| Revision as of 22:17, 21 December 2010 editMr.grantevans2 (talk | contribs)3,791 edits →Peter T. King← Previous edit | Revision as of 22:20, 21 December 2010 edit undoMr.grantevans2 (talk | contribs)3,791 edits →Peter T. KingNext edit → | ||
| Line 193: | Line 193: | ||
| == ] == | == ] == | ||
| Please consider semi protection. There was no 3RR nor much of an edit war except perhaps 1 edit by an Anon after obviously pov |
Please consider semi protection. There was no 3RR nor much of an edit war except perhaps 1 edit by an Anon after obviously pov Editors,]and]'', reverted RS content once each. ] (]) 22:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 22:20, 21 December 2010
|
This page is archived by MiszaBot III 60 hours after the last timestamp. If your discussion was archived before it was complete, feel free to go retrieve it. New messages at the bottom, please. It is very, very easy to never see things that are put at the top, unless yours is the only message in the morning. Courcelles |
 Archives |
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
|
This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Difference problem: Crash bandicoot (series)
At the Crash Bandicoot (Series) page, look at the differences between the past and the current revision. Whats the difference between (2008) and (2008-)? (Don't forget to warn me if (2008-) is vandalism!) 74.12.126.46 (talk) 15:46, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- 2008 means in the year 2008. 2008– means from 2008 to the present day. Courcelles 19:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
- I get it. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 15:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Article: Peter Baldrachi
I am surprised, given the references I listed, his popularity in the genre of powerpop, and the fact that he has some pretty well known people playing on his next record, that this artist would be deleted. I only started doing this recently so maybe my page was not up to par with others, I would, however, suggest taking another look if at all possible. I hope my next pages on The Gladhands and The Beatifics don't face a similar fate. ]) 10:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerpopgirl (talk • contribs)
- We had a deletion discussion, and after fourteen days, no one other than the nominator commented. I'll typically close these as delete, but will restore the article upon request, which seeing as you have now made, I have done. Anyone may start a fresh deletion discussion though, so if more sources are out there, I suggest you add them sooner rather than later. Courcelles 03:22, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Internationalsecurity.jpg
I requested that the file be deleted one week ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_December_12
Maybe I missed something in my description? I'm still learning. :-) Shoplifter (talk) 04:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, you made one mistake... you sent something to an obscure deletion process ;) (No, you really were fine. However, a simple
{{db-g7}}would have been much easier than sending it to FFD. Author requests deletion without other users making substantial contributions is one of the easiest speedy deletions to process. Courcelles 04:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)- Alright, thanks for letting me know. Shoplifter (talk) 04:12, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Re: The "T" shortcuts
Just wanted to double check and get your thoughts on WP:R#DELETE, rule#6 and your decision after this discussion: Misplaced Pages:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_December_6#T:. I thought the pseudo-namespaces were an exception to Redirect deletions. Since the debate appears to be ongoing, does this mean that consensus has been reached?
— Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 08:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, main namespace to "Category:, Template:, Misplaced Pages:, Help: and Portal:" namespaces are exemptions to being speedied WP:R2, but are not exemptions to being deleted at RFD. Courcelles 13:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- My concern is for the possible broken links this deletion may have caused. For example, we're having a discussion right now at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 15#T:AH, which is what brought me here to your Talk page. In this particular case, the shortcut had not been added to the /doc page of the target template. Nobody knew about it, so it went unused. That shortcut does have a "linked to" history, so those links will break if that template is deleted. If any of the ones you deleted had important history links going to them, they are now broken, as well as any {{shortcut}} links on their target pages. Have these links been repaired?
- — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 04:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- PS To be completely honest with you, Courcelles, I do have another concern, which has to do with the ongoing discussion about CNRs. That discussion is summarized here, and shows that present consensus is to hold on to the pseudo-namespace CNRs and to use them freely. So maybe ensuring they were all shown as shortcuts on their target pages would have been a better alternative to deleting them? If you agree, then perhaps you won't mind if I begin a Deletion Review to get them restored?
- Check the links to redirect link at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 6. You'll find that only three or so of them have any links other than RFD, and the four total broken links are all in response to an RFA question, not in actual use. Citing an essay such as Misplaced Pages:Cross-namespace redirects as consensus is almost always a logical fallacy, and I really don't see how else the relevant RFD discussion could be closed. A nomination and two other deletes among three participants is always a delete close. Courcelles 15:50, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed that your decision based upon the 3/3 delete inputs was good based upon the facts at hand. I'm just saying that more input might be needed to come to final choice. The recently added Keep at the above-referenced discussion might apply to more of these shortcuts. There might be one or two or more shortcuts in that group you deleted that are worth saving. Perhaps a deletion review would help determine which ones are no longer needed, and which are still good redirect shortcuts.
- — Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX ) 18:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, take it to DRV, I don't mind. Though, how does the keep !vote referenced, "Keep—this is one of the few "T:" cross-namespace redirects I'd favor keeping," related to these other seven redirects? T:AH seems to be actually used, unlike the other seven. Courcelles 19:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Check the links to redirect link at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 6. You'll find that only three or so of them have any links other than RFD, and the four total broken links are all in response to an RFA question, not in actual use. Citing an essay such as Misplaced Pages:Cross-namespace redirects as consensus is almost always a logical fallacy, and I really don't see how else the relevant RFD discussion could be closed. A nomination and two other deletes among three participants is always a delete close. Courcelles 15:50, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Underneath the Stars listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Underneath the Stars. Since you had some involvement with the Underneath the Stars redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Erpert (let's talk about it) 08:12, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
File:RipOffReview.jpeg
Hi Corcelles, I won't be using this image in the article. It was suggested that I put them up individually, which I did. Please delete.Thank you!Thisandthem (talk) 12:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- G7'ed the image. Thanks. Courcelles 13:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Excessive vandalism warning: User talk:Di3h4rd
Courcelles, the page in the title is vandalized by the main user. A user already blocked 2 other users and The main user keeps vandalizing the talk page. Is it possible to block the user for an extended period of time since the user is unblocked? 74.12.126.46 (talk) 14:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC) (Thomas)
- Everyone involved was already indef blocked before I got there. Protected the talk page to prevent more sockpuppetry. Courcelles 14:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Well good. I just want to see how big was the vandalism. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 15:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Zamora (musician) now at (pianist)
Greetings! You protected Zamora (musician) as repeatedly recreated. Angel2021 (talk · contribs) has created a new article at Zamora (pianist). It doesn't look to be the same article that was last deleted as spam, and there's a new claim of notability (Grammy nomination), so I don't think A7 or G4 apply for speedy deletion. On the flip side, Angel2021 is probably another account created by Angelamuziotti (talk · contribs), who had been the proponent for the article during the most recent AfD. What's your take on the situation? —C.Fred (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- I really don't think a single Grammy nomination is enough to keep the article around, but is might be just enough to avoid the G4. (That said, if someone hit the G4 button, I wouldn't complain) All that said, we seriously need an SPI into this mess; there is something rotten going on here with the socks; we see these folks every so often that won't give up until they finally manage to either get banned or get their article to stick. Courcelles 22:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Re: Orphaned non-free image File:Viacom V of Doom logo.svg
Oh, that's okay. I already uploaded an EPS version of the logo at AllFreeLogo.com. :)
~~LDEJRuff~~ December 19, 2010, 22:15 (EDT)
- It'll get deleted in a week if it doesn't get added back into any articles; and it can be undeleted after that if there is ever a need. (Or are you trying to say we can go right ahead and delete this now?) Courcelles 03:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Semi-protection?
Courcelles, please check the revision history of this article if someone is blanking the page. Warn me if its vandalism or if its proper clean up. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 18:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC) (Thomas) (Link)
- I don't see anything untoward going on there. The article needs work, but that's par for the course around here. Courcelles 19:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Deleted Article: Novak Druce + Quigg LLP
"Spam. None of the references are to Independent Reliable Sources. "
The Novak Druce + Quigg LLP page was linked to multiple independent reliable sources reporting on activities of the firm, especially in regards to the firm's relationship with Oxford University and the infamous infringement case of NTP v. Research in Motion Limited (RIM) (both of which recieved extensive press coverage).
"Likely a non-notable law firm under our inclusion policy"
Many similar firms are included in Misplaced Pages including 'Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner' and 'Kenyon & Kenyon' are allowed in Misplaced Pages with fewer external links and references than our site provided.
