18:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I shall appreciate if you could assist in the unjustified administrator deletion of the racist term "Chinese Pig". The article provides valuable information on a the slur. It is particularly useful for Chinese students who are racially abused and needs information about the term.
The administrator claims that the term needs to be extensively referenced, but the fact is that the term is already sufficiently referenced by credible sources. Other similar articles like "Nigger" and "Coolie" are in Wikipedia.
Please be kind to help me revert the carefully written article. The assistance rendered would be appreciated.
(Sorry about the standard of my English because it is my second language and I am from Hong Kong.)
Henry Chung. My Email is: chungkwoksum@gmail.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chinese_Pig -- Chungkwok 01:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
I am vexed to learn that my article on the
P-1000 was deleted per CSD:G4. I was unaware of the existence of any prior article by that name, and any similarity between the two editions is most likely due to there being a very limited amount of sources of information on the vehicle (all of which I quoted as references).
I am unconvinced by the arguments presented in the original AFD for the first edition and request that if they are to be taken as law, then the similarly poorly-referenced
P-1500 be deleted with extreme prejudice. --
Agamemnon2
05:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
You shall burn i hell u destroyed the Unquestioned Goat. He will get u in your dreams Thank you Ghersher association !!! Δ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mark606800 ( talk • contribs) .
An image or media file that you uploaded, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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. Stifle (talk) 10:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
You provide no reason as to why you are deleting my shit. So, Why? Dfrg.msc 07:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
* Image:WP MTG FInal!.jpg (talk | delete)
Uploaded by Dfrg.msc (notify). UE- Stifle (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
* Image:NPOV 2.jpg (talk | delete)
Uploaded by Dfrg.msc (notify). UE- Stifle (talk) 09:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
* Image:Brass Monkey.jpg (talk | delete)
Uploaded by Dfrg.msc (notify). UE- Stifle (talk) 10:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
* Image:DFRG. MSC.jpg (talk | delete)
Uploaded by Dfrg.msc (notify). UE- Stifle (talk) 10:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Dfrg.msc 07:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
I was worried this might happen. Oliver Knox has nothing to do with the current article called Chronicles of America, and should not redirect there, or exist at all. Oliver Knox is a character in a nn fantasy by Stephen Ward called Chronicles of America. He (OK) originally had a short article to himself, which was changed to a redirect to the fantasy. I nominated Chronicles of America at AfD. During the AfD process, the article Chronicles of America was changed to describe a 1920s series of history books. At the conclusion of the AfD, all mention of the fantasy was removed (have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chronicles of America). So, we now have the situation where a character in a nn fictional book has a page which redirects to an article about history books. It is that which I was trying to rectify through the CSD process. Mr Stephen 15:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
sorry fro making the article Peter McGuinness what can I write about Irish Railfan 09:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)