User talk:Explicit/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Orgelbau Pieringer

Dear Explicit: first of all – all the best in the new year! On 11th November 2020 you have deleted the page Orgelbau Pieringer. In the meantime I found a few more third-party sources that you might want to consider and hopefully restore the page so it may be improved further. Please see the following links:

• "Johann Pieringer set up his own business in 1996 and founded his organ workshop in the city of Haag." Haus-Chroniken von Haag (House Chronicles of Haague) – 1996: Orgelbau Pieringer and Diözese Linz: Orgelbaufirmen in Österreich (Diocese of Linz: Organ builders in Austria) / Pieringer, Johann - Orgelbau Pieringer KG
• Orgelbau Pieringer is a member of ISO (International Society of Organbuilders)
• Organ in Großgmain (2000): The organ in the church of Großgmain is the only two-manual organ by Ludwig Mooser that has been almost completely preserved. During a restoration by Johann Pieringer in 2000, the Dolce 4' and the Bassposaune 8' were reconstructed. The storage bellows were installed by Mauracher at the end of the nineteenth century. Organ database: Großgmain, Österreich (Salzburg) - Pfarr- und Wallfahrtskirche; also in Ars Organi, 56. Jhg., Heft 1, März 2008 (p. 36-37): Heribert Metzger: „Die Ludwig-Moser-Orgel zu Großgmain im Land Salzburg – ihre Geschichte, Wiederherstellung und späte Vollendung“: In 1999 the organ building company Johann Pieringer from the city of Haag/Lower Austria was commissioned to extensively restore the Moser organ in Großgmain. Pieringer had previously drawn attention to himself with the restoration of another instrument from the 19th century in the state of Salzburg and demonstrated his qualification for such a task.
• Organ in Zeillern (2003): Gemeinde Zeillern – Pfarramt Zeillern (Zeillern parish office); Walter Sengstschmid: „Die tönende Seele“ – Orgeln nach 1945 in Niederösterreich, in: Klangdenkmale – Glocken und Orgeln, vol. 40, p. 21
• Organ in Hallwang: The restoration and reconstruction of lost parts including all metal pipes based on a model in Vorau Abbey by Orgelbau Pieringer (Orgeln der Erzdiözese Salzburg (Organs of the Archdiocese of Salzburg): Hallwang (Filialkirche Hl. Antonius {Filial church of St. Anthony}, Söllheim)); Orgues & vitraux: Pieringer Orgelbau (Autriche) [in French]
• Organ in Straudorf (2014): The instrument was restored to its good-sounding original condition by Orgelbau Pieringer from the city of Haag after several months of restoration work. Chronik Straudorf (Chronicle Straudorf): 2014 (in German)
• MAECENAS PRIZE (2014): "This year, the prize for small and medium-sized enterprises went to Orgelbau Pieringer KG from Haag - for concert series such as the Ybbs Organ Autumn" www.noen.at – Gina Christof: „MEACENAS: Partner der Kunst“ (on 8th Dezember 2014, in German)
• Organ in Bad Vöslau (2016): www.pfarre-gainfarn.at – Das Kirchenorgel-Projekt St. Jakob (The St. Jakob church organ project), p. 6; www.badvoeslau.at – Feierliche Orgelweihe durch Generalvikar Dr. Nikolaus Krasa (Organ consecration by Vicar General Dr. Nikolaus Krasa); Erzdiözese Wien / Referat Kirchenmusik (Archdiocese of Vienna / Department of Church Music) / Orgel & Glocken: Bad Vöslau, NÖ

Would these new sources − in addition to the existing ones − be good/neutral enough to return the article to the main namespace of the English Wikipedia? Best regards, Maestro Ivanković (talk) 20:40, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ƏXPLICIT 00:50, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

File:YAR Logo.png

Hey User:Explicit, I have translated article Youth Against Rape to Hindi Wikipedia, so I request you to kindly restore the Logo image. Thank you and a very Happy New Year. -- Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 07:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Pratyush.shrivastava: Hi, are you requesting for the file to be restored to be used on the Hindi Wikipedia? As the logo was originally uploaded on the English Wikipedia, that is not possible. You will need to upload it separately on that project. ƏXPLICIT 10:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Thanks for the information. Happy editing. :-) -- Pratyush.shrivastava (talk) 10:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Explicit,
Thanks for your contributions to improving and organizing all articles relating to Korean pop culture. Have a Happy New Year! ~~~~

---

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkon21 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

2600:1700:1682:56A0:5C83:6DDB:1A85:658C

Can user:2600:1700:1682:56A0:5C83:6DDB:1A85:658C please be blocked ASAP for vandalism. Thank you. CLCStudent (talk) 00:01, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Baby96000

Can user:Baby96000 please be blocked ASAP for vandalism? CLCStudent (talk) 12:48, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Harry From deletion

Please restore this article, I was about to remove the PROD when you deleted it. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ƏXPLICIT 01:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Image Deleted

Hi Explicit, this is with regards to an image I uploaded but was speedily deleted by yourself - File:Ogrefencers.jpg. It's been a long time since I regularly edited and maybe the policies have changed. This is a photograph I took of some miniatures that I painted. Is this not allowed? I'm looking at Wikipedia:Image use policy#Photographs and I'm not sure how copyright or fair use works for my own photo of a toy. Marasmusine (talk) 10:23, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Marasmusine: Hi, given that it was tagged for violating WP:NFCC#8, I'm assuming it was done in accordance with WP:NFC#CS, which states: "To identify a subject of discussion, depiction of a prominent aspect of the subject generally suffices, thus only a single item of non-free content meets the criterion." Since the article in question already contains a non-free image of game pieces, a second would not be justified per policy. ƏXPLICIT 01:52, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, that makes sense, thanks. Marasmusine (talk) 09:27, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Only way Is Up Otis Clay.jpg

I see you closed the FFD discussion as "no consensus". But how does that result in default "keep"? I thought I was mainly discussing the whole image itself, so maybe I also discussed the infobox? --George Ho (talk) 01:33, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@George Ho: Per WP:NOCON, the default action for a "no consensus" result is to keep the page in question. In your nomination statement, you highlighted the insertion of the Otis Clay infobox as an issue, which wasn't accompanied with a cover image at that time. You also mentioned in your penultimate response to Ghmyrtle that you would "discuss the infobox when the closure of this listing arrives". That, coupled with no support for your proposal, led to my closure. ƏXPLICIT 01:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Gorgo 1961

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 December 7#File:Gorgo 1961.jpg

The local version had a higher quality revision than the Commons version. Could you please undelete the file (including the higher quality revision) so this local file can be reverted to that higher quality version and used here? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 07:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz:  Done, should be good to go now. ƏXPLICIT 00:14, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Marjan Borsjes

just a courtesy heads up that I draftified this as I think she may be notable. Won't move back without sources, but let me know if you want to be notified if/when I do. StarM 17:53, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleting those images made sense

