Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:01, 23 July 2013

Archives

Note: If you leave a message here I will usually respond here.

Deletion Review Request

Hi, I found the page created by me on Book Beyond A Billion Ballots has been deleted by you citing a reason as Promotion. It was purely about the book & nothing else. Let me know the objectionable part of the content. I request you to review this deletion. Thanks.

Well, there were a lot of things wrong with this article. First, its tone was promotional of both the book and its sponsor (e.g. calling it "insightful", "building a strong case", "credited for adopting innovative good governance practices" etc., all of which are statements of opinion). Second, at least the full first paragraph was copy-pasted from the publisher's blurb here (which both explains why it was so promotional in tone, and signifies that it was a copyright violation). Third, nothing in the article demonstrated how and why the book was notable, so even if you were to recreate it in a cleaned-up way, you'd very likely face another deletion proposal soon enough. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:06, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Agree with your concerns. Actually no intention to promote publisher. I wrote, as I'm reading it. I know, i rushed to publish it before citing few more sources & putting it in neutral words. Your quote, "...so even if you were to recreate it in a cleaned-up way, you'd very likely face another deletion proposal soon enough". Does that mean one should create articles about popular author's work only? Isn't there any scope for letting people know about some good books by less familial authors. Its not a fancy fiction, it talks about serious reforms need to undertake for strengthening democracy.

Re-VibhintaVerma.jpg image Problem

Hi, The vibhinta verma image has not yet published anywhere online, It is perfectly safe to use it on Misplaced Pages. There will be no copyright issue at all. and there will be no problem in future regarding copyright. Candicell

Steve Hodges

Hi, Steve Hodges gave permission for his official photo to be used on Misplaced Pages the day before the election. He lost the special election for congress so I doubt that we will have a photo of him available again. The note that he gave his permission to use the photo was in the boxes under the photo and on the talk page. without the one picture of him, the special congressional election for MO_08 at Misplaced Pages looks very biased for the man elected. I admit that I have trouble trolling through the wp jargon and do not understand all the image permissions, but it seems that to keep the unbiased nature of wp and because he sent written permission, the photo of Steve Hodges for Congress 2013 should be returned to Misplaced Pages, but by somebody with a greater understanding of wp permissions...like you perhaps. thank you!

Thessaloniki picture

Hi. I added a picture of many Thessaloniki landmarks but it was changed again. I think this high resolution picture that shows 6 Thessaloniki landmarks is much better than just the White Tower. If you see Athens, it has a picture with many landmarks than just the Acropolis for example. Here's the picture I talk about

http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Thessaloniki_collage.jpg

Thank you!

Help

Could you please tell me how to not violate the copywriter policy because I am new to Misplaced Pages and want to add images to visually improve articles. I tried uploaded several images like Malik al-Ashtar's grave.jpg ‎but it got deleted for copywriter issues. Thanks

result of admin enforcement

Hi, some time ago there was a case of my user with the admin noticeboard, I do not know if you remember. I had written something on your talkpage but it is now in archive. Today the result is that I am blocked for 3 months to edit greek related topics, I thought maybe you want to know the result, I am not trying to get your support to undo this, do not understand me wrong.

At least the truth came out because of this discussion in at least one topic, because you cared to check the topics and background, you found out that the columns of Hagia Sophia were not 23 meter. You did a really good job there, if you would not have noticed the error it would probably go unnoticed, not for the next 5 years but 50 years maybe for ever. DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I am now thinking, it was not good that you corrected the height of the columns. The truth is that they are not 23 meter, but the truth itself is not important in Misplaced Pages, the views of the Misplaced Pages "users" are what really matter. So it would be better if you would leave it as 23 meter, in accordance with numerous other articles where exactly the same is the case. After all 23 meter was the view of a user but the views of some users in Misplaced Pages are more valuable than others so you could change it. DragonTiger23 (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Besides you were the first one to block me, I have been blocked four times since my time on Misplaced Pages. By two admins however both of them were unjust. You had unfairly blocked me for edit warring on Crimean Tatars, but I was actually restoring rightly info of the source. After the block I was not busy anymore on that page but still other users supported my view and in the end the pov pusher source distorting user was blocked and the sentence was restored.

