Misplaced Pages

User talk:Explicit: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:01, 18 December 2024 editExplicit (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators325,752 edits Restoration of article: Reply.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 00:25, 4 January 2025 edit undoBusterD (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators44,809 editsm In a case like this...: in 
(87 intermediate revisions by 34 users not shown)
Line 14: Line 14:
|} |}


== File:The Computer Book (BBC 1982).jpg ==
==DYK for Kang Ju-hyeok==
{{ivmbox
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that ''']''' ''(pictured)'' became the youngest player in ]'s history at the age of 17 years, 9 months, and 6 days?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and the hook may be added to ] after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> ] ] 00:02, 6 December 2024 (UTC)


Hi,
== Arambegama ==


I only got back to editing Misplaced Pages today, and read the file talk page a little earlier. It was only later in the day that I have time to do some editing and was planning to convert the deletion request to an FFD as the uploader (]) was quite passionate in his defence of the image. Would you be willing to restore so I can take it to FFD? -- ] (]) 00:43, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
I saw your edit on ] (as it is still listed as having dab pages), but it appears to have no content after your edit - should it be deleted?&mdash; ] <sup>]</sup> 21:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Rodw}} {{Done}}. ]] 00:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC) :{{Reply to|Whpq}} Very well, I have restored the file. ]] 00:45, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks -- ] (]) 00:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)


== File:Bokontayev.jpg ==
==Kassia St. Clair==
Could I please have a copy of ] (which you deleted), as I had only recently added a photo to it. ] (]) 00:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Edwardx}} . There isn't much content. ]] 00:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)


Hi Explicit. Can you take a look at ]? This is another file that you've previously deleted twice before (once per F4 and once per F11) that could be a reupload or a new file with the same name. -- ] (]) 07:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
== File:Invicta Old Logo.gif ==


==Happy Holidays!==
Why is ] deleted? I have already altered the non-free use rationale to comply with the guidelines? ''']''' <small>(])</small> 00:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
And happy new year as well! ] (]) 19:48, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Marcnut1996}} I have restored the image. If {{U|Iruka13}} wishes to pursue it further, they should go to ]. ]] 00:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
:: Thanks for that. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 00:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)


== You Deleted a Page but it's still online. ==
== File:Baume-les-messieurs.jpg ==


@] I was going to nominate a page for deletion but discovered it had been nominated in the past and ended as delete. I am surprised that the page (] is still online. What's happening? ] (]) 12:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Explicit. Could you take a look at ]? It was uploaded without a copyright license or any real source information, but the EXIF data indicates it might be Getty Images stock photo. I tried searching for the image and found it on Getty page in Korean, but I can't find how the file's being licensed. -- ] (]) 07:04, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{tpw}}{{ping|Joseph4real1995}} It appears the article was recreated per ]. There appears to have been a disagreement as to whether ] applied to the recreation. I can't see the original article that was deleted, but Explicit can. I'm sure Explicit will figure out whether the article needs to go to AfD again or meets the criteria for G4. -- ] (]) 14:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
:https://www.istockphoto.com/en/%EC%82%AC%EC%A7%84/%EB%B4%84-%EB%A0%88-%EB%A9%94%EC%8B%9C%EC%99%B8%EB%A5%B4-%EC%9E%88%EB%8A%94-%EC%A3%BC%EB%9D%BC-gm178824413-25187314 —] 09:24, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::Thanks for that {{u|Cryptic}}. I thought the file might be eligible for speedy deletion per F9, but you deleting the file for that reason takes care of that too. -- ] (]) 10:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Cryptic|Explicit}} ] is another one uploaded (by a different uploader though) that has no copyright license and is sourced to some kind of social media site. I explained the issue (at least what I perceive to be the issue) with this file to the uploader on ], but they haven't responded yet. FWIW, I'm not seeing any way for Misplaced Pages to keep this absent an acceptable free license or VRT verification since I don't think it can be converted to non-free. I suggested to the uploader that they tag the file for speedy deletion per G7, but this probably also meets F9. -- ] (]) 12:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Github isn't exactly social-media, but it is user-generated content. I'm less comfortable deleting those as F9s, since there's usually some chance the author's contactable and amenable to freely licensing the image. If it's the same person that ] is redirecting to, that's, um, probably not going to happen here. Definitely not usable as nonfree either way. I'd let it wait out the week to be deleted as an F4 for not having a known license. —] 12:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
::::Thank you for taking a look at this {{u|Cryptic}}. Although your approach seems reasonable to me, another user has tagged the file for speedy deletion per F9, and I'm not sure I should remove the tag at this point. -- ] (]) 00:50, 12 December 2024 (UTC)


