User talk:Courcelles/Archive 52

Your message

 * Timestamp. Courcelles 21:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Please restore article
I see that you deleted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EVO_Shift Please restore it. This is a legitimate article. Likeminas (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm going to assume you meant HTC Evo Shift 4G and not the redirect you pointed to. You are welcome to write an article on this subject, however our policies on block evasion allow all edits by a blocked user who evades to be removed from the encyclopaedia. No substantial contributions were made by others to this article. Courcelles 21:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Why do you want me to re-write the article when a draft was already up there? I don't know what terrible things the original author did to have this article deleted but this phone is the successor of the HTC Evo 4G and is notable and verifiable enough to have its own article. Regardless of what the initial author of the article did I don't see how deleting this legitimate article improves Wikipedia. If anything it is detrimental to the project because you're asking me to start all over when somebody already did. Please restore it.


 * PS: I can't see if there was any substantial contributions by others, but please do consider that this phone just came out and not many people are aware of it. Likeminas (talk) 23:22, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * This particular user is a serial troll and copyright violator. Nothing they wrote can ever be trusted for either accuracy or that they wrote it themselves. Courcelles 02:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll be working on the article. I was looking for it the other day, I saw part of the result cache, then when I clicked on it, I saw the deletion post.
 * like I said, I'll work on the article but at least make my job easier by restoring what was written. I'll check for accuracy. thanks! Likeminas (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I can e-mail it to you, but I will not restore one word that troll wrote to this website. Courcelles 02:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That'd be great. Thank you! Likeminas (talk) 02:38, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Your e-mail is not enabled. Courcelles 02:40, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * oops, ok I just turned it on.Likeminas (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sent. Courcelles 12:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just FYI, mate, this guy was a serial block-evading, pain-in-the-arse troll, but he's not Shutterbug (also a block-evading pain in the arse, but a different one). He was impersonating Shutterbug from about 1,000 miles away. Not that that would make me any more inclined to restore what he wrote, but I thought it might interest you. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts?   02:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * When someone says they are banned editor X, I'm ready to apply RBI, regardless if they're actually someone else. Block 'em for lying and trolling or block them for block evasion, the result is largely the same. Courcelles 12:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi
HJ says you've been talking about me! Heehee! :p

He's going to send me an email, I might also take a look at successful/unsuccessful RFAs as well.

How are you doing anyway? --5 albert square (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm doing alright... been stuck at home with snow for most of this week, though. I'll send you an e-mail of my own soon. Courcelles 02:27, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I forgot the snow, is it really bad where you are? We had it really bad here around the start of December.--5 albert square (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I cc'd you on an email to 5asq, my friend. You might have something I didn't think of. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts?   18:33, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Elijah wood (drummer)
Hi Courcelles. Putting the record straight: My last post to this AfD was 'Delete'. This was an unintentional error and was supposed to read 'Comment' as I had already placed my delete !vote earlier. I hope you had realised my mistake when assessing the debate for closure -  which  I think was a clear case for deletion  anyway. --Kudpung (talk) 05:48, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I did notice, but one !vote any which way would have been very unlikely to swing this one, the consensus among the uninvolved was crystal clear. Courcelles 05:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Are you checking the files?
Hi Brad, you recently deleted several images, including File:Chetanfam.jpg and File:Bibi ka makbara3030.jpg, under F11. However, the file was tagged for lacking a license tag, not evidence of permission, and should have been deleted under F4. F11 and F4 are not interchangeable, as the former asserts a free license, while the latter doesn't assert a license. Please be more careful with these files, especially with User:Sfan00 IMG's current RFC for not checking file histories for possible vandalism which resulted in removal of the original license or just plain mis-tagging of files, among several other things. Please be more careful, as valid images being deleted is harming the image department. — ξ  xplicit  23:53, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am checking them. Those two could have gone for any number of reasons, though I'll I have always interpreted F11 as "No evidence we can use it" which is a little broader than what you're saying, and does fit those files. Courcelles 23:56, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * F11 states "If an uploader has specified a license and has named a third party as the source/copyright holder without providing evidence that this third party has in fact agreed..." (emphasis added). It states that a license must be specified. Not sure how that can be interpreted any other way. — ξ  xplicit  23:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, so I need to read WP:CSD more than once a year, things keep changing from what I memorised. May I suggest, though, the next time you feel the need to bring this up with someone you moderate your language- being accused of doing something without checking is highly offensive, more so as the files were deletable but merely being done under the wrong code number. Courcelles 00:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Huh? I didn't say "you aren't checking the files!", I was simply asking; a few mistakes I can understand, but deleting loads of images at a time under the wrong criteria? That's something to worry about. As for the CSD policy, the "specified a license" has been there since at least March 2009 (I didn't check further), long before either of us were admins. If deleting files under the wrong criteria was okay, then so many people wouldn't fail their RFAs for their less-than-stellar CSD tagging. It's a small, but important detail to tag and delete pages accurately. While I'm here, if you're going to make a suggestion, so will I—it would be appreciated if the files deleted, especially those under F5, were deleted on the day tag says right at or after 00:00 UTC, not 20 or 30 minutes beforehand. — ξ  xplicit  00:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm just saying starting a conversation with "Are you checking the files?" is never going to turn into a collegial chat- it's an accusatory opening. Yes, I was checking every file for deletability through traverse, and I'll be more careful about switching between F4 and F11 explanations. Now, if you want a real challenge, figure out what is going on here because I've been looking for ten minutes and I'm flat-out stumped. Courcelles 01:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Licensing