My second block comes much later when I was falsely accused by two canvassing Greek users who disliked me for creating a Greek army massacre of Turkish civilians, they did a lot of false accusations, and I was blocked again for restoring sourced info, later they blocked me again when I complained against admins of their behavior.

Later an unrelated Armenian out of sheer hate, falsely accused me, but the ironical thing was that you protected me there, why really? What does it matter? Why did you not gave them fun to block me? But now you are ignoring me for what reason? Besides I would like to know what you think of my topic ban after 10 days when the discussion was already in archive?

But in the end they are persistent in blocking me and so show the battle ground mentality which they complain of me but it doesn't matter, I do not care for their blind childish hate. A proverb says injustice does not last forever but maybe it does on Misplaced Pages.:) DragonTiger23 (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Picture.

I found a modern Shahnameh artwork here http://pic.persian-man.ir/shahh-name/%D9%85%D9%86%D8%B8%D8%B1%D9%87%20%D9%86%D8%AE%D8%AC%D9%8A%D8%B1%DA%AF%D8%A7%D9%87%20%D9%88%20%D9%85%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B8%D8%B1%D9%87%20%D8%A8%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%85%20%DA%AF%D9%88%D8%B1%20%D8%A8%D8%A7%20%D9%83%D9%86%D9%8A%D8%B2%D9%83%20%DA%86%D9%86%DA%AF%D9%89/

It is created by the same person who made this: http://translate.google.dk/translate?sl=fa&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UTF-8&u=http://fa.wikipedia.org/%25D9%25BE%25D8%25B1%25D9%2588%25D9%2586%25D8%25AF%25D9%2587:Siavash.jpg (Sent you a Google translate link so you can read what it says)

So i guess i am allowed to upload it? --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

According to commons:Template:PD-Iran, only if you can demonstrate that the painter died before 22 August 1980. Who is the painter? (And incidentally, again, what do you want this image for? Do you ever get your information from anything other than cheap amateur websites?) Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

You can clearly see that it was the same person who made these two artworks, so yes, he died before 22 August 1980. --HistoryofIran (talk) 14:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I see nothing about the painter's life dates. Where? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

No exact life date, only says that he died over 50 years ago - http://translate.google.dk/translate?sl=fa&tl=en&prev=_t&hl=da&ie=UTF-8&u=http://fa.wikipedia.org/%25D9%25BE%25D8%25B1%25D9%2588%25D9%2586%25D8%25AF%25D9%2587:Siavash.jpg --HistoryofIran (talk) 15:00, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, somebody on fa-wp slapping some random template on an image (probably without reading it) is not a reliable source for a person's birth and death dates. Fa-wp is notoriously unreliable anyway. You will need to find out who the painter is, and finding independent reliable evidence for when he lived and when his work was published. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:03, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Bad taste

Everyone has his own opinion about something, no need to act like a child and tell me that i have a bad taste, you are admin, act like one. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:58, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Look. That painting looks like it's taken from a cheap video game designed for male teenagers with inferiority complexes. Some 16-year-olds will undoubtedly appreciate fantasy worlds filled with very virile men with very big muscles, wielding very big swords, straddling very big dragon tails right between their legs, and wearing a tiger mask in front of where their johns should be. Some people might also savour the idea of using the memory of a medieval Persian hero in that role. Fortunately, not every Misplaced Pages reader is a 16-year-old male with that kind of issue over their own virility. We are still an encyclopedia, not a video gaming website, so that picture goes out. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:07, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

First off, i am not 16 years old if you are trying to tell that. Second, as i said before everyone has his own opinion, it may look like a video game to you, but it does not look like that to me, i have even seen it from Iranian TV channels, oh let me guess, they are 16 years old too? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, you could atleast have said that it was a copyright violation before removing it, how should i know? --HistoryofIran (talk) 09:56, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Uhm, by looking at the image page, for example, where there is a link to the deletion discussion? Or by simply recognizing that it's obviously another item by the same guy you asked me about the other day? Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:58, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