I know I was the person that uploaded the "File:Bolaris2003strip.jpg" and "File:Cosplaybeanjuly2019.jpg" but I knew that they would be deleted anyhow, after learning that the CC license used for both has been depreciated last week, so it was only a matter of time before they were deleted... Besides, I had already removed the images from the articles in anticipation of deletion too. But, now I know that CC license has been depreciated, so before I upload another image with a CC license, I'll check to make sure it isn't on the depreciated list first. --Historyday01 (talk) 01:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hello, I had recently worked to provide an updated rationale and tried to start a Talk page discussion about File:Lee Weiner, outside Federal Building in Chicago during conspiracy trial, Feb 11 1970.jpeg, but just saw that it was deleted. I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I have been trying to better understand the policies and processes, but I have been hoping to find a way to better explain how this file appears to meet the criteria for inclusion. If you have any guidance about how I could proceed, that would be appreciated. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Beccaynr: Hi, per WP:NFC#CS, the non-free item in question must itself be subject to critical commentary from a reliable source in the article. On the file's talk page, you cited WP:NFC#UUI to justify using this image. However, Lee Weiner's notability does not seem to derive from his age at the time or because of his appearance—the article certainly does not mention his appearance to back up this assertion—but on the allegations he was tried for. In the absence of sourced critical commentary, in addition to Wikipedia's restrictive use of non-free images of living individuals, the file was deleted as a result. ƏXPLICIT 12:56, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply, that does help clarify my understanding. I realize now that I relied too much on context from wikilinks in the article to support notability for his age and appearance, instead of having it directly discussed in the article. There also is a reliable source that refers to the image, but there is a circular reporting problem because the image was sourced from Lee Weiner's article, and from my view, it would be gaming the system to try to justify the inclusion of the image based on that, so I will not - however, the source does comment on the difference between Lee Weiner's appearance at trial and his appearance in the recent Sorkin movie, which could be added to Lee Weiner's article in the Popular Culture section; the source also seemed to use the image to help describe what text alone could not, which seems like an example of how the article would be enhanced by the inclusion of the image, and why it would be a detriment to not have an image of what became notable due to the reactions of a prosecutor, sheriff, political officials, etc, at the time. My question at this point is whether I can follow up with you after making updates to Lee Weiner's article, for another review of the undeletion request - I very much appreciate your reply but also understand that you are busy and/or if I should be referred elsewhere. Thanks again, Beccaynr (talk) 17:41, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Beccaynr: Of course, feel free to get into contact with me at any point in the future. ƏXPLICIT 11:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Pcgmserich

Can user:Pcgmserich please be blocked ASAP. CLCStudent (talk) 00:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Open WhisperSystems logo.png

Hi, Explicit! The Open Whisper Systems article is now restored to its original name, so I would like to request that the recently deleted logo at File:Open WhisperSystems logo.png be restored for use in that article. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Dodi 8238:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 23:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hey!

Can you undelete this? After someone had redirected its article, it became unused and got deleted. I would appreciate your help. Thanks.Krish | Talk To Me 09:02, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Krish!:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 12:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

GLIMPSE

You deleted the article about Udi Manber's GLIMPSE software. It may not be important to you, but it is an integral part of many enterprises. Because you didn't know how to search for it does not make it unimportant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 19:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=YjkkYJiaOM3U-gT0nIboDA&iflsig=AINFCbYAAAAAYCRHcmeJwwfQkcOgJeqAWozlMUvLaAA2&q=text+search+glimpse&oq=text+search+glimpse — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Spumante Cricova.png

Hi. Could you restore this file for this article. Someone previously tried to upload on Commons, where it obviously was deleted. XXN, 17:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@XXN:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 23:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		You have been an excellent administrator since you were nominated. Thank you for your work. Please keep going! KirkburnFandom (talk) 05:33, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

File: Paliska

Hi there. You recently deleted the file Ornela Paliska2.jpg uploaded by myself. Now I might be wrong, but I'm 99% sure there was no warning. I'd like to ask if a) can we verify whether there was a warning b) In the case there wasn't, can you explain your actions? Thanks.--Wiki.Jaap.07 (talk) 00:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wiki.Jaap.07: Hi, you received a notice on your talk page the day the file was nominated for deletion. Per WP:NFC#UUI, the general rule is that non-free files of living people are not allowed to be used in articles. ƏXPLICIT 01:01, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry you are absolutely right, I did receive it... As for the rule, yes, I know, but I also attempted to explain why we should keep it (them); anyway, I don't discuss your decisions. Thanks for your help and sorry for bothering you!--Wiki.Jaap.07 (talk) 09:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

151.225.180.70

Can user:151.225.180.70 please be blocked ASAP for vandalism. CLCStudent (talk) 12:29, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Re: Aespa infobox

Hi there, may I know what is the reason for removing the korean name module from the infobox? While you indicated in your summary "Infobox is for native names only", I don't get the part of native names, isn't Korean name their native name? In addition, see Girls' Generation, the article is GA status and it has Korean name and Japanese name via infobox chinese module. Thanks — 🍊 Paper9oll 🍊 (📣 • 📝) 13:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Paper9oll: A name or word written in Hangul is not the same as being a native Korean name or word. "에스파" is just "Aespa" written in Hangul, but Girls' Generation is not "걸스제너레이션". "소녀시대" and "少女時代" are native words written in their respective languages. ƏXPLICIT 13:45, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Now I understand what you meant by it. Thanks for the clarification and happy editing. Cheers! — 🍊 Paper9oll 🍊 (📣 • 📝) 13:48, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hello,

Why did you delete the page for Edwynn Houk Gallery? I see a protest on the now deleted Talk page history that was archived:

"This page is not unambiguously promotional, because this is apparently a major gallery that is in fact notable, despite the article's unfortunate provenance."