== ] == == Deletion review for ] ==
] has asked for ] of ]. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.<!-- Template:DRV notice --> —] 15:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


== ] ==
Hi - I'm contacting you because you are the admin who speedy deleted the redirect created when a user ]ed an article I created with no notification to me, and what I think is an explanation at odds with what are described as valid reasons in DRAFTIFY; I just want to make sure I didn't miss anything. I do like to create stubs on things which seem to have enough sources, but I don't have the expertise (language or knowledge-base) to really interpret. Thanks! ] (]) 17:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Tduk}} Hi, per ], you are free to move it back into mainspace if you object to the draftification of the article. You may also want to contact the user who moved the page to better understand and perhaps address their concerns. ]] 23:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)


<s>Deleted PROD - please could you let me have the text of the deleted article ], as I think I have sources to warrant keeping it? Thanks, ] (]) 05:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== Talk:Nicolás Atanes un-protection ==
and</s>Happy New Year! ] (]) 05:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:Please don't trouble - the same text, such as it is, is on the Punjabi Wiki. ] (]) 18:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)


== Prod on ] ==
Heya @], I just accepted ] via AfC, I think it passes notability - would you mind unprotecting the talk page so I can correctly move it? <span style="background-color: RoyalBlue; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">''']''' <small>]</small></span> 21:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC)


Hi Explicit -- Liz suggested that I look at recently deleted prods because there was a bulge in numbers and we were worried that they might have received reduced attention over the holidays. I found ], which you deleted and which I think might be notable -- there's a respectable source in the deleted article (''Boston Globe'') and multiple hits in Proquest, many of which look reliable. Do you mind if I undelete it? Cheers, ] <small>(])</small> 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== Restoration of article ==
:{{Reply to|Espresso Addict}} <!-- Begin Template:UND -->] '''Done''' as a contested ], the article has been restored upon request.<!-- End Template:UND - prod --> ]] 01:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


== Removing link(s) undefined (XFDcloser) ==
Hello, I would like to ask if there is still a chance to restore the articles. @] They had real sources and were really well done and didn't break Misplaced Pages rules. Thank you in advance for your answer @] ] (]) 17:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)


:@] ] (]) 07:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC) You're leaving a lot of edits with this summary. Perhaps there's a problem with the XFDcloser tool. ~] (]) 04:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Kvng}} This is a ]. Unfortunately, it has gone unaddressed for several years. ]] 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)


== File:Rafi malik.jpg ==
{{Reply to|Historyk.ok}} Hi, I do not restore pages created by banned users per ]. I can provide the sources as an alternative solution. ]] 12:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)


Hi Explicit and Happy New Year! What's your take on the licensing of ]? The file has EXIF data, but it says the image was generated in 2014. I can't find the full image anywhere online, but there's a crop from 2016 found ? Do you think this meets ] or should it be tagged with {{tlx|npd}}? -- ] (]) 09:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
==DYK for Yoon Do-young==
:{{Reply to|Marchjuly}} Hi, I don't think this is a case that requires outright deletion as F9. Tagging it for lacking evidence of permission is the better way to go. ]] 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
{{ivmbox
::Thank you for taking a look at this. I've tagged the file with {{tlx|npd}}. -- ] (]) 06:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
|image = Updated DYK query.svg
|imagesize=40px
|text = On ], ''']''' was updated with a fact from the article ''''']''''', which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ''... that ''']''' ''(pictured)'' scored his debut goal for ] 50 seconds into a match against ]?'' The nomination discussion and review may be seen at ]. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page <small>(], )</small>, and the hook may be added to ] after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the ].
}}<!-- Template:UpdatedDYK --> &nbsp;—&nbsp;] (]) 00:03, 18 December 2024 (UTC)


