User talk:Courcelles/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 December 3#Valeri Lilov

Because you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valeri Lilov (2nd nomination), you may be interested in Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 December 3#Valeri Lilov. Cunard (talk) 09:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure who's actually getting appealed here- I think it may be Orangemike, since the most recent version deleted was Valeri "Tiger" Lilov. Either way, thanks, noted. Courcelles 16:10, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2010 Summer Youth Olympics medal table/archive1

Hey, could you please revisit that FLC to review a response by a third party to one of your comments? Thanks! StrPby (talk) 00:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I always watchlist FLC's I comment in. There's just very little need to say anything until the list actually changes- I think this could work, but it'll only be in execution that we can see that. Courcelles 02:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

List of fictional companies... again

I think I may have screwed up and thoughtlessly left the time-stamping to Sinebot (Its existence actually encourages me to not sign since I like to see it in action!) and that may have somehow left my comment less visible to you. Sorry. Anyway, the post is now here in the archive:

User talk:Courcelles/Archive 35#List of fictional companies as a redirect and transwikied

and I would appreciate your input. (I also erred. Turns out the last deletion discussion did include a mention of Transwiking to the the Wikipedia Annex, though nothing appears to have come of it.)

Remembering to sign this time... 4.254.84.217 (talk) 02:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay... well, you're wanting to import this into an external site. If another WMF project wanted this, that would be all well and good. Meh... if your wiki takes this, what happens to the copyright of WP contributors when the absolutely useless redirect re-enters the trash? Because if there's one thing Wikia does extremely poorly it is respecting people's copyrights. Further, I can't say I'm inclined to sort through 2,472 revisions for copyright and living persons problems so an external project can take this list, because restoring this would make me responsible for anything hidden in the history. If you have a registered username on here- or any WMF project, I'd be happy to e-mail you the last version for background towards building an external work, though.Courcelles 03:31, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply!

Copyright? That would be an issue, with a list like that of all things? A somewhat silly but fun list I was thinking of basing this export/import on was list of fictional characters with heterochromia, turned into a redirect to Heterochromia, but just before the redirect was created someone relocated it to WikiLists here [1]. A list that got deleted because it was determined didn't belong on wikipedia was relocated to a place where it did belong and both wikis are now better for it. (A zillion redlinks notwithstanding.) There appear to be a great many other happy endings to other deletions and I consider it a tragedy when more and more important information isn't similarly relocated. But if copyright is somehow an issue with list of fictional companies even though the list of fictional characters with heterochromia redirect has yet to cause to cause any death or dismemberment (YET! BWAHAHA), then sure. Fine. Whatever. I'll get back to you regarding my usename I resort to when not leaving IP address breadcrumbs. 4.254.84.217 (talk) 04:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

You'll notice that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional characters with heterochromia closed as redirect, not delete. Looking through the history, I don't see any major problems wrt BLP, so... I'll undelete it for 24 hours, and then redelete the article. I had to go look this up, but if you're using MediaWiki's import feature, rather than copying and pasting, the history will go with the list over to your wiki, and then our local copy can be deleted again. Courcelles 05:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay... in both revisions and size of the XML, this was just too large to Transwiki. So, see [2] and [3]. It's not pretty, but it accomplishes what I think you wanted, it preserves the ENWP contributor's copyright under CC-BY-SA, and it saves me havign to check all the revisions for the BLP disasters that we see so many of. Courcelles 05:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the trust shown

I was notified by a colleague about this today. I am not so often here but sometimes do some cross wiki vandalism matters (using my global rollback) as well as label Dutch and Belgian school that vandalise on en-wiki as well so you can indeed trust me I think. Best wishes from The Netherlands, MoiraMoira (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

No problems. If I had a way to generate lists, I'd give the flag to all the editors here who are sysops on other large WPs. Courcelles 02:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hi there, I've request Somewhere in the World (song) article for semi-protection. ozurbanmusic (talk) 04:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I've seen this one at RFPP and have intentionally avoided handling it- it sure doesn't look like obvious vandalism to me. Were I to do anything, it would be a full-protect, so I've kept away from it. Courcelles 05:05, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh ok then. I was wandering why this was the only request you didn't review. So are you saying I should request full protection for the article? ozurbanmusic (talk) 05:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Unless it's obvious with the force of week old dead fish, I just don't touch music stuff. I don't know about it, I don't know our guidelines on it. You shouldn't read much into me skipping an RFPP report. Courcelles 06:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Bailey Jay