Why was the entire page removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vh089 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Vh089: Hi, the protest was in response to the article being tagged for speedy deletion as a promotional page back in September 2012, not to the proposed deletion in December 2020. As the deletion log shows, an editor expressed the following concern: "Doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for organisations, and appears to have been created and maintained mostly for promotional purposes. There's a certain amount of coverage of specific exhibitions held at the gallery, and some listings and the like, but I haven't been able to find significant coverage in reliable sources." ƏXPLICIT 23:52, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Bertosa

Hi there Explicit, may I ask your opinion on another matter? I uploaded the file File:Miroslav Bertoša.jpg a while ago. Its use in a list was contested, but accepted by another editor (admin?) on Bertosa's own article. Now another editor, who contested some other edits of mine on another article and completely unrelated topic and now is tracking down and contesting my other uploads (which of course they have a right to do, I guess), has contested the use of this file even on the subject's own article. It's the picture of a 82-year old professor, and is the exact copy of the same file uploaded, confirmed and used on wiki.hr, the original photograph being owned by the original uploader. Do you think there is a chance we can leave the picture at least in Bertosa's article, as it was implicitly agreed before? Thanks.--Wiki.Jaap.07 (talk) 14:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The discussion referred to above about this file can be found at User talk:JJMC89#Bertos. I participated in that discussion and it was me who made the post about the use of this file in the list article. At that time, I only focused on explaining why the bot removed the file from the list, and didn’t realize that file also violated WP:F7 in the biography article. If I had, I would’ve tagged it with {{rfu}} at that time. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:30, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

@Wiki.Jaap.07: In regards to the file on the Croatian Wikipedia, it is also licensed under {{Non-free fair use in}} and (according to Google Translate) the sourced is listed as "associate" while the photographer is unknown, which does not necessarily provide satisfactory evidence of publication outside of Wikipedia as required by WP:NFCCP #4 here on the English Wikipedia. There is no evidence that the file is freely licensed, either.

As for the local file, its removal from List of Istrians was carried out by a bot because it lacked a fair use rationale for that specific article. As Marchjuly notes above, the image did not appear to be subject to human review on any article at that point. As previously mentioned, non-free files of living people are generally not allowed. ƏXPLICIT 06:03, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay Explicit, I trust your judgement. It just feels strange, and it irks you a little having the same picture on wiki.hr, so close, just on another language's section of the same website, and not being able to just use it in the infobox on wiki.en... But it's okay, maybe someone will come up with a picture of him some day.--Wiki.Jaap.07 (talk) 11:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Wiki.Jaap.07 has been CU blocked. I don't know all of the details, but perhaps it partly had to do with this. Anyway, Wiki.Jaap.07 did upload quite a number of files locally prior to their account being blocked and also created a couple of other pages. Some of the files like File:Lorena Beucic.jpg seem to clearly fail WP:NFCC, some like File:Francesco Neffat.jpg are probably OK, and some like File:Logo L'Est républicain 2010.jpg probably just need to be relicesed and {{PD-logo}} or {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}. I'm assuming it's going to be OK now to just go through all the files and tag those eligible for WP:F7 with {{rfu}} and relicense the rest as needed, but I don't know if the CU block means that these all would qualify for deletion per WP:G5. I'm going to ping TonyBallioni (the admin who issued the block) and Praxidicae (who seems to be familiar with Wiki.Jaap.07's global ban) for input as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't know who they are, but all 24ish accounts I blocked at 00:37 and 00:39 UTC today are the same person. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:35, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Wiki.Jaap.07's global status on Meta seems to indicate that they were blocked for their cross-wiki abuse related to their machine translations and not from a user trying to evade a block from an older account. If this is the case, then the standard deletion route should take place, Marchjuly. ƏXPLICIT 03:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:11, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

80.61.71.5

user: 80.61.71.5 is posting lewd pics. CLCStudent (talk) 13:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Procedural Question

Hi, I was wondering if I could ask you a couple questions about a PROD you made last year. It wasn't my article, and I don't wish to formally contest the deletion or recreate it, so I was wondering if we could possibly discuss on my Talk page. Thank you! RWEnoch (talk) 23:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

User:FaisalMusicFan99 socks

Hi Explicit - you wait ages for a new sock - and then you get a pair - a matching pair at that

• 2.50.171.195 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 86.97.24.225 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) both Etisalat addresses from Al Ain City, Abu Dhabi
• Both creating very dubious drafts, both editing vandalising Alberto y Lost Trios Paranoias, Jimmy Hibbert and I'm a Cult Hero

Please could you block and delete - thanks - Arjayay (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arjayay: It has been quite a while.  Done, both blocked and three drafts deleted. ƏXPLICIT 14:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much, but I've now found third one 217.164.250.140 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) if you could oblige - thanks

Thanks again - Arjayay (talk) 14:27, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

File restoration

Hey! Would you be available to restore File:Digital Homicide Studios.png? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 22:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 09:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion request

Hello Explicit, Please restore the draft of the Carmen Harra page because this page is under discussion on the discussion forum. If the moderators who blocked the page refuse to answer my questions for a few months, it does not mean that the page is abandoned and must be deleted without any explanation. Thanks! Here is the link to the open discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/Archives/2020_October_8 The draft of the Carmen Harra page is not an abandoned page, but a page blocked and sabotaged without motivation by moderators who refuse to justify their decision. If you apply the rules, ask the moderators involved to justify their decision with arguments. On this page we worked side by side with some moderators and they guided me. Then came another moderator who blocked the page without any valid arguments. EmanuelB2019 (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@EmanuelB2019: Done – as a draft that was deleted under CSD G13, the page has been restored upon request. However, the draft namespace, though it is intended to provide some breathing room to create and develop a page without the time pressure of immediate review, is not for the indefinite hosting of material that is unsuitable for inclusion in the article mainspace. Please continue to work on the draft so that it meets Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for inclusion and then submit it for review—at the least, prior to another six months elapsing. When you are ready, a review can be requested by placing this code at the top of the page and then saving: {{subst:submit}}. ƏXPLICIT 14:10, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Hello Explicit! Thank you very much for your objectivity, I really appreciate your constructive and equidistant attitude. I will improve the draft page Carmen Harra in the next period and then I will submit it for review. Thank you!EmanuelB2019 (talk) 14:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Frogcircus albums

A tag has been placed on Category:Frogcircus albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Flag of Cape Town, Western Cape.png

Hi Explicit. Would you mind taking a look at this file? It's basically File:CoCT logo.svg with some added text; so, if the Commons file is OK (which it might be per c:COM:TOO United States but not sure about c:COM:South Africa), then the non-free one can probably be relicensed. Even if it's not "PD-logo" in South Africa, it probably is OK as {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} for English Wikipedia. Anyway, I thought I'd ask you about this since you are an admin here and at Commons before I started relicensing anything, Dr'ing anything or removing any files from any articles (the flag file is missing rationales for two uses, and one of those almost certainly isn't going to be NFCCP compliant). -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Generally, when I come across a non-free file on Wikipedia that is freely licensed on Commons, I try to determine whether it is reasonable to believe that the latter is appropriately licensed and take the needed action locally or on Commons. In this particular case, I would argue that the shape of this logo wouldn't qualify as a simple geometric case even in the United States. The lack of information regarding the threshold of originality in South Africa doesn't help matters. I would begin a DR at Commons first and followup on the local file based on the outcome of the Commons discussion. ƏXPLICIT 06:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at these. I'll start a DR about the Commons file and then work from there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Deleting CSD G13s

Hello, Explicit,

We work in some of the same areas of Wikipedia but don't cross paths much. Although you are a very experienced admin, I have a suggestion for you. When it's time to delete an aging stale draft, could you use Twinkle to do a G13 deletion rather than just use the drop down Page Deletion option? Twinkle will post a message on the page creator's talk page informing them of the deletion and letting them that they can go to WP:REFUND to restore the draft should they want to continue to work on it. Without a talk page message, the page creator may not even know about the draft deletion, much less that they can get their work back upon request.