== Deletion of Akidearest article ==
== XfD request ==


Happy new year!
I've listed a redirect for discussion per ], the redirect in question is "]" and its up on the ]. ] (]) 10:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
I saw you deleted the article for YouTuber Akidearest last month and wanted to ask if there is any way to gain access to the article, since I would like to re-write it and reference the old article. I would of course revamp the sources so it doesn't get taken down again. ] (]) 10:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Maehii}} Hi, I can restore it as a draft where you can work on it. Then, you can submit it as an ] submission. Would you happen to have any new sources available now? ]] 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
::Hi, that would be wonderful. Yes, I collected some new sources so the article will align with Misplaced Pages guidelines. Here are some examples:
::https://metropolisjapan.com/beyond-the-view-counter/
::https://www.tokyocreative.jp/en/influencer-47-akidearest
::https://youtube.fandom.com/Akidearest
::https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/h9y57-4dc32/The-Anime-Show-with-Joey--AkiDearest-Podcast (podcast with The Anime Man)
::https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW-y5RjZOLw (collaboration video with Netflix and CDawgVA) ] (]) 08:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:::{{Reply to|Maehii}} The content is now available at ]. ]] 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

== ] ==
Would you be willing to undelete this? It was deleted for having two links but it should have had three (] was missing). I ] the nominator (who is also an admin) if he would be willing to undelete it but he suggested deletion review, which I'm not sure is necessary or not since there was nothing wrong with the delete outcome at the time. ] (]) 17:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|WikiOriginal-9}} The general rule of thumb is that navigational templates require five blue links. This would not survive TFD if only one additional link was added. ]] 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

== Deletion review for ] ==
An editor has asked for ] of ]. 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.<!-- Template:DRV notice --> ] (]) 05:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

== In a case like this... ==

] was a G4 which you originally deleted, and I did again today. I'm inclined to salt something like this, but wonder what a more experienced hand has to say. I'm deleting several dozen at once this afternoon (by the same sock) so while I might make some of my own choices, I'd like your opinion: what's the sweet spot on salting? Twice G4'ed seems slam dunk to me. I've also been experimenting with some short term salting, to discourage multiple attempts for now. ] (]) 23:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|BusterD}} When I became an admin, the general practice seemed to be that salting was done when a page was deleted three times. That's what I continue to do, kind of like a "three strikes and you're out" rule. It does differ from person to person, though. I think it's ultimately a personal decision. ]] 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
::Thanks for the sage advice, such as it is. I noticed the policy suggests shorter term salting (as I have been trying) in some cases. Three strikes makes perfect sense to me. I've been spending some time every morning on the speedy list. (I'm now #35 among current admin deleters; a dubious distinction but surprising to me.) For clarification, technically any EC editor could potentially (and under policy) recreate a salted title, right? It's not a form of full protection. I'm not sure this is fully understood by the trolling community... ] (]) 00:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 00:25, 4 January 2025


Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55



This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

It is approximately 10:03 AM where this user lives (South Korea).

File:The Computer Book (BBC 1982).jpg

Hi,

I only got back to editing Misplaced Pages today, and read the file talk page a little earlier. It was only later in the day that I have time to do some editing and was planning to convert the deletion request to an FFD as the uploader (User:Jheald) was quite passionate in his defence of the image. Would you be willing to restore so I can take it to FFD? -- Whpq (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

@Whpq: Very well, I have restored the file. plicit 00:45, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Thanks -- Whpq (talk) 00:48, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

File:Bokontayev.jpg

Hi Explicit. Can you take a look at File:Bokontayev.jpg? This is another file that you've previously deleted twice before (once per F4 and once per F11) that could be a reupload or a new file with the same name. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

And happy new year as well! Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:48, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

You Deleted a Page but it's still online.

@Explicit I was going to nominate a page for deletion but discovered it had been nominated in the past and ended as delete. I am surprised that the page (this page) is still online. What's happening? Joseph4real1995 (talk) 12:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)@Joseph4real1995: It appears the article was recreated per User talk:Reading Beans/Archives/2024/October#Speedy deletion nomination of Oyebanji Akins. There appears to have been a disagreement as to whether WP:G4 applied to the recreation. I can't see the original article that was deleted, but Explicit can. I'm sure Explicit will figure out whether the article needs to go to AfD again or meets the criteria for G4. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Patrik Kincl

Clariniie has asked for a deletion review of Patrik Kincl. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 15:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Bathwala