(Butting in) I agree with Future Perfect. That Rostam picture in particular is incredibly tacky, almost as bad as a Whitesnake album cover. It makes Rostam look like Brian Blessed in Flash Gordon. Why must we have this monstrosity when there's so much great Persian art? --Folantin (talk) 19:15, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Folantin. You might be interested (or appalled, maybe) to see that we are also in a dispute over this image and several others (see Talk:Khosrau I). Sigh. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:20, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I assume the bad taste has nothing to do with deletion because of copyright violations. Your taste doesn't play any role in when deciding to delete an image (without any warning): I assume it is only the copyright infringement why pictures are removed directly; not because they are bad. (how true that very probably is). Just 'sharing' in this discussion when I revisited this page to see an answer on a question I had asked (see below) and couldn't find it. Cheers, Tonkie (talk) 21:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

No, indeed, the discussion I'm having here with H.o.I. has nothing to do with my admin work on copyright issues; it's just an editorial disagreement over what images are appropriate content-wise. We are not talking about deleting anything, just about not using it in some articles. (Although H.o.I. also had some issues with other images that were copyright problems and had to be deleted.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Missed your reply - if any-

Hi FPaS, Few days ago I wrote you a question on deletion of two images I had added for my article on Dell PE VRTX. As I didn't have time before to check if you had replied via your own Talk page (as it was clearly not in my talk page) I tried to find it but your talk page is 'cleaned up' and I couldn't find the data (added on 4 July 2013 at 02:23 GMT) in an archive. Did you reach to my questions? And if so: where can I find it?

My question was: Deletion of two pictures used in article on Dell PE VRTX (as a new section on this page) PS: As you seem to clean up your talk page very fast (due to high volume I assume) please reply via my talk page if possible. Many thanks, Tonkie (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

thanks for your reply. It's clear now for me, although I'm not completely convinced of the 'obviously wrong' statement; but that is besides this discussion. For me the discussion is closed now and again thanks for the feedback. Tonkie (talk) 19:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Picture deletion question

Hello. I'm the subject of the photo "File:Samuel West at the London Film Festival screening of Hyde Park on Hudson, October 2012.jpg" which you recently deleted quoting (F7: Violates non-free use policy). I tried to follow WP instructions correctly - although they're extremely confusing - but I'm no expert at photos and have failed. I've no wish to violate copyright but I do have permission from the photographer to use the picture on WP and it is my current headshot (as you can imagine, for an actor it's important that these are kept up to date). I'd be very grateful if you could advise me how to use the photo, since many other actors on WP seem to manage it. Also, any advice or help on removing the citations box, since there are now plenty of citations? Many thanks in advance.

Hello. From what you wrote, it unfortunately didn't appear like you had a fully free license for the picture, i.e. one that allows anybody to re-use it, not just on Misplaced Pages but also elsewhere. Such a license is required for use on Misplaced Pages because of our free-content policies. As long as it's not fully free, it falls under our rule that we won't use non-free images of living people, given that a new fully free one could always be created instead. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Scythians

I have some sources that says the Scythians were of Iranian origin, may i ask why i can't post them? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

For Pete's sake, it's already in the article, right in the first sentence, with three high-quality sources, and again in the "archaeology" section, with several more; what else do you want? The stuff I pruned the other day was a link to that Farroukh website. I told you why that one is unuseable. This article works with actual academic print sources, and it's being developed by people who are willing and able to go to a library and actually read and understand high-quality academic print sources. If you are not willing to do that, don't meddle. We are not going to water down the article to your favourite level of cheap amateur website junk. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, let's ignore the Kaveh farrokh site, what about the others then? --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Which were they? Honestly, I don't remember we discussed any others. And what do you need them for? As I said, the basic claim is already well sourced. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

