Open main menu


Page deletionEdit

Hello, I am contacting you because my page was deleted by you and I do not understand why. My page contained the same amount of information as the page 'Toscotec' which was not deleted and is an active page talking about a company in the same industry as the page I created. Thank you in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperdudes2019 (talkcontribs) 08:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Paperdudes2019. Please refrain from using your userspace for self-promotion, or you may find yourself blocked from editing. Thanks, FASTILY 23:04, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries#Campaign logo images for withdrawn candidatesEdit

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries#Campaign logo images for withdrawn candidates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Fastily. Would you mind taking a look at this as well as User talk:LD1998#Non-free content use? The file in question is being removed because its use in that article doesn't meet WP:NFCCP; it's not being removed for any reasons other than that. I'm not sure if there's any way to work around that simply because all of the other files are PD files from Commons, but maybe you can think of one. The article is subject to discretionary sanctions which means my removing the file again (even though I believe I'd be correct in doing so) will likely be reverted by another possibly causing them to go over the one revert per day restriction. The bots who check non-free files, on the other hand, won't care about this at all and should remove the file (at least as long as it fails WP:NFCC#10c) when they make their next run unless they're being told not to. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:14, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Marchjuly. Unless I'm missing something, this appears to be a run-of-the-mill case. File:Ojeda 2020.png should go to FfD for failing WP:NFCC#3a/WP:NFCC#8. In the same article, File:Joe Sestak 2020 Logo.png and File:Jay Inslee 2020 presidential campaign logo.svg should also be deleted on Commons for exceeding the USA's COM:TOO. Regards, FASTILY 23:04, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
I think the Ojeda file is pretty run of the mill as well, but I'm not sure it needs a FFD since there's no rationale provided for the use that particular article. Usually, WP:NFCC#10c violations are just removed (lately mostly by JJMC89's JJMC89 bot) per WP:NFCCE or tagged with {{di-missing some article links}} when it doesn't seem like an obvious NFCCP violation. If someone then adds the missing rationale and then re-adds the file, then FFD may be needed per WP:JUSTONE. Most of the time editors adding files like this are unaware of WP:NFCCP or WP:FCT and just see all files as being equal and therefore should be equal to use; that appears to be the reason why the file keeps getting re-added here. I would've removed the file again myself, but the page is subject to ACDS; if you think, therefore, it's better to discuss at FFD, then that's fine. However, regardless of the FFD discussion, the file may continue to be re-added and I'm not sure how ACDS applies to removals of clear violations of the NFCC.
As for the Commons files, I agree for sure on one and have !voted as such. I saw the other as well, but wasn't so sure; so, I didn't nominate it for deletion. It might be a borderline case that's just close enough to squeak in given some of the other examples considered to be too simple per c:COM:TOO United States. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
JJMC89 just removed File:Ojeda 2020.png from 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries. If someone re-adds it I'll just send it to FfD. -FASTILY 04:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
I saw that JJMC89 removed the file. FWIW, when I posted if you think, therefore, it's better to discuss at FFD, then that's fine to mean that I think you should take the file to FFD; so, apologize if it seemed as if it was. Since there is a 1RR restriction on the article, FFD might actually be the best way to resolve this. Does WP:3RRNO also apply to articles where ACDS are in place? -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:21, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
No worries, I don't mind taking the file to FfD :) AFAIK reverting major policy violations/vandalism are exempt from ACDS 1RR. If you're unsure, it's best to start a discussion somewhere than to risk a block. Regards, FASTILY 01:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)


Happy Adminship from the Birthday Committee

Wishing Fastily a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!

-- Mjs1991 (talk) 06:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! :) -FASTILY 01:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Page deletionEdit

@Fastily I have not gotten a reply to my last message sent to you. My page was deleted by you on Friday and I read through all the reasons that a post could qualify for a speedy deletion and I do not fall into any of these points. I would appraciate to get my publication back from you. Please tell me the steps I can take to have it back online. If you say that my page was used as a form of advertisment, I invite you to look at the wikipedia page of TOSCOTEC, a company in the same industry who has the same amount of information on their page and for some reason is able to stay online. Thank you in advance for your help.

Paperdudes2019 (talk) 09:16, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

#Page deletion..? -FASTILY 01:03, 12 July 2019 (UTC)


User:Garra15 is evading blocks on Wikipedia and Commons, and continues to upload copyrighted images to both websites. SLBedit (talk) 21:49, 13 July 2019 (UTC)


Please come help out on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism for a little. (talk) 21:40, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

File:Big Brother 21 House Photo.jpgEdit

Can you inform me of why this file was still deleted despite the messages on the talk page of why it met the criteria? Thanks TheDoctorWho (talk) 03:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Fastily".