Deleted PROD - please could you let me have the text of the deleted article here, as I think I have sources to warrant keeping it? Thanks, Ingratis (talk) 05:00, 1 January 2025 (UTC) andHappy New Year! Ingratis (talk) 05:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Please don't trouble - the same text, such as it is, is on the Punjabi Wiki. Ingratis (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Prod on Wordhunt

Hi Explicit -- Liz suggested that I look at recently deleted prods because there was a bulge in numbers and we were worried that they might have received reduced attention over the holidays. I found Wordhunt, which you deleted and which I think might be notable -- there's a respectable source in the deleted article (Boston Globe) and multiple hits in Proquest, many of which look reliable. Do you mind if I undelete it? Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

@Espresso Addict: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. plicit 01:39, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Removing link(s) undefined (XFDcloser)

You're leaving a lot of edits with this summary. Perhaps there's a problem with the XFDcloser tool. ~Kvng (talk) 04:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kvng: This is a known issue. Unfortunately, it has gone unaddressed for several years. plicit 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Rafi malik.jpg

Hi Explicit and Happy New Year! What's your take on the licensing of File:Rafi malik.jpg? The file has EXIF data, but it says the image was generated in 2014. I can't find the full image anywhere online, but there's a crop from 2016 found here? Do you think this meets WP:F9 or should it be tagged with {{npd}}? -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:08, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hi, I don't think this is a case that requires outright deletion as F9. Tagging it for lacking evidence of permission is the better way to go. plicit 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look at this. I've tagged the file with {{npd}}. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Deletion of Akidearest article

Happy new year! I saw you deleted the article for YouTuber Akidearest last month and wanted to ask if there is any way to gain access to the article, since I would like to re-write it and reference the old article. I would of course revamp the sources so it doesn't get taken down again. Maehii (talk) 10:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@Maehii: Hi, I can restore it as a draft where you can work on it. Then, you can submit it as an Articles for creation submission. Would you happen to have any new sources available now? plicit 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi, that would be wonderful. Yes, I collected some new sources so the article will align with Misplaced Pages guidelines. Here are some examples:
https://metropolisjapan.com/beyond-the-view-counter/
https://www.tokyocreative.jp/en/influencer-47-akidearest
https://youtube.fandom.com/Akidearest
https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/h9y57-4dc32/The-Anime-Show-with-Joey--AkiDearest-Podcast (podcast with The Anime Man)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW-y5RjZOLw (collaboration video with Netflix and CDawgVA) Maehii (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
@Maehii: The content is now available at Draft:Akidearest. plicit 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Template:Colorado Crush starting quarterback navbox

Would you be willing to undelete this? It was deleted for having two links but it should have had three (Bobby Pesavento was missing). I asked the nominator (who is also an admin) if he would be willing to undelete it but he suggested deletion review, which I'm not sure is necessary or not since there was nothing wrong with the delete outcome at the time. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@WikiOriginal-9: The general rule of thumb is that navigational templates require five blue links. This would not survive TFD if only one additional link was added. plicit 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Deletion review for Category:Fulbright Scholars

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Category:Fulbright Scholars. 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. RubyEmpress (talk) 05:12, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

In a case like this...

Tafajjal Hossain was a G4 which you originally deleted, and I did again today. I'm inclined to salt something like this, but wonder what a more experienced hand has to say. I'm deleting several dozen at once this afternoon (by the same sock) so while I might make some of my own choices, I'd like your opinion: what's the sweet spot on salting? Twice G4'ed seems slam dunk to me. I've also been experimenting with some short term salting, to discourage multiple attempts for now. BusterD (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

@BusterD: When I became an admin, the general practice seemed to be that salting was done when a page was deleted three times. That's what I continue to do, kind of like a "three strikes and you're out" rule. It does differ from person to person, though. I think it's ultimately a personal decision. plicit 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the sage advice, such as it is. I noticed the policy suggests shorter term salting (as I have been trying) in some cases. Three strikes makes perfect sense to me. I've been spending some time every morning on the speedy list. (I'm now #35 among current admin deleters; a dubious distinction but surprising to me.) For clarification, technically any EC editor could potentially (and under policy) recreate a salted title, right? It's not a form of full protection. I'm not sure this is fully understood by the trolling community... BusterD (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)