We didn't discuss about other sources, but there were more than one source when i posted it on the Scythian article if you didn't notice when you removed it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah right, I see now. Somebody had ref-bombed that sentence with as many as 8(!) footnotes. Now, whenever I see more than three footnotes in a row, I know for certain that an article has been in the hands of POV-pushers. It is never, ever, appropriate to put in that many refs for a single, simple statement of fact. Use one, two, maximum three refs, but use high-quality ones. Among the eight that I saw there, at least four were blatantly unsuitable (Farroukh, plus two from an amateur website called "ancient.eu.com" and one from another called "history-world.org"; a fifth was from Britannica online, which is also not our first choice when higher-quality alternatives from the academic literature exist. One of these pages was even a freaking Misplaced Pages mirror! It said so right at the top. Seriously, don't you even read the pages which you add as "sources"?) So I pruned the low-quality ones and left the best ones in. I don't think I removed anything else of significance in that edit. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well if it's like that then Misplaced Pages have some serious problems, because i have many times seen more than 8 sources in a row. --HistoryofIran (talk) 19:51, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, yes, we undoubtedly have too much rotten quality editing, especially in history articles like this one. But there's still also the issue of the quality of each source. In this case it was uncommonly poor. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:54, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Reuploaded file

Should File:Gemini-ganesan-phone.jpg, which was deleted following this FFD Misplaced Pages:Files for deletion/2012 May 30#File:Gemini-ganesan-phone.jpg, be relisted or can it be deleted by an admin immediately? Also see this log. There is no tag for files recreated such as WP:G4 for pages. Thanks ww2censor (talk) 22:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks ww2censor (talk) 20:04, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom case

Whatever Qwyrxian has said in his statement is twisted. Am I supposed to reply to statement of Qwyrxian or am I supposed to make independent statement on whole issue? What's the meaning of 'statement by'? neo (talk) 15:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, the crucial idea is that you should give your view on why you ought not to be sanctioned, so refuting the accusations made by Qwyrxian would be one way of doing that. Another would be to provide assurances that you have understood what was wrong about your editing and make a clear commitment to change. What you should not try to do is to make lengthy arguments about the content issues at question. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:21, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Then I think my 2 statements are wide off the mark. I am going to draft a reply to allegations of Qwyrxian. Except allegation of 'tag team', I don't think I have done some other misconduct. As I have said, I will not edit any Gujarat, Politics, religion related article until decision is made. Thanks. neo (talk) 15:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Michele Miscavige

Thanks for cleaning up Michele Miscavige - I was working through the article to clean it up and got partway through a couple of days ago, but hadn't yet got round to tackling the tabloid sources (though I am not sure it's entirely correct to call Vanity Fair a tabloid?). In any case, I've rewritten and recited the offending section. Could you take a quick look and let me know if you think it's better now? Prioryman (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Close

Closing backlogged FFD noms regarding TV episode screenshots

Greetings. I noticed you've been closing some of the backlogged deletion nominations at Misplaced Pages:Files_for_deletion/2013_May_23. I thought you might want to know about the RFC at Wikipedia_talk:Files_for_deletion#Non-free_images_of_a_specific_television_episode, if you weren't already aware. All the best, – Quadell 11:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it, and already commented, but I don't really think that RfC has much of a perspective of creating a situation that would change the basis for these deletions. Creating a new exception rule that would essentially grant those images a blanket okay is simply not going to happen. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Your comments there are extremely informative. Thank you. – Quadell 20:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

250 plaza photo

Ok do you know where I can find a pic of 250 Plaza without committing any violations? Or should I take a pic of the building myself with my cell phone? Zonafan39 (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, for buildings in the US, taking your own picture will be the best solution by far. The architect's copyright doesn't extend to controlling who can publish photographs of the building, so there is no copyright problem involved in taking your own pic. Fut.Perf. ☼ 09:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