I had noticed when defending the article for Sarina Valentina that one of the actores she work with had her page deleted because of lack of source of the 4chan fame and AVN nomination. The nomination wasn't announcement a little over 2weeks after the deletion happened (see the pdfs 1 2). The 4chan fame can be easily found at encyclopedia dramatica. I would post a direct link to the page but it as blocked as spam. She also has many dvd that can be found on many adult sites. I hope this can be fixed soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erifneerg (talk • contribs) 05:29, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

This was deleted following a discussion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bailey Jay. We're going to need reliable, secondary sources to even consider bringing the article back, as the disputed WP:PORNBIO requires nominations for awards in multiple years. Whatever you're going at about 4chan can only be considered if reliable sources have covered it- Encyclopaedia Dramatica is not one. Courcelles 05:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Double Negative (2010 film)

I see that you deleted Jesse Johnson (director) after an AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Johnson (director)). His film Double Negative (2010 film) was included in this AFD but has not been deleted. Do I come to you to get this changed? duffbeerforme (talk) 07:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Yep, you come here and you apply a heavy dose of WP:TROUT. {{db-afd}} would have also gotten the matter sorted out. This seems to happen fairly often when the second article isn't listed at the top of the page and is instead mentioned in the nominating statement... not an excuse, but it does seem to. Courcelles 07:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Question

Excuse me sir, but why was my article deleted? I cannot contact the admin who deleted it and saw that you are online, so not really sure. Thanks peep. --Lineintegral123 (talk) 08:14, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I can see why you are confused- the deletion note you received was about as uninformative as it could be. Your article, however, was deleted under criteria A7 of our criteria for speedy deletion as it failed to contain any claim of encyclopedic importance for this person. The vast majority of people—inducing your humble attendant here—are not notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. The bottom line is that we require the people we cover; about 750,000 out of the Earth's population; to have received significant coverage in independent, secondary sources. The article you submitted gave no clue why this person might be in that class. (He may well be, but you have to establish that before writing a biography.) Courcelles 08:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

For my archives so this conversation makes sense in two years, the article was Zach Wagner. Courcelles 08:22, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Carrie Bickmore semi-protection etc.

Thanks for your help on the Carrie Bickmore article. Kiore (talk) 09:02, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. The protection is likely a touch long, but I have little patience for playing whack-a-mole when we're talking about a BLP. Courcelles 09:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Michael unprotection

I am requesting you unprotection of Michael (album) since the only disruptive editor (Chelo61 (talk · contribs)) has been blocked (again) for the same time the page is already protected. Chelo refuse to collaborate constructively and when he felt he is "being attacked" by others—according to him— he start edit warring. Protect the page the same time he is blocked is excessive, and the album will be released in 4 days (leaked today) so alot of information will come in these days. Tbh®tch^{Talk ©} Happy Holidays 19:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Downgraded to semi, since according to the logs we're still supposed to be on semi that vanished in one of the full protections. Courcelles 23:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback: SpikeToronto

Hello, Courcelles. You have new messages at SpikeToronto's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— SpikeToronto 01:30, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

U2

Sorry about not asking you first, but could you unprotect U2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) since there's now consensus on its talkpage to include "Irish" in the lead. DC T•C 22:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Downgraded to semi. Let's see what happens. Courcelles 00:05, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. DC T•C 00:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Insert cork, please.