What's great about using Twinkle is that it doesn't take any more time, just select CSD, uncheck the box that says to "Tag, don't delete", make sure the "Notify creator" box is checked and click on G13. Presto chango, it's done! Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:58, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Hi, thanks for the suggestion. I initially started deleting stale drafts and notifying creators (as I did here, for example), but realized it became a bit redundant due to FireflyBot's notification to the page creator's talk page about five days ahead of the scheduled deletion, which can also be seen in the aforementioned link. The bot's notice provides the same information as {{Db-draft-notice}} does. I'm not sure if providing a similar notice after deletion has taken place would make much of a difference. ƏXPLICIT 03:51, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Bubble tea for you!

Just came across your user page and saw your little paragraph on "Ethnic cleansing". I totally agree! Mottezen (talk) 06:03, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Draftify Funkwhale

Hi, can you WP:DRAFTIFY this article (Funkwhale) please? These two sources can show notability:

• https://www.google.com/books/edition/Create_Share_and_Save_Money_Using_Open_S/cVwBEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=funkwhale
• https://www.google.com/books/edition/Dann_haben_die_halt_meine_Daten_Na_und/ijYYEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=funkwhale

riffic (talk) 00:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Riffic:  Done, the content is now available at Draft:Funkwhale. ƏXPLICIT 00:58, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

many thanks! I might not be able to edit this immediately, is there a time limit before deletion again? riffic (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

@Riffic: The draft is eligible for speedy deletion under G13 if it is not edited in a span of sixth months. Plenty of time! ƏXPLICIT 01:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Retrieving a fair-use image deleted as F5

Hi Explicit -

I have a question about the possibility of retrieving an image (File:Helen Quach ca 1977.jpg) once it has been deleted. I uploaded the image as fair use. Another editor later uploaded an image (File:郭美貞與她心愛的狗還有知心好友劉吉如.jpg), so the original image became subject to F5. It seems that the new image was taken from Facebook, so it has now been deleted as well, leaving the Helen Quach entry without an image.

I suspect that the original image isn't retrievable, but I thought I would at least ask. It could save me some work, as I don't have the file saved on my computer anymore. Thanks in advance for any help you can provide. Larry Hockett (Talk) 07:21, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

@Larry Hockett: Hi, I have restored the non-free file and re-added it to the article's infobox. ƏXPLICIT 08:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate you. Have a good weekend! Larry Hockett (Talk) 14:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Cynthia Chisom

Hi Explicit

Regarding the draft you just deleted, at Draft:Cynthia Umezulike - I think this seems a little harsh. I can find at least three pieces of coverage in reasonably reliable-looking sources (something suggested by the essay WP:THREE), namely: [1][2][3]. Certainly it's not obvious that she fails WP:GNG. I think this article should be restored and moved to main space, then if people really think she's not notable they can nominate the article at WP:AFD. Also, the creator of the article Davykamanzi is not a newcomer - he's been around on Wikipedia for a long time and made more than 32,000 edits; so unless there's something I'm missing, his new articles didn't really need to go through AFC anyway. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 14:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Hi, the draft wasn't deleted for any reason other than six months having lapsed without any edits, as dictated by WP:CSD#G13. Davykamanzi created the page in the draft namespace, either by choice or he wasn't sure if the subject was notable enough and wanted an independent review. Perhaps it was simply an editorial choice. Regardless, the submission received two separate reviews by different users, both who declined it due to the subject lacking notability. If those reviews do not appear adequate, the best place to discuss those reviews is with those respective editors. Additionally, the three references you cited are all interviews with the subject, which are considered primary sources. They do not necessarily indicate notability, and the reviewers may have shared that sentiment.

Of course, if you feel that the subject is still notable, I am not opposed to the idea of having the page restored if you'd like to do so. ƏXPLICIT 03:39, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Page Reinstatement

Hello, I'm very sorry to bother you. You deleted me from Wikipedia in September. I was just just about to add new music releases to my page, but found I was no longer there. You stated that I was part of the walled garden of promotion surrounding Csaba Zvekan who has apparently been deleted many times and that otherwise I was not part of any notable bands. Csaba is someone I ceased working with many years ago as he was nothing but trouble. However, the band I was in with him was one of the least notable in my history as a performer. I toured the world with Tony Martin of Black Sabbath, received a medal at the Kremlin from the russian president for being an ambassador for peace in music, have recorded with or toured with members of The Kinks, Argent, T.Rex, Venom, Bad Company, Saxon, Steely Dan, The Sensational Alex Harvey Band, The Quireboys, Dave Berry and The UK Subs. I've played festivals to 15,000 people with support bands I used to listen to growing up and idolised. When Covid is over and we can gig again I will be doing gigs with Gerry Leonard - David Bowie's guitarist. I continue to work with John Verity of Argent and release music of my own. I do have some considerable profile and have many endorsement deals with big musical instrument manufacturers and software developers. This information was all available on my page and can easily be verified by visiting my website. I therefore respectully would like to contest this deletion and would like you to advise me how I make my page live again please.

Best Regards, Jamie Mallender Jamie Mallender (talk) 15:02, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Jamie Mallender. Since administrators like Explicit tend to come across lots of pages which have issues, it might be helpful if you could provide an actual link or a least the name of the page that was deleted. Moreover, that fact the you're referring to whatever was deleted as "my page" and that you want the page to be restored so that you can "update" it might indicate that you're misunderstanding some important things about Wikipedia like Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. There's no record of you making any edits other than the one you made when posting above; so, it's kind of hard to give you anything more than general advice. I will add a template to your user talk page that contains some links to relevant Wikipedia pages that you might find helpful, and perhaps Explicit himself will be able to go into specifics as to why the page was deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I don't know how to provide you with a link since my page has been deleted but it was simply called Jamie Mallender. It was set up for me, if I remember correctly by Csaba Zvekan who seems to be the issue here. I took over looking after it myself, I left that band and was no longer connected with them for a very long time. I don't think they even exist now. My page did not contain anything controversial, it was just factual info about my career. I'm quite upset that someone would delete it, it seems very unfair. Jamie Mallender (talk) 20:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jamie Mallender: The article was Jamie Mallender and it seems to have been proposed for deletion by another editor (I can't see who) and then deleted by Explicit because the proposed deletion went unchallenged. The deletion might seem unfair to you, but try taking a look at Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? for some explanation as to why that might have happened. Most articles end up deleted because someone feels that the subject matter doesn't satisfy Wikipedia:Notability. Since it appears you're a musician, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (music) for a little more detail. Since the deletion was a proposed deletion, you can request that the article be restored per Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, but before you do so you might want to carefully take a look at Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (particularly this part here), Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Dealing with articles about yourself, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Moreover, if the article is restored, you really shouldn't be directly editing it yourself, but instead be using its talk page to propose changes as explained here. You need to understand that the article is only intended to reflect what reliable sources (as defined by Wikipedia) have said about you and you have no final editorial control over the article's content. It's also possible that if the article is restored, another editor may decide to nominate it for deletion if they feel that the Wikipedia notability guidelines aren't meant, and at that point the Wikipedia community will decide what should be done.