Please advise as to how we can improve our page and why our references (third party publications) were not deemed independent reliable sources. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.166.148.121 (talk) 18:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- I think the last sentence really shows the problem. We have a guideline on editing with a conflict of interest for just this exact reason. The problem is that you can't establish notability by putting a lot of external links in an article, the coverage has to be significant. Press releases never help matters. If you have intellectually independent sources, please, let's see them. (And, should we reach an impasse, deletion review is your final option.) Courcelles 19:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Here are several intellectually independent sources:
Fish, Novak Druce Pick Up Darby & Darby Attys-Law 360
Emcore Infringes Avago Fiber Optics Patent: ITC
ITC Bars Emcore From Selling Infringing Optoelectronics
Five Join Novak Druce After Stevens Davis Breakup
Novak Druce Opens New IP Office with Akerman Attys- Law 360
WORLDleaders 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.166.148.121 (talk) 15:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- And every last one of them is from the firm's own website. That's not independence. Courcelles 15:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Nedzmin Kozlo
Sorry to be stroppy again, but did the irony not strike you that in removing backlinks to Nedzmin Kozlo because "Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nedzmin Kozlo" had knocked off NK you were actually handling the evidence that "Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Nedzmin Kozlo" had found missing. The pictures show NK as a member of the (multiple) national championship winning team. That's not further sourced but of course that might just be because Bosnian volleyball supporters may not have the Misplaced Pages/internet savviness and resources that Americans are able to devote to eg Operation Big Bear. The relentless pursuit of unsourced/undersourced foreigners reminds me of the fundamental finding of the MacPherson Inquiry - that institutional processes carried out fairly and diligently by those working within the institution can yield biased outcomes which the individuals involved find difficult to recognise as such - the bias is structural, not locatedd within individuals. Your conscientiousness in carrying out this minor tidying up exercise is part of this unacknowledged "cleansing of the inadequates" that seems to be an inherent part of the way Misplaced Pages works. Opbeith (talk) 23:07, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Okay... if you can source the biography, it can always be brought back. In some ways your point is well taken, we are biased towards things from the Commonwealth and the US, because so many of us speak English and little else. The thing is, someone wrote the Nedzmin Kozlo article in 2008. A fair amount of info was there... yet where did that come from? Did they have English sources in front of them that we can't find now? Do they speak Bosnian? Was the entire thing written based off what they remembered? The best person to source things is the person that wrote it in the first place. Otherwise we may well end up where we did with Kozlo; deletion as an unsourced BLP. (Not that I'm convinced by any stretch that playing volleyball at any level lower than the Olympics/World Championships is notable. That athlete articles stick easier than most any other kind of BLP is another discussion entirely.) Courcelles 23:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. Unfortunately I only came across the Nedzmin Kozlo deletion because by chance I came across the Sanjin Bezdrob AfD (national team captain) and in finding a couple of references for him found that OK Kakanj was unreferenced (and the national league as well), found a hopefully prophylactic reference for that and while adding that bumped into your removal of the Kozlo links.
- Kozlo's deletion roused my suspicions and led me to do some more investigation and find Almir Aganovic's AfD, where I spotted a purger I've come across before. In fact I've now had a message back from Wizardman reassuring me that there isn't a targeted purge going on, although the systemic issues remain.
- Now that Kozlo's gone I can't tell who the article's originator was. However the major contributors at OK Kakanj who I guess are the prime candidates don't seem contactable. I haven't a clue what information was already in their or where it came from. As I'm sure you know, researching often means coming sideways at information, looking for what you know ought to be there. Unfortunately as I have Bosnian friends I know that quite often after bumping into conflict on Misplaced Pages they just give up. So I assume I will have to try and put together what I can find and come up with some sort of new stub when I can. Perhaps once I've done that you can see whether the blocked information tallies and leads anywhere else. I have only a recognition level of Bosnian myself and my contacts with Bosnian friends tend to be about more serious subjects than volleyball so it'll probably be limited to what I can dig up without much reliance on Bosnian sources.
- I'm not desperately worried about the volleyball issue itself, though this episode has reminded me about volleyball at school and how it was actually one of the few sports I really enjoyed. But sport's a cultural phenomenon that's as deserving of a place in a comprehensive encyclopedia as anything, regardless of volleyball's relative popularity (and BiH's 72nd world ranking). And less prominent sports are often important in (usually less prosperous) countries where sport is as much a force for community cohesion as a commercial or political enterprise. So there's a wider danger of communicating the impression of "cultural denial" when any group of contributors is encouraged to feel disrespected. That should be an issue of sensitivity for Misplaced Pages, particularly given its dominance by nationals of countries whose awareness of their own experience of dealing with discrimination in its more and less obvious forms is not always evident. That's why I'm bothered about Bosnian volleyball however low it may be on the list of global priorities, even/particularly in Bosnia itself.Opbeith (talk) 09:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- There's nothing BLP harmful in the article, so I'll quote it for you. "Nedzmin Kozlo is a Bosnian volleyball player.