File:Datuk M Magendran.jpg

Today you deleted an image, File:Datuk M Magendran.jpg, that I thought I had taken all the right steps and had met the burden of proof to keep the photo in the article, M. Magendran. Would it be possible for me to keep the contents of the File: page (sans image, of course) and the File talk: page in my user space? I would like to study them to see where I went wrong so that next time I will not make the same mistakes. Thank you for your consideration and for keeping an eye on these things! – Paine Ellsworth  18:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, I see that you made two separate cases here: on the file page itself, you described the image as non-free and were trying to make a case for how it passes the WP:NFCC. However, this was doomed to fail, because the person in question is alive, so he falls under our general rule that with living persons, barring some very unusual exceptional circumstances, it would always be possible to create a new alternative image, which its creator could then release under a free license, so a non-free image will always fail the replaceability test. On the file talk page, you were talking about the licensing status of the file, arguing that the use on Facebook implied a license for reuse; however, whatever the meaning of that Facebook rule is, it certainly doesn't constitute a fully free license of the type we require, so we're back at square one. Have you tried contacting the person in question and asking if he'd be willing to release a pic? That would probably be your best bet now. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I came to the same conclusion this morning and thank you for your confirmation. Now, would it be possible for you to userfy the content of the File: and File talk: pages so I can study the material? – Paine Ellsworth  19:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, now at User talk:Paine Ellsworth/img. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Just one more quick question... Wouldn't the fact that this photo was taken in 1997, sixteen years ago while still on the mountain and still in his climbing jacket, to commemorate the subject's achievement make it fall into the category of "very unusual exceptional circumstances"? Since the subject was 37 years old then, and is now 53 years old, wouldn't that make it fairly impossible for the subject to create a new, similar alternative image? – Paine Ellsworth  19:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Please restore the Soft redirects you just deleted

Per WP:CSD#A3 soft redirects are not to be deleted under that criteria. They are redirects and are to be treated as such. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Please stop rules-lawyering about this. Soft redirects were never meant for uses like this. Just because the WP:Soft redirect page forgot to explicitly specify this particular type of bad idea still doesn't make such a link a legitimate redirect. These were pages that consisted merely of an external link, and just because you opted to wrap them in a fancy template that called it a redirect doesn't change this basic fact. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The article WP:Soft redirect explicitly included this particular type of usage and of course that is what a soft redirect is, a template around the external link. Deleting the pages before the RfD discussion were completed is not appropriate. Geraldo Perez (talk) 23:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything in WP:Soft redirect that would encourage such links from Misplaced Pages article space to external non-sister sites. Where has that ever been proposed? Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:45, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The first paragraph of the article is a general description of the intent of soft redirects. There is no restriction mentioned there about going only to wiki projects and the second paragraph reinforces that. The second paragraph says "particularly likely to be used when redirecting users across Wikimedia sister projects" The interpretation being pushed that "only links to sister projects is permitted" is not the same as "particularly likely" as stated in the article. Some discussion on WT:Soft redirect. The use I am pushing here is not common but I don't see any documentation anywhere that it is not permitted if it has value to the project, which I believe, of course, that it does. --Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I am off to bed and I don't really feel like debating this rather silly case of ruleslawyering further. So far, all I can see is a unanimous consensus that these links were an outrageously bad idea, and if the letter of the policy texts is found to be leaving a loophole for it and you will insist on invoking that loophole, then the policy texts will have to be tightened so as to make sense again. If you can find any other administrator who thinks these links are legit, they are free to undo my deletions and reopen the case at RfD, but it will be a waste of time for everybody involved because deletion there is ultimately certain. Fut.Perf. ☼ 00:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For demonstrating once again what sensible admin action looks like. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Seconded. I, Jethrobot (note: not a bot!) 20:02, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ginifer King

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ginifer King. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Luri and Persian

Hello. Any idea if Luri is considered part of the Persian language? According to the Misplaced Pages article, it isn't and I haven't found a single source that considers it a Persian language. Would it be acceptable to conflate all Luri speakers and Persian language speakers here List of countries by Persian-speaking population. Iraq has 405,000 Persian language speakers and 99,000 "Luri, Northern" speakers, is conflating both Luri and Persian accurate? Chitooribah (talk) 12:59, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, that is really not something I know much about. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Any idea who might know? Chitooribah (talk) 13:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Dunno. I seem to remember Jonsafari (talk · contribs) used to work on the Persian language article. Or try Kwamikagami (talk · contribs); he's generally active on issues of language classification. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:42, 22 July 2013 (UTC)