Some other things you might want to look at re WP:REALWORLD and WP:REALNAME. You can use your real name as your username if you want, but you might want to considered having your identity verified by Wikimedia OTRS so that others don't mistake you from being an imposter. You only need to do this if you're going to edit or try to create content about yourself because that's when others are going to notice that you are you. Regardless of what articles you edit though, you should understand that everyone will be able to see the edits you make with his account and may then in turn associate them with you as a person; so, if someone Googles your name, they might somehow come across you on Wikipedia and then if they dig a bit deeper, they might be able to find out what types of edits you're making on Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

User:HaasLola

Hi. Since you previously deleted User:HaasLola in January, I thought I should inform you that that editor's disruptive behavior has continued persistently, as seen in the five subsequent warnings placed on his page, plus the sixth one I just added there. Can you impose a longer block? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 15:33, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

CfD Category:Aldrich family

I saw that you restored the NAC closure of this CfD with the edit summary "appropriate NAC". I originally reverted the "delete" NAC closure because at the time that closure was made the category had not yet been deleted. WP:NACD explicitly says: "Non-administrators should limit their closes to outcomes they have the technical ability to implement; for example, non-admins should not close a discussion as delete, because only admins can delete pages." As far as I can tell, the NAC closure was in violation of WP:NACD and was inappropriate at the time it was made. Could you clarify? Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 13:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nsk92: Hi, the admins at CFD have long welcomed uncontroversial non-admin closures regardless of the outcome and ignored NACD due to the months-long backlog that has persisted over the past several years. You can view WT:CFD/W and the archives for evidence of this. The backlog is pretty bad as it stands and was actually worse several years ago. Unless a NAC closure was particularly bad, there is no compelling reason to undo it. ✗plicit 13:54, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. OK, thanks. I had no idea that this practice was the norm at CfD now. That actually reinforces my belief that we need to create aditional userrights for situations such as this since we are not getting a large influx of new admins any time soon. Nsk92 (talk) 14:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

User Cassandra872 sock

Thanks for taking care of those, I was getting a bit weary of marking them for deletion. Obviously, there's a script to mass delete. In the future when I come across a banned/blocked editor with a bunch of stuff to delete, is there someplace I should simply post to get them all deleted? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Hi, if a high number of pages created by one particular user require mass deletion, the best place may be to post at WP:AN with a request to nuke them. The limitation is that this tool only works with pages created within the past 30 days. ✗plicit 02:19, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't come across it often, but it does happen occasionally, so I'll keep it in mind. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:32, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Baekhyun

The "tenor" category for him is sourced on List of tenors in non-classical music. —beetricks ~ 💬 · ✉️ 03:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Beetricks: You will need to incorporate that information into the Baekhyun article specifically. You can not expect others to guess that his voice type is cited on a completely different page. ✗plicit 03:37, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: I gotchu fam —beetricks ~ 💬 · ✉️ 03:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet of User:FaisalMusicFan99

Hi Explicit - I trust you are well
Please could you give 2.50.119.27 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) a holiday - usual location, usual articles, usual rubbish
Many thanks - Arjayay (talk) 11:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:06, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

decline?

the edit[4] in question was just to save an article 1. in draft, 2, that has not really been edited in 0ver 6 months, 3. see G 13 Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ozzie10aaaa: I believe you're referring to this IP edit? Yes, that is sufficient to delay the G13 deletion by another six months. ✗plicit 12:33, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

File:The Trouble with Harry Soundtrack.jpg

Hi Explicit. I'm wondering if you can advise me on how to proceed with respect to this file. The file was being used in The Trouble with Harry#Musical score in a manner that isn't really allowed per WP:NFCCP; so, I prodded it for deletion here. Before the file could be deleted or assessed by an administrator, however, the uploader of the file split the "Musical score" section off into the stand-alone article The Trouble with Harry (soundtrack), which meant that the rationale for prodding the file for deletion was no longer valid. So, I updated the non-free use rationale and de-prodded the file myself. Sometime earlier today though, a different editor reverted the split, and re-added the soundtrack content (including the non-free file) back to the article about the film. This means that things are essentially back at the same place they were when I prodded the file for deletion and the non-free use is no longer NFCCP compliant. Can I restore my original prod or do I now need to bring the file up for discussion at FFD? -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hi, since the PROD was originally placed last month and the original seven-day window has lapsed, it may be better to take this to FFD instead of attempting PROD again. ✗plicit 23:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Now being discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 April 9#File:The Trouble with Harry Soundtrack.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:27, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Youngblood Brass Band

I represent Youngblood Brass Band, and you recently deleted the wikipedia page associated with the artist. I'm not quite sure why, since the band is an international touring artist responsible for influencing thousands of musicians around the globe, and is considered one of the most important artists in the field. The band's music has been featured in major television productions (Fargo et al), with 60k monthly listeners on Spotify, nearly half a million annually, and millions of all-time streams. The band's views on YouTube also number in the millions. Youngblood is considered one of most influential, successful groups of this type in the world, they have been touring internationally for more than two decades, and their educational work has been seen/utilized all over the world as well (hundreds of Universities/Colleges/High Schools play Youngblood's music, and many of them teach Youngblood in the curriculum).

My guess is that there were old citations or unverified quotes or something (no one associated with the artist runs the page), but I am 100% sure that the artist meets the 'notability' criteria. In fact, on Wiki itself, under 'Brass Band', Youngblood is one of the groups mentioned as notable. Also, the disambiguation of the word 'Youngblood' with regard to music brings up 5 names, with Youngblood Brass Band being 2nd or 3rd. Likewise, many lesser-known brass bands not only have Wiki pages but include Youngblood in said page, with some going so far as to list Youngblood in the 'See also' section.

I'm wondering what can be done to reactivate the page, and if any issues therein can be solved by us, the artist, or contributors.

Thank you! I can be reached via the contact form at the artist website (youngbloodbrassband.com), or @youngbloodbrassband on instagram, @youngbloodbrassband on facebook, or @youngblood brass on twitter.

