Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:30, 26 June 2017

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.Please consider using other venues such as WP:REFUND, where most of my deletions are considered uncontroversial and can be restored upon request. Alternatively, you can consult other experienced users and admins for any guidance or help, or simply await my response.

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, as I am watching it. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, so please add it to your watchlist. Please click here to leave me a new message.

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 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

It is approximately 7:08 PM where this user lives (South Korea).

Deletion of "Aek Chabhi Hai Padoss Mein"

Dear admin, i really would like to get back information about this page since i am quiet attached with this serial. and infact i had checked it week just before its deletion. Daily i am watching its episodes available on Metasvideos and i am interested in knowing star cast episode wise which was nicely mentioned on this page of wikipedia. Drpratikgandhi (talk) 18:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@Drpratikgandhi: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 23:55, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Removed content

This editor also removed the international broadcast section of Love in the Moonlight. https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Love_in_the_Moonlight&diff=781441362&oldid=781179564 It's similar to the ones you've reverted by socks and has been a point of conflict in the page. I hope you can restore it as it's properly sourced. Thanks! 50.67.141.33 (talk) 05:40, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

I think I got it all now. ℯxplicit 06:10, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

You can also visit Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Bertrand101/Archive to know more about 50.67.141.33 and its sockpuppets. -112.198.73.9 (talk) 00:51, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Photo of Einstein at Locker-Lampson's guarded hideout in England

Hi Explicit. I just thought you should know about File talk:Einstein and Locker-Lampson.jpeg#RfC: Photo of Einstein at Locker-Lampson's guarded hideout in England. I'm not sure if an RFC is appropriate for a deleted non-free image, but if you feel further discussion of this is needed as WP:FFD or at WP:DRV, then I have no objections. I nominated the file for deletion, but you are the admin you actually deleted it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Sockpuppet from The Emperor's page is contacting me

The sockpuppet that has been ruining K-drama pages has written a message on my talk page. I don't know what to do to report him. I'm 99% sure it's him. Edit: I reported him, but I think 112.68.131.222 is his account too. It follows the same pattern of the previously banned users/IPs. Hessa94 (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

That sock is responsible for controlling and semi-protecting both Love in the Moonlight and The Emperor: Owner of the Mask pages. I believe that IP sock is the same as 50.67.141.33. -112.198.73.9 (talk) 03:47, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

112.198.73.9, contrary to your claim, Bertrand101 did not request for me to protect any page. I came across User talk:Xdeluna#Impersonation account, where Xdeluna stated that "most of the users who edit the pages (The Emperor: Owner of the Mask and Love in the Moonlight) are his socks". After reviewing the page histories, I decided to protect them. CJojoC also re-added this information back, and the edit war between several different IPs really muddled things. Additionally, as Bertrand101 is a banned editor, their edits will generally be reverted per WP:BANREVERT. What this boils down to is a content dispute, especially when WP:TVINTL does allow this information in certain cases. You should be discussing this on the article's talk page instead of just claiming it's vandalism—it's not. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Can you help protect pages like Who Are You: School 2015 and Moon Lovers: Scarlet Heart Ryeo as well? There are many socks trying to control the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.43.184 (talk) 17:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

removing infinite's variety show list

why did the ‘’variety show’’ section from infinite's page get deleted again? most of them are done together as a group, or at least with several members. this information isn’t listed on their individual pages either, nor available anywhere else, so why was it deleted? practically all groups has this list on their pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.92.230 (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Because simple television appearances do not constitute as being part of a filmography. See Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Twice filmography, where Twice filmography was deleted for this exact reason. These types of lists are fancruft and are not suitable for inclusion on Misplaced Pages. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

hmm i guess i can accept that explanation when it comes to variety shows/tv appearances, but what about their own shows (like sesame player, infinite showtime, ranking king etc etc) ? those should at least ‘’constitute as being part of a filmography’’/be placed somewhere on their page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.92.230 (talk) 21:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Yash Aradhya

Contest deletion of Yash Aradhya as the person has "Competed in a series or race of worldwide or national interest" that is participation in WSK Series and CIK FIA ACADEMY TROPHY — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujith Aradhya (talk • contribs) 03:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 00:22, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Maryann Keller

Hi Explicit, Can you help address the issues raised by the warning tag in the article "Maryann Keller" here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Maryann_Keller . Thanks a lot for your time and help. Cutie girly (talk) 09:55, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested input

Hello, I frequently see you contribute to articles listed in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture and would very much appreciate your input on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Korea/Popular culture#Eradication of variety show sections so that a conclusion towards variety show appearances can be made. Thanks. Abdotorg (talk) 18:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Roccor Misplaced Pages site

Hello Explicit, in December you deleted my page entitled Roccor. As a reminder, you're rational was: (Expired PROD, concern was: Trivial and minor mentions in these links, searches not finding anything but few local mentions in local trade publications, nothing for genuine independent notability and substance. History alone suggests paid ad...).

