|
Skip to the bottom ⇩ ·
 It is 9:07 AM where this user lives in Alberta.
Role models
|
|
|
| Non-attachment
|
Logic
|
Class
|
| Talk page archive |
|---|
 Send me no flowers | |
2009–2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2012
|
|
2013
|
FFD
Have a look at this massive close. AnomieBot must've been smoking a bit after that one! This day's FFDs aren't looking like such an easy deal. Any thoughts or suggestions? I was thinking maybe I should just vote on each one so I could absolve myself of the responsibility of ever closing them.  INeverCry 19:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- Wow, that's huge, you are awesome. I had to stop helping at FFD and PUF; the stress was getting to me and it was sucking all the fun out of editing. And there's an IP who is going around adding talk pages to all the listings at PUF, effectively doubling the admin workload. And anyone who proposes to close those Star Trek deletion discussions had better have a pretty thick skin, bound to take some heat either way. I will poke around and do some of the easier closures -- Diannaa (talk) 19:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- I think I've picked all the low-hanging fruit, but if you can find some, you're welcome to it. Most of what's left is from higher up on the trees, and, as you say, it takes an adventurous soul to go for those. I close a few of those now and then. As for the IP, he's just helping me add to my admin stats without realizing it. In any event, very few people besides us spend any time thinking about FFD and PUF backlogs, so I guess they're not too urgent.
Bringing an article like this one to GA or FA would be worth all the FFDs and PUFs ever filed put together. It takes a truly awesome person to bring aticles like that or this to GA/FA.  INeverCry 20:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- I have found a couple easier closes already (over at PUF). Nazi Germany is a double whammy, as it was my WP:Core contest entry. My last entry (Bob Hope) won me a cool ₤30 at Amazon.uk, which I used to buy books to get Rudolf Hess up to GA. If I win another prize, I will use it to buy more wiki-related source material. It's win-win. Doing photo deletions is necessary work, but improving Nazi Germany and other core content is so important, work of lasting value that people will be using as a resource for years to come. It was so scary and hard (who the hell do I think I am to take on such an important project?) but with some marvellous feedback from User:Nick-D and others at the peer review and on the talk page, I think we ended up with a pretty good result. I will think about the May 23 problem and will let you know my opinion in the next day or two. Thank you so much for your kind words. -- Diannaa (talk) 20:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, those keeps are a bit of a pain. I'm spoiled from DelReqHandler on Commons; we have a keep button which does the whole keep process for us just as quickly as the delete button deletes. Perhaps we'll have a keep button here someday; I'll leave it to the technical wizards, who are, on average, 10 or 15 years younger than me. INeverCry 21:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- I have been thinking about the Star Trek images and I think they need to be kept. This type of game-changing mass nomination would really require an RFC or wider community input. The images have been here for many years, the first one I checked has been here for eight years, and the others have similar history. If the nominator wants to change the rules of NFCC this is not the way to do it. My opinion: Keep. It is possible to do a mass Keep-close on the daily nomination page using a text editor search and replace in Notepad++. Search for the string ]]==== and substitute ]]====\n{{subst:ffd top|Keep: This type of rule-changing mass nomination requires an RFC and/or wider community input, as it goes against long-standing interpretations of the non-free content criteria.}} ~~~~\n and do a similar trick at the bottom: {{subst:ffd bottom}}\n====
- What would Mr. Nimoy do? Would it be possible to do the RFC first, and close these based on the decision reached there? It's not like anyone else will be in a hurry to close them, so having them sit there a while wouldn't be a big problem. If you want to keep them right away though, we could use AWB to remove the ffd tags from the images and add {{oldffdfull}} to the talkpages. INeverCry 22:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- It would be up to the guy who wants to see them deleted to start the RFC, in my opinion. If you know how to do the AWB step I could do the other step (closing the nominations). -- Diannaa (talk) 23:00, 24 June 2013 (UTC) Here is a possible wording:
Keep: This rule-changing mass nomination is contrary to the long-standing way the community has interpreted the NFCC. If the nominator wishes for the site-wide policy regarding the use of this type of image to be changed, a community-wide RFC would be a more appropriate venue.
- There's no rush, I am going to think about this overnight. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. There's only 303 images in the 3 ST images cats involved, so it shouldn't be too hard to skip around and edit the ones with ffd tags in AWB. There may be a few uncatted images, but that can be checked pretty quickly with popups after I'm done with AWB. INeverCry 23:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, sounds great. I am off to the gym now; ttyl. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
- This does not really seem to be a change of any rules. In the documentation for {{Infobox television episode}}, it says that such images often are inappropriate, and files like those have been deleted for ages when taken to FFD. --Stefan2 (talk) 08:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- I realise that it's within a strict interpretation of the rules. Otherwise he would not be able to nominate them. But it's not the way people have been interpreting the rules all these years. What's next? Album covers? Movie posters? Pics of soap opera characters? by his strict definition of NFCC none of these qualify either. I am not interested in participating in stripping the wiki of all these images, because I don't agree that they need to be deleted. The only way I am going to close the mass nomination is if the images are kept. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- We have 100+ ffds here with half keep and half delete votes from the few people who've commented. I can't see anyone closing these as delete any time soon as they are, if ever. I think keeping them and allowing the nominator or anyone else who's interested to open an RFC is the safe and responsible choice. This could affect many other files, and so more community involvement is needed than can be had at a limited venue like ffd. INeverCry 15:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- If these are closed, someone would likely take them to WP:DRV regardless of how the FFDs are closed, but maybe that's a good outcome since it would mean that more (and other) people will see them. I don't think that posting hundreds of FFD requests about images like this is a good idea as it makes it difficult to discuss anything about them, and it becomes more of a copy & paste task. There were a couple of Simpsons images at DRV last year after a similar set of hundreds of FFDs, with varying outcome. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- The offshoot of that fiasco is that User:SchuminWeb retired. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Michael Pliuskaitis
Hi, Diannaa! It's been a while; I remember your help and advice with real gratitude. I find myself not knowing which way to turn, thought of you. The article on Michael Pliuskaitis (which I have had nothing to do with) was created by a user called Snowswimmer; the gist of the article is that the subject was prosecuted and banned from coaching while working at the Snow Swimming club (or team, or whatever), apparently now run by his ex-wife. What I don't know is whether that is (1) a COI problem, (2) a username problem, (3) an attack page problem, (4) something for ANI or (5) none of the above? What, if any, are your thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:07, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hi J-lan. A quick look at the article indicates that the legal problems are not why the guy is notable; he had a career in swimming both before and after the ban. In my opinion the article would survive a trip to WP:AFD in its present form. The reverse-chronological order of the material gives undue weight to the legal issues. I have put the material in chronological order and removed a couple of points that are not covered by the quoted sources. I will watch-list and will put a custom COI message on the userpage of Snowswimmer. Thanks for notifying me. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for that, which of course I could have done myself if only I had been able to decide what was the proper course to take. Till soon, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 June 2013
Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2013-06-24
Arms of Canada
Thanks for adding the original official version of the svg back! I was looking for it and couldn't find it. In fact, I still can't find it using the search function... In any event, that could have saved me quite a bit of trouble. Thanks again. trackratte (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Trackratte. There's a related thread at User talk:Moonriddengirl#Non-free file needs to be undeleted. -- Diannaa (talk) 19:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your info. Since I am a new user, please forgive me. Next time, please don't delete the files. It would be my pleasure if you could inform me about it and then I could provide those necessary information about the file.
Thanks a lot. BenisonPBaby 08:18, 30 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benisonpanthaplackal (talk • contribs)
A barnstar for you!
|