EDIT: Per the wiki notability guidelines, Youngblood Brass Band would meet criteria 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, and 12, and as specified, notability is usually determined by meeting even only one of those.

96.42.32.145 (talk) 19:27, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Explicit. Just a note that the same message was also posted at WP:REFUND#Youngblood Brass Band. In addition, I did ask about this at WT:MUSICIAN#Youngblood Brass Band and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz/Archives/2021 1#Youngblood Brass Band because I found the article to be a bit promotional and excessive on the use of images as well as the group's Wikipedia notability a bit iffy per WP:NBAND. I didn't, however, propose it for deletion myself and don't remember who did, but maybe they saw one of those two posts and prodded the article. Perhaps they could clarify their reasoning and would be willing to bring the article up for discussion at WP:AFD. Even though some of things posted above by the IP don't really matter when it comes to WP:N (e.g. being mentioned in another Wikipedia article has nothing to do with Wikipedia notability per WP:ARTN, WP:NOTEWORTHY and WP:WPNOTRS), perhaps there's enough for a slimmed down version of the article which can be supported by secondary reliable sources. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I have restored the article under the basis of WP:CONTESTED. Dear IP user, this does not meet that the article is safe from deletion in the future, as it may be subject to discussion at the articles for deletion venue. Please improve the page's content to align with the pertinent notability guideline for bands. ✗plicit 03:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. The IP has stated that they represent the band. I'm not exactly sure what that means since it could be a case of WP:PAID ,just a regular WP:COI, or it could be the IP just saying something that they thought would help get the article undeleted. If the IP does have a COI, then it might be better for them to propose any changes they want made to the article on the article's talk page using edit requests, unless it's some of the stuff mentioned in WP:COIADVICE. This will give others a chance to look them over and perhaps avoid an reverting if the IP tries to make the changes themselves. They should also consider following WP:DECLARECOI even though it's not necessarily required. On the other hand, if the IP has a WP:FCOI, then they will certainly need to follow WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY since that's not optional. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

96.42.32.145 (talk) 22:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Thanks for the advice/help all, I honestly am not wiki/tech-savvy enough to understand all of the above but I will request that some fan or outside party take a look at the content of the article and make sure it mentioned/cites the notability guidelines; my impression from reading the article is that it is largely older information and much of it hasn't been updated in years. Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.32.145 (talk) 21:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

That's fine IP 96.42.32.145; however, I wouldn't recommend that you request a fan or outside part to look at the article because (1) they might not be familiar with editing Wikipedia and (2) you might just create a conflict of interest for them by doing so. I'll post some more information and suggestions for you at User talk:96.42.32.145. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Degrassi images

Hi, you recently deleted four images of Degrassi actors that I uploaded because I did not give a reason they couldn't be replaced with free media. I simply forgot to specify because I was occupied with expanding Degrassi Junior High. I did however put a dispute, which nobody appeared to notice or message me back on. As for my reason for them not being replaceable, it's because there is no easily available and free photos of the actors I can find, and even if someone were able to contact any of them to get one taken for them and put out under a free license, there's pandemic restrictions that might not allow it right now. And I believe that a photo of a person on Wikipedia is absolutely necessary if available. Even if I did not provide a rationale to begin with, nobody seemed to notice the dispute I put down below, which is my biggest annoyance more than anything. Sorry if I sound hostile. ToQ100gou (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@ToQ100gou: Hi, uploading a non-free image of a living person in an article about their biography is usually considered a textbook violation of WP:NFCC#1. The criterion has two conditions that must be met: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created" (emphasis mine). While a freely licensed image may not exist now, one could conceivably be created at any point in the future while the subjects are still alive. ✗plicit 09:41, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

But why exactly are non-free images of living people so problematic? The guideline does not specify exactly why they shouldn't be used. Just that they shouldn't be used. ToQ100gou (talk) 10:28, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@ToQ100gou: WP:NFCC#Rationale lists three reasons why the English Wikipedia minimizes the use of non-free media. The mission is to create and use as much free content as possible. Non-free images of living people are generally not accepted because freely licensed alternatives exist or could be produced. In fact, Amanda Stepto and Stacie Mistysyn were already using freely licensed images up until you decided to upload non-free ones, directly contradicting your argument that there are no free images for these specific individuals. ✗plicit 10:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: I had no idea they were freely licensed. Even if they are, however, the way they look on the articles is unacceptable. They are crops from an ensemble photo that is not at an ideal resolution to crop people's portraits from. If whoever took that photo still has the original file, and if it is in a much greater resolution, than it should be updated. But that's why I "decided" to upload those photos was because they were not only more recent and better quality, and also simply because it made the articles look like they hadn't been last edited 12 years ago. I'm a fan of this particular series and I felt the articles on it and the people involved with it needed to be done justice. While I still disagree to the fullest extent about the merits of non-free images of living people on Wikipedia, I did not know about said rules much beforehand, I have a habit of thinking before doing, and I apologize for violating the rule. I thought I was improving the articles. ToQ100gou (talk) 11:49, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Moskerhus puppet

Sorry about those speedy tags. I looked at the SPI, and saw that it was done back in February, and I looked at Oshwah's comment, again in February, and didn't notice that it took a couple of months for the block. My apologies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Bhupinder Singh Mahal.png

Hi Explicit. I believe you've already deleted this file once before as File:Bhupinder Singh Mahal.jpg, but it's been re-uploaded again. I've been trying to explain image related stuff to S Tallim both at User talk:S Tallim and c:User talk:S Tallim, but seem to be having zero success. He's already received an c:Template:End of Copyvios over at Commons and he's moving in that direction here on Wikipedia as well. I've suggested that he focus on the textual content of the draft he's currently working on and leave the images to last, but he doesn't seem to want to do that. Since you're an administrator on both, perhaps you might give it a try. Maybe you'll be more successful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Just going to add File:College of Physiotherapists Council Award.jpg to this as well since he seems to have reuploaded it after it was deleted as File:College of Physiotherapists of Ontario Council Award 2002.jpg. The OTRS ticket he seems to be referring to was received, but there was a problem with it per File:Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal award 2003.jpeg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hi, once an OTRS ticket is involved, administrators' hands are a bit tied due to ongoing correspondence between the uploader, copyright holder, and agent. It seems that S Tallim tried to go about it the right way, but still has some misunderstandings about who has the authority to release works under a free license. If a free license can not be secured, the agent will tag it with {{di-no permission}} or it will automatically be tagged for deletion by a bot (I forget which one) after 30 days of no activity. ✗plicit 23:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