We are in fact a real, internationally known company of 35 employees, supplying spaceflight hardware to the DoD, NASA and Commercial companies in the US and Europe. We've been working to improve our online presence and I'd like to point you to our website www.roccor.com and this recent news article: Roccor Exec on Supporting 900-Satellite LEO Constellation

I would kindly ask that you reverse your action and restore the material I have previously written. I will make enhancements from that point forward.

Thanks for your work supporting Misplaced Pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bld175 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

@Bld175: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Please take look at the notability guideline for organizations and companies to understand the nature of why it was nominated for deletion to begin with. As you are associated with the company, I also implore you to read the conflict of interest. ℯxplicit 00:35, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Closing at CFD

Hi, thanks very much for helping to close discussions at CFD.

I noticed that after Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_May_26#Organizations_based_in_Turkey, you implemented the renamings for the "option B" list, but have not yet removed the CFD templates from the "option A" list. You could either do this yourself, or list them at WP:CFDWR. Hope this helps, – Fayenatic London 21:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Please reconsider your deletion of the page 'Justin Basini'

Hello,

You recently deleted the page 'Justin Basini' because he is "one of three co-founders of relatively minor company. no other factors for notability".

I would disagree. ClearScore has 4.5 million users, and is the most visited credit checking website in the UK. There are founders of smaller companies on Misplaced Pages - for example, Tom Blomfield, CEO of Monzo: https://en.wikipedia.org/Tom_Blomfield.

Is there any other sources or information you think we could add, to make this page legitimate?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucyburgess (talk • contribs) 10:39, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Lucyburgess: In order to establish notability, individuals must meet the notability guideline for people. Basically, the person must be subject to extensive coverage from reliable sources independent of them. Additionally, per WP:NBUSINESSPEOPLE, "Biographical material on heads and key figures of smaller companies which are themselves the subject of Misplaced Pages articles are sometimes merged into those articles and the biographies redirected to the company." This may be an alternative worth considering. ℯxplicit 23:47, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Cfd

I was surprised at the closing of Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2017 May 29#Organisations based in Bolivia because I thought I had supported 's' rather than 'z'. (With AusLondonder, who has relied upon WP:RETAIN.) I see that in fact we both said A although WP:RETAIN implies B. So I wondered if you could reopen the discussion and I will change my support to Option B. Oculi (talk) 11:46, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

@Oculi: I've relisted the discussion here. ℯxplicit 00:16, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Khyatisharma2017.jpg

Hi Explicit. I tagged File:Khyatisharma2017.jpg for speedy deletion per WP:F7 as replaceable fair use, and you subsequently deleted it. It appears the the uploade is now disputing that because they've added a {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}} to the empty file's page. I'm pretty sure the image unequivocally failed NFCC#1 and the uploader is just misunderstanding how non-free images are used on Misplaced Pages. However, I have no problem with further discussing this if you feel such a thing is needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Disruptive editing

Hello! Please help in preventing edit wars in the page Who Are You: School 2015. Anonymous editors have been deleting information in the page's reception section (things they find unflattering as they are fans of the show) even though a reliable source was provided which explicitly states that the show did suffer from poor ratings. Thank you for your help! 36.8.61.234 (talk) 15:35, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

• There is an army of users like the one above who are hell-bent on retaining only negative information, whereas the rest of us only want to maintain a neutral POV. See: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A310:142:8680:9126:97FA:684D:8FC1 (talk) 15:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
• These are addressed per my comment here.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

User talk:FINLAND FINS

Could you revoke talk page access. The user doesn't look like he wants to stop... Thanks —72 _talk 00:25, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@72: Done and done. ℯxplicit 00:26, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for closing so many CfD discussions recently! Marcocapelle (talk) 06:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

I came here to say the same. I'm mightily glad you're here! – Fayenatic London 17:33, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@Marcocapelle and Fayenatic london: I had left CFD abandoned for long enough. I took on the venue again after finding out Good Olfactory had stopped editing. ℯxplicit 23:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Deprod of Anti-fans in Korean pop

I think this may be notable, as anti-fans by country seems like a reasonable subarticle. I've added one reliable refs, other ones there are poor indeed. If you still think this is bad, do take it to AfD and do ping me in that case. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Piotrus: My rationale had nothing to do with notablity. I nominated it as an unnecessary content fork, as neither Anti-fan nor Anti-fans in Korean pop were long enough to justify a split. ℯxplicit 04:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I would not be opposed to a merge, but proposed deletion is not the way to go about it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the Samsung SPH-i700 article.

