Misplaced Pages

Jorge Larrionda and the disallowed England goal

Thank you for providing the requested citation. Regards, Skysmurf (talk) 13:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure Skysmurf, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

re Missing You (The Saturdays song)

Well, its a complicated question. As for notability, the song has garnered some attention already, in the Daily Mail etc. and it probably will meet WP:SONG soon, since it's a Saturday's single and will presumably climb the charts soon on enough (granted we don't know that for a fact), so why delete a perfectly good article just to recreate it. Yes WP:CRYSTALBALL, but one hates to throw away good work that's just going to have to be redone, it seems a waste of people's time. So the Keep arguments are not without merit.

On the other hand you make good points too, and after all the single could tank, and WP:CRYSTALBALL exists for a reason. So on consideration I find your appeal has merit and is convincing, so I will merge and redirect the article. Nobody !voted "merge" so I'm reluctant to do that, but it seems the best compromise. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Herostratus (talk) 16:30, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for looking again at that, I agree merge is a good compromise. Off2riorob (talk) 16:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

summarizing others

Someone yelled at me not to summarize others' opinions. You do that. There are some people that don't fit your model, such as opposing both options 1 and 2.

Although we try not to be legalistic in WP, the trouble with the past election was there was not enough thought into the election rules and scenarios. I thought of it but I also found that mentioning potential trouble in WP is discouraged.

What do you think is the best way to achieve real consensus? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:40, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Whatever it is we should get on with it, I see stronger support for option one. If you dispute that then a simple two way seven days vote comment will close the issue. Off2riorob (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

BLP Stuff

Hi your pretty good on blp stuff, can you tell me if a blog post is acceptable for use if the author is making claims about a living person? This is the blog in question this is the article the issue pertains to thanks for any advice you can give mark nutley (talk) 20:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Mark you've brought this up at the proper venue of WP:RSN already, please don't canvass. Verbal chat 20:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see that WMC is a notable enough or qualified enough to warrant things he says to be added to our Global warming article. I have said before, if he was not a wikipedian editor it is highly unlikely we would have an article about him. Adding and using his comments and linking to his blog also creates serious conflict of interest issues which under the circumstances would be better avoided. Off2riorob (talk) 20:19, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

I`m not canvassing Verbal, i`m asking for advice, which i am meant to do if i am unsure about something mark nutley (talk) 20:22, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Hewitt picture

That picture of Patricia Hewitt, looks copyrighted to me, it is from here..what do you think all these are commons? library list is is unclear but they have this terms of use statement statement http://www2.lse.ac.uk/aboutThisWebsite/termsOfUse/Home.aspx#3 perhaps it is worth asking a picture expert, what do you think? Off2riorob (talk) 08:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The Hewitt picture came from Flickr (see: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lselibrary/4150615240/) where no copyright was known, I'm not sure if the LSE uses separate copyright for their website and their Flickr page. I do agree that asking a photo expert would be a good idea, especially since I found several other images which could be of use on their Flickr account.--] (talk) 20:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I had a bit more of a look and on flickr they are basically saying, as far as we know these picures are not copyrighted. I do think a picture expert to have a look, you could ask User:Toon05 who I have always found very helpful. This is the Librarys Flikr rights statement.. Off2riorob (talk) 20:26, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

If it makes you feel better

--Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Oh, and . I know what you thought - I can't quite decide. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:55, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for 31 hours

This post went way over the line. I might understand if you had been provoked, but J provided you with a reasoned, calm response that you reverted without comment. He gave you absolutely no reason to assume that he "supports" or is a pedophile. If I see this again, I will not hesitate to indefinitely block you. —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 07:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)