That's fine and I think S Tallim means well, but there's also some things about licensing that they simply are not quite getting. They also seem to continue to reupload files which have been deleted despite being advised not to and this is just making more things that need to be sorted out. I'm not an OTRS volunteer and therefore see the ticket, but I'm concerned that he's going to keep adding the same boilerplate statement about said ticket each time he re-uploads another file like he did with File:Bhupinder Singh Mahal.png and File:College of Physiotherapists Council Award.jpg, and OTRS will not know about these files which means they might not be deleted after 30 days if their licensing cannot be verified. Should an {{OTRS pending}} or {{OTRS received}} template be added to these files so there at least added to an appropriate maintenance category? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:16, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding {{OTRS pending}} would be fine. In regards to the aforementioned files which have since been deleted, neither made a mention about an email being on their description page, so S Tallim may not have been aware of the OTRS system the first time and is trying to rectify the situation now. File:Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal award 2003.jpeg was initially uploaded here, tagged for lacking a license, and then imported to Commons; I deleted the local upload when seven days lapsed. The Commons upload was then tagged as a derivative work before being tagged by an OTRS agent; it was not tagged for missing permission at any point. S Tallim has only uploaded one file here and one on Commons since the other files were deleted, so I would not classify these actions as being disruptive or flippantly ignoring copyright matters just yet. ✗plicit 03:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I don't think S Tallim is being intentionally disruptive; I think they're sincerely trying to create a draft about Bhupinder Singh Mahal and upload images that they think would round out the draft. My concern is that if he keeps making too many innocent mistakes that he's going to end up blocked. I actually tried to seek help for him on Commons at c:COM:AN/U#User:S Tallim, but somehow that ended up only with this, this and this which is not really the kind of response I was looking for. Since it didn't seem as if anything I was posting on my user talk page or on his user talk page was eing helpful, I just thought someone else might've better luck. Anyway, thank you for posting on their user talk. Perhaps that will help clear things up. As for the two images mentioned above, JJMC89 has added {{OTRS received}} to them; so, at least S Tallim will see that there are still unresolved issues with the permissions email that was sent to OTRS.-- Marchjuly (talk) 04:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Grammy Award for Best Vocal Performance, Male

Hi there, you undo the speedy deletion request done by me in here. It's already contained all material on here. So I thought it's the best for that page to be deleted. Is it still necessary to emerge them? Thank you! --Elenktra (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Elenktra: Yes, the page history must be preserved. You are free to redirect the page. ✗plicit 06:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Can this user be blocked?

Hello, sorry to bother you. Can Pooperscoper69420 please be blocked for obvious WP:NOTHERE edits, racial abuses and personal attacks? --Ashleyyoursmile! 06:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Ashleyyoursmile! 06:41, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ashleyyoursmile: No worries. The poop had to get scooped. ✗plicit 06:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Right. :) Is it possible to revdel their edits? Ashleyyoursmile! 06:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ashleyyoursmile:  Done. ✗plicit 06:51, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Ashleyyoursmile! 07:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of sandbox pages

Continue with the deletion as you will, but at least I would like to salvage the contents of Gridman sandbox. Even if I fail to create the page, at least I can save a few valuable info. I wanted to do a lot with it, but I have to shelve the project due to college life. Is that alright to you?

Zero stylinx (talk) 12:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Restoration of File:Microsoft_Edge_Screenshot_(2018).png

Firstly, does this file also have a screenshot of the Edge Chromium browser?

Secondly, if it does, can this file be restored? A screenshot of Edge Chromium was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons but the uploader apparently did not understand that doing so would be in violation of Commons deletion policy as it is non-free, and only the Chromium browser is BSD licensed, not Google Chrome or Microsoft Edge Chromium. Aasim (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Awesome Aasim:  Done, file restored. ✗plicit 00:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Robert Héliès

Hello. I understand you deleted the article Robert Héliès because a banned user had created the article. But could you please at least let me re-create the article? Where can I find its wikitext? Thank you. 22:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The same thing goes for René Vigliani. Paul Vaurie (talk) 22:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: Hi, you are free to recreate the articles, of course. A copy of the text for each can be found here and here. ✗plicit 23:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Paul Vaurie (talk) 00:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Explicit. Can you please show me all the articles that you deleted due to the banned user? I would like to recreate more of them. Thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: Sure. It's quite the list.

✗plicit 01:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't expect that. Thank you. Where can I find the wikitexts? I'm looking to re-create at least just Marcel Bacou but I might do more. Thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: Unfortunately, only administrators have access to the deleted content. You will have to request copies of the text for each page. ✗plicit 02:19, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

you are an admin, correct? Can I please have the text for Marcel Bacou? Thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie: The text is here. ✗plicit 09:44, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

File:JonesPantanoMemoir.pdf

Please undelete this file, since it's actually being used in a way that doesn't get recognized as a file use. See User talk:Cloudbound/Archive 5#File:JonesPantanoMemoir.pdf. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 13:05, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@Pppery:  Done, file restored. ✗plicit 13:08, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Francisca James and Nguyễn Trần Khánh Vân

Francisca James and Nguyễn Trần Khánh Vân are not a notable beauty pageant winner, the page was not giving the readers much more information, many unsourced miss-leading information and lack of sources legitimacy, and lack of interest for Wikipedian user to discuss about this page. Please delete those non-notable person pages.--125.164.51.144 (talk) 12:59, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Geetha Nagu

Hi, I understand this page was deleted as a promotional, but the idea was not to. It was to create a page for this motivational speaker who is well known in the Tamil community from India. Please let me know what to delete and recreate the page. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Geetha_Nagu&action=edit&redlink=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bearcubscout (talk • contribs) 04:54, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bearcubscout: Hi, the core issue with your draft was that it read more like a résumé more than an encyclopedic article about the subject. Wikipedia does not accept such content. In regards to writing an article about her, the pertinent notability guideline is WP:BIO. Looking over the references now, there are seven distinct references. Three of them—vikaasa.edu.in, sunindustriesglobal.com, and news18.com—did not mention Geetha Nagu at all. Two of them—wef.org.in and vikatan.com—were not independent from her. That is to say, because she was involved in the Women Economic Forum as a speaker, the blurb written about her on their website is considered a primary source and does not contribute to notability. The latter source appears to be a direct interview with her. Again, a primary source. What remains is the awards given by GOPIO and Global Entrepreneur Council. These are a little more difficult to assess because the organizations may be notable, but the awards themselves may not be notable (notability is not inherited). In general, a topic is considered notable "when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Please see the general notability guideline for further information. ✗plicit 07:24, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Thanks very much for taking the time and for the detailed response! Truly appreciate it. I'm new at this, and I'll submit a new version only if it is a biographic version that conforms to the notability guidelines with additional notable secondary sources. Thanks again.

Thanks

Hello, I just wanted to thank you for deleting the deluge of old stuff I had in my userspace that I just mass-nominated for deletion! I hope it wasn't too much of a time-waster. Gluons12 ^t|c 14:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC).