Hi Explicit,

I just went to link to https://en.wikipedia.org/Samsung_SPH-i700 as I always do when referencing Samsung's first commercially successful Windows CE Phone. I'm curious why it was deleted, and I'd really like to see it restored as the SPH-i300, SPH-i500, and SPH-i550 are all still there. I reference the SPH-i700 pretty frequently and always point to the wikipedia article.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MicronXD (talk • contribs) 01:48, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@MicronXD: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ℯxplicit 04:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2017 June 15#File:James Thomas Hodgkinson.png

Hi, I think you erred in closing this discussion. Opinions were divided about whether the image meets NFCC, which should have resulted in a "no consensus, default to keep" outcome, given that no one side's arguments seem to offer a particularly more compelling interpretation of the NFCC. Your reference to "precedent" is mistaken in that Misplaced Pages does not apply (binding) precedent, but looks at each case individually; this is even more so where the "precedent" is exactly one closure by your self, and took place on a notoriously poorly attended forum such as FfD, where individual discussions can't amount to much in the way of community consensus. Thanks for reconsidering,  Sandstein  06:22, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sandstein: I respectfully disagree with your assessment. Most of the keep arguments failed to address NFCC at all; the ones that did addressed points that weren't part of the concern to begin with. In your argument, you claimed that "It's normal practice to illustrate biographies of significant public figures", but failed to provide any evidence of this. In contrary, I provided a link to my January 2016 closure which established the exact opposite. It was the first of a series of images that would end up being deleted (for example, Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion/2016 February 21#File:Rodger small.png, closed by Stifle), which led to the establishment of this precedence. You also stated that the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting serves as the subject's biographical article, which simply not true. It is an article about event which contains biographical content—a fine distinction between the two. Not once did you mention or even allude to NFCC in your initial comment or the ones which followed.

Dennis Brown addressed one point of NFCC, but not in context to the deletion nomination. Fourthords was not arguing against its replaceability. What weight could I have given a misguided argument?

Philosopher cited the arguments above, mostly addressing the image's replaceability. Once again, a misguided argument in context to the deletion rationale.

Doctor Papa Jones: "per Dennis Brown and Sandstein." Ditto.

AGreatPhoenixSunsFan: "Usually the purpose for images like this is to give a better idea as to who the perpetrator that committed an action like this was in the first place." One non-free image is allowed in the article about the perpetrator if it exists, not in the article about the incident. The aforementioned precedent established this. Additionally, this is another argument which fails to address the nominator's NFCC concern.

The delete arguments all cited NFCC; they were specific and direct, and ultimately established a foundation against the use of the image in context of the article's main subject.

For the record, I find arguments like of "a poorly attended forum" incredibly flimsy. These statements generally come from a place of vested interest. When editors take an interest of how the venue works outside of something that affects them or their work, then there might be something worth talking about. Otherwise, it really just seems like an attempt turn consensus on its head because the result isn't what the vested editor wanted. ℯxplicit 08:31, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your detailed reply, which I've attempted to address at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 23. I'm not aware of any specific editor having a "vested interest"; this is in and of itself a rather divisive term because it implies that editors who have made a contribution to Misplaced Pages are no longer able to professionally respond to others just because of that contribution.  Sandstein  10:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sandstein: To clarify, my comment of vested interest was in regards to your statement that FFD is "a poorly attended forum" where "discussions can't amount to much in the way of community consensus". These claims against FFD (and CFD) only come as a result of a contentious discussion result, and are made more in frustration thereof and not really as a process as a whole. If a genuine problem existed, remedies would have been implemented years ago to eradicate such concerns; it's simply the by-product of some feathers being ruffled. It was not meant to disregard you or the input of others users which led to the outcome. ℯxplicit 13:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

File: Twink.jpg

Hi, you deleted File:Twink.jpg. I have managed to arrange for copyright holder permission to be sent to OTRS (Ticket#: 2017062010002382). Is it possible it could be restored with an {{OTRS pending}} tag? Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wwwhatsup: Hi, could you specify which free license is being asserted? Restoring it at this point in time would just bring back a fair use claim. ℯxplicit 13:15, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you misunderstand. I contacted the subject of the article. He confirmed he is the rightsholder of the image (a passport photo), and I nursed him into the OTRS process. He has sent an email agreeing to release it under CC BY-SA. Wwwhatsup (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

@Wwwhatsup: Ah, I see. The file has been restored. ℯxplicit 23:43, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Merger of Category:Misplaced Pages 1.0 assessments

Hi, you closed this CFD as merge Category:Misplaced Pages 1.0 assessments. It turns out that user:WP 1.0 bot requires the pages to be in that category, and there is no-one currently maintaining that bot. I pinged you during the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Index#Bot_is_down_again, and am letting you know (as a courtesy) that I undid the implementation of your close for now.

As there seems to be little prospect of the bot being updated in the short term, would you consent to me removing the cfd-manual template from the category page, and de-listing it from WP:CFDWM? – Fayenatic London 21:37, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Yes, that's fine. I contacted the two listed bot operators in hopes of a response to no avail. ℯxplicit 00:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

174.28.192.246 (talk) 00:30, 26 June 2017 (UTC)