HalfShadow 01:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Someone already disgorged that one. Courcelles 01:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

need pg protection for St. Nick

Hi- need your help to protect St. Nicholas pg, see wp:rpp, thanks!--Funandtrvl (talk) 01:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Wonders how many St. Nicks there are.... Will go look. Courcelles 01:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

re: logged out bots

Hi - thanks for the message. No problem - I'll keep that in mind. I'm a horsewoman and whenever I see the word 'bot' I think of botflies and I throw up my hands, shriek, and dismount before I get thrown. ;-)

I also replied to your comment at AIV - generally, if it's a school IP and school's out, I tend to let it go especially when the last prior edit was two weeks ago. I'll certainly put the hammer down if I feel I should, but I came of admin age in the era of WillyOnWheels and Grawp, so I guess I have a certain perspective about disruption. ;-) But if you want to block the IP, go ahead. I don't get hurt feelings or hold grudges about stuff like that. See you around. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 01:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Copy-edit

Alright, I'm done with the episode summaries, is there a way you can copy-edit them? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing, will do tonight. Courcelles 23:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Okay, well do in the morning. This is that space where nothing I think of sounds like an improvement. Courcelles 08:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

• News and notes: ArbCom tally pending; Pediapress renderer; fundraiser update; unreferenced BLP drive

• In the news: Amazon "shopping-enabling" Wikipedia; Al Jazeera interview; be like Wikipedia

• GLAM-WIKI London: British Museum hosts two days of talks between Wikimedia and the cultural sector

• WikiLeaks: Repercussions of the WikiLeaks cable leak

• WikiProject report: Talking copyright with WikiProject Copyright Cleanup

• Features and admins: Birds and insects

• Arbitration report: New case: World War II

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:54, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Chatwal

Hi, thanks for protection that article, I am unsure, will this user be restricted under that protection, he is the one that is repeatedly adding this content, I think he is autocomfirmed.. ? Off2riorob (talk) 03:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

IP's can't be autoconfirmed. The ten edit rule only works for actual registered accounts. Courcelles 03:14, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

And if he moves on to one of his other grudge targets, come track me down. I'll put a long block on that IP. Courcelles 03:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I will keep my eye on him, I was watching Chatwal but missed it, he is a complete nuisance, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 03:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Huggle whitelist

Not finding my name on the list...does that mean I'm considered a risk?
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 03:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea. I thought anyone with 500 edits and a month or two was added, you've got 15,000 edits and three years tenure. You've got me here. Courcelles 03:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

DYK

Hi Courcelles. I saw you demoted my pic; just FYI, I can assure you the image is free. I'm in regular e-mail correspondence with the game's author and he released it to the public domain on the AtariAge forum a while back on my request. 28bytes (talk) 07:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The problem being that a forum post is not a reliable source. Basically, without something coming through OTRS or solid source saying it is free, I can't risk putting it on the main page. Courcelles 07:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I would have thought that WP:ABOUTSELF would apply, but I will defer to your judgment. 28bytes (talk) 07:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, point 4 would be the problem- there are tons of guys on forums that aren't who they claim to be. Courcelles 07:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand. I suppose it's reasonable to want to be cautious about these things. I was just very excited about my first lead hook, especially since public domain video game screenshots are so hard to come by. 28bytes (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Contest of Deletion

Whom it may concern,

We here at Insurance Licensing Services of America, Inc. feel that our company offers a huge wealth of knowledge and service within our industry. Our clients are nationwide and range from insurance companies - including four of the top brokers in the world - to individual insurance agents. We are one of very few companies who specialize in compliance for the insurance and business industry and offer full service surplus lines tax services. We purposely do not list or name our clients or try to link with them thru Wikipedia to prove our relevance as defined arbitrarily by the editors. This does put us at a disadvantage as guarding our clients' privacy can hinder us on that score.

The posted reason for deletion is being contested by us due to the claims that a "professional" wrote our definitions for us, when in truth we write all of our own contributions. We had hired Robert Slate to edit and review our article before submission due to his claims of being a Wikipedia specialist. We wanted to make sure that we registered our logos and other images correctly and that our article would be a true definition of our firm and not a mere advertisement. We only enlisted his services to ensure that our article adhered to Wikipedia's guidelines and rules before submitting. Please advise on the next step in the dispute process.

Srfraley (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insurance Licensing Services of America, Inc. is abundantly clear, that your organisation fails WP:CORP guidelines for the notability of companies. Looking over the deleted article once again not only do I not see any assertion of notability, I see repeated use of promotional language... and nothing that resembles a truly independent source. I'm also suggesting strongly you read WP:COI- writing about things you have a conflict of interest with rarely works. Courcelles 20:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)