@Gluons12: Not a problem! No time wasted at all. ✗plicit 14:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

CSD's

Hi. And thanks for all the effort you put in on the grunt work of an admin. I'd like you to reconsider your decision of several CSD's your recently rejected. I hadn't seen your decision, and had responded on the talk pages (see Talk:Warning (Sejeong song) for my rationale. Of course, I'll respect your decision, but I do not think that socks should ever be encouraged. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Hi, the rejections were not an easy decision to make, especially as I hold the exact opposite view of my actions. I had to go back and forth in deciding between deleting the pages or declining the deletions. I revisited WP:CSD#G5 and WP:BP#Enforcement by reverting, taking note of the argument that G5 deletions have been restored on behalf of other editors' request in the past—which held true in cases like Michael Spavor and Secoo, which spectacularly undermine the criterion. I'm guessing a handful of admins hold a similar view to this. I ultimately decided to err on the side of caution.

I'm open to a compromise if you and Silver seren are open to it: allow him to copy the pages' contents, have an administrator to delete the pages under G5, and simply recreate them. ✗plicit 14:29, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Hi admin, if possible can you also restore I'm (EP) and Plant (EP)? Both are Kim Se-jeong EP, I didn't have the time to contested to it because I was offline at that time when it was deleted. By the time, I was online, I was already deleted 1-2 hours ago. I'm okay with this solution (to copy the pages' contents, have an administrator to delete the pages under G5, and simply recreate them) as well if you could restore both article, I will copy them to sandbox, initial G5 by myself and recreate it or move it to mainspace from sandbox. Both article meets WP:NMG as per Kim Se-jeong#Discography. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed explanation. As I said, I respect your decision, but disagree with the concept of rewarding socks. We spend way too much time on enforcing their WP violations. I almost always disagree when articles which have been G5'd are restored. If an editor is interested in creating the article, then create it, but don't reward the sock. The one exception is when their is honest disagreement about how much other editors have contributed to the article. That's a matter of interpretation, and different editors have different measures. But other than that, I appreciate your views on the subject. I don't know how many hours I've wasted in either reviewing articles by socks, which later get deleted, or in researching and reporting socks, or in marking the G5's. Regarding that other editor has taken to following me around after we had a disagreement a couple of weeks ago, so doubtful there's a genuine compromise. Again, thanks for your explanation, and all the hard work you do on the project. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: Hopefully, you're not referring to me. I just came here because Explicit rejected the various CSD for Korean-related articles hence I'm just requesting if it is possible for restore the two deleted EP articles. My advance apologies if you're not referring to me, just want to clear the air. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Paper9oll, absolutely not. You have an actual interest in Korean arts topics. I was referring to the editor mentioned by Explicit. And apologies to them for clogging their talk page. I've said my piece. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:57, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 3) @Paper9oll: Restoration is out of the question. Instead, I have copied the contents for those two pages here and here. You can work on these in your sandbox until they are ready for mainspace. These articles aren't exactly stellar. ✗plicit 15:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@Explicit: Hi admin, thanks a lot. I have downloaded both code. Once again, thanks a lot. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

PROD deluge

Hello, Explicit,

We often cross paths in deletion areas on Wikipedia lately and I wanted to give you a head's up that there are over 300 articles nominated for deletion next Saturday (see Category:Proposed deletion as of 24 April 2021). I also posted a note to GB fan who also patrols PRODs. I have asked the nominator to pace themselves to maybe 20-30 PROD'd articles a day but there are a lot of these village articles to be deleted. I didn't expect there to be several hundred to evaluate in one day. All hands on deck next weekend if you are free. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Review requests

Hi there! Can you perhaps review these page if you don't mind, or maybe just tell me are these article notable enough? Article 1 | Article 2

Thank you! Byy2 (talk) 09:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Byy2: Hi, Jang Dae-hyeon easily passes WP:SINGER #2. On the other hand, Kim Dong-hyun (singer, born 1998) doesn't seem to pass either WP:SINGER or WP:NACTOR. He has released a few songs and has been in a few series that were nothing of note. If we exclude everything from his career with AB6IX and MXM, we're left with "In early 2021, Kim starred as one of male lead in a web series called Fling at Convenience Store. He also sang the soundtrack for the series, which was co-produced by him." That isn't sufficient to demonstrate notability. ✗plicit 11:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah, okay then. I'm going to come up with something to make the Kim Dong-hyun article notable. Thank you for responding! Byy2 (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Request block

@Explicit: Hi admin, could you block this user Cedric Peridot? User was warned many times prior since 2019 to not remove content without providing a valid reason in doing so, however user continued to do so to various articles and recently to various Red Velvet-related articles. In addition, to removing content without providing a valid reason, user also added several failed verification content such as to Russian Roulette (Red Velvet song) where user denotes that 2016 Melon Music Awards – Best Music Video was awarded to director Shin Hee-won which isn't true as per the source in the body section and Naver search doesn't show such indications as well, so does the YouTube live recording of the event displayed as such.

User also fail to communicate to issued warnings by various editors and even to written message by other editor as seen in user talk page. Contributions log also shows that user has never tried to communicate with other users and this includes moving 2 mainspace article (both Red Velvet compilation album article) that isn't stub-start class to draftspace without providing a valid reason previously and not even communicating on what the reason was for making the move. Such warnings has stacked up since 2019 and it doesn't seem user is even caring about it as recent and overtime behavior shows user have no intention to comply. I have filed report on WP:AIV however no admin responded to it and the bot just clear them after few hours. A report was also filed yesterday by fellow editor EN-Jungwon and same results, the bot just clear it after few hours. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback needed

Hello and hi. For the past 4 to 5 months, I have been participating in several AFD discussions. So now I believe I have the enough experience to close the uncontroversial AFD's. I already did some. Now I really want a feedback from your side whether I had done any mistakes. If so, please tell me how can improve myself to make good decisions while closing AFD's. Because I really want to help in that area of this project. I will show you all the AFD's which I closed. Please see [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26]. Please tell me which among these do you think I should not have closed. I would be grateful if you have some time to spare for me. Regards. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 14:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kashmorwiki: Hi, these all seem like fine closures, except for potentially Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Legitimate Wise Guy. The nom plus one other participant is generally not enough to determine a consensus, especially if the two opinions don't match as in this discussion. I would have relisted it for additionally participation. ✗plicit 00:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for you valuable feeback. From now on I will be watching over your closures to learn and get more experience for future AFD closures from my side. And I hope I can contact you at anytime regarding any doubts. Regards:) Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 00:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

European Academies' Science Advisory Council (EASAC)

Hi there, I would appreciate it if you could recover the material for this article so that I can improve it and bring it in line with current standards. Thank you! --S.molls (talk) 09:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)