- I'm not desperately worried about the volleyball issue itself, though this episode has reminded me about volleyball at school and how it was actually one of the few sports I really enjoyed. But sport's a cultural phenomenon that's as deserving of a place in a comprehensive encyclopedia as anything, regardless of volleyball's relative popularity (and BiH's 72nd world ranking). And less prominent sports are often important in (usually less prosperous) countries where sport is as much a force for community cohesion as a commercial or political enterprise. So there's a wider danger of communicating the impression of "cultural denial" when any group of contributors is encouraged to feel disrespected. That should be an issue of sensitivity for Misplaced Pages, particularly given its dominance by nationals of countries whose awareness of their own experience of dealing with discrimination in its more and less obvious forms is not always evident. That's why I'm bothered about Bosnian volleyball however low it may be on the list of global priorities, even/particularly in Bosnia itself.Opbeith (talk) 09:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
With OK Kakanj he won for Premier League of Volleyball of Bosnia and Herzegovina 5 times (2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005), and National CUP of Bosnia and Herzegovina 5 times (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006).
He played as middle-blocker/hitter, Nedzmin played for OK Kakanj, Bosnia (1992-1995) (1997-2006)." Hopefully that'll help you sourcing it by knowing what you're looking for. Courcelles 13:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Warning for the page, User talk:67.52.216.253
Hello, courcelles. The link in the title is vandalized. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 23:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC) (Thomas) (talk)
- Yes, it has been. Did you know that you can revert the vandalism yourself? When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Misplaced Pages is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Misplaced Pages community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Courcelles 23:31, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Courcelles, I have reverted the vandalism. If he continues, you might me able to extend the block. But he's already blocked for 2 years. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 23:48, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Favor
If you see "the late" in the Katie and orbie article, warn me. But to see the vandalism easier, Check the current revision and the previous revision. 74.12.126.46 (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2010 (UTC) (Thomas)
The Signpost: 20 December 2010
- News and notes: Article Alerts back from the dead, plus news in brief
- Image donation: Christmas gift to Commons from the State Library of Queensland
- Discussion report: Should leaked documents be cited on Misplaced Pages?
- WikiProject report: Majestic Titans
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: Motion passed in R&I case; ban appeals, amendment requests, and more
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Peter T. King
I'm new to the BLP, looks to me as if its being tightly controled by Editors loyal to the Subject and that the request for full protection, done 3 minutes after the Requester made the page the way he wanted it, 16:07, 20 December 2010 (diff | hist) Misplaced Pages:Requests for page protection (Requesting full protection of Peter T. King. (TW)) 16:04, 20 December 2010 (diff | hist) Peter T. King (Undid revision 403364488 by 128.253.237.77 (talk)---Please discuss on talk page.)
Request for page protection was apparently part of that pov effort. Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 03:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- This was an edit war over a BLP. Controversial material always stays out of a BLP when it is disputed. Logging out to use an IP sockpuppet was an especially bad move; you discuss and then re-add the material when you have consensus, you do not get into a revert war. Tht gets pages locked or editors blocked. Courcelles 22:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Could you please attend to the request at Talk:Peter T. King#Page Protection Apparently for POV Retention when you get a chance? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I shouldn't handle that. I protected the page, someone else should rule on editprotected requests. Courcelles 22:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Reconfirmation diff to Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Subscribe
Hello. This is a message to inform you that your name has been removed from from the list of Misplaced Pages Signpost subscribers. Do not worry; this is simply a method of reforming the Signpost so that automated bots do not fill up retired users' talk pages with Signpost subscriptions (see discussion here) and to make life easier for the Signpost. If you wish to re-receive subscriptions, please send a reconfirmation edit to Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Subscribe by signing with
- MessageDeliveryBot [you can also use a user talk subpage (like
- MessageDeliveryBot, replacing SUBPAGE with the subpage for the delivery), but this won't trigger your "New messages" bar.] Thank you for understanding.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of TeleComNasSprVen (talk) at 06:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC).
SoftArtisans Revision
Hi Courcelles, Thanks so much for letting me try for a rewrite. If you have a moment, would you mind telling me what you think of the revision? http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Cdulaney/SoftArtisans Cdulaney (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)Cdulaney
User talk:K.O.K Kev
This user has once again violated our fair use policies by uploading an image just for use outside of the article space, but this time the talk space. My two messages to him were met with extreme vitriol. Killiondude has blocked for half a day, but I'm not sure if this will solve anything. Would you mind telling him what he has done is wrong? He has made it clear that he will ignore me in the future.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I declare. I would have blocked for longer, but since it was done, all I can do is warn him again. Courcelles 22:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Chris Giles
Congratulations on deleting this page. Hope you feel better now. ] (talk) 21:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)]
- I think you have the wrong page. Chris Giles has not been deleted, and as far as I can tell, never has been deleted. Courcelles 21:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Peter T. King
Please consider semi protection. There was no 3RR nor much of an edit war except perhaps 1 edit by an Anon after obviously pov Editors,RepublicanJacobiteand], reverted RS content once each. Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 22:06, 21 December 2010 (UTC)