 * Where did this come from, and who put it here? Courcelles 21:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Done, Thanks
Sorry to be upset. Its just the chart sat for a month undisturbed, and then i added the note in big red letters (where I was told to)asking to hold off on deleting the page just to move it over and then suddenly a few hours later it was gone. Thanks for the help.
 * No problem. Courcelles 21:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Protection level at Sarah Palin
I'm kinda baffled. I don't understand how 96.241.5.102 was able to vandalize the article. I thought it was under protection and had been since the 9th. Did he have a passkey or something? I don't understand the inner workings so I'm not questioning anything. Just curious and trying to learn the ropes. I hope his actions don't cause a repeat of the increased protection. Many editors seem anxious to update the article. Thanks, Buster Seven   Talk  04:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * When Courcelles changed the protection level for Sarah Palin from semi to full, he had to change the expiry date from indefinite to Jan 15; therefore, when the full protection expired, the article was not protected at all. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We had to go to full protection for a while, and when full protection expires, an admin has to manually reinstate semi-protection. As much as we'd like it, full and semi protection cannot be "stacked", so unless someone remembers, the article will be unprotected when the full protection expires. Seeing the vandalism on my watchlist, I reinstalled the semi tonight as indef, so unless someone unprotects or we have another episode of full protection, this should not happen again. Courcelles 04:44, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks. Buster Seven   Talk  05:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Images
Stop templating me; it's highly insulting. Rodhull andemu  04:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * There's simply no other way, given that an average of 200 or so of these things get orphaned most days. Not using the templates would produce little benefit, and make a task that already takes half an hour take several times longer. (And as a practical matter, when processing the report every night, am I supposed to run everyone's edit count to see who the "regulars" are?)  This isn't a one-off decision like most situations DTTR is invoked, it is literally 200-600 edits every night when the database report is published. Courcelles 04:52, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * You seriously do not know one of the top 100 contributors to this encyclopedia? And what makes you think that when I am suffering from insomnia at 5 a.m. I need to be starting a new stub article (From Past Archives) to retain the image I have taken so much trouble to find, and justify? Due diligence, please. D'oh! Rodhull  andemu  05:03, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, I don't, though looking it up I see I am also in that label, meaningless though it is... there's at least a half of the top of that list I've never interacted with, and quite a few I'd swear in a court of law I'd never even heard of. Further, F5 has a seven day hold time, so I don't see why you feel pressured to start a new article tonight. Courcelles 05:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Because if I don't at least start it now, I may forget it tomorrow (although it is now tomorrow), because vandals don't stop vandalising to let us get on with things. And I have other projects to be getting on with. Simples! Rodhull  andemu  05:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And I have a long list of things I want to take to FAC/FLC rather than spend hours on that database report every night. Yet, someone still had to do it, and I'm sorry if occasionally someone gets a template that doesn't like them. If there was a simple way to avoid it, I'd do it, but I simply can't memorise the name of every editor who has been around awhile. (On a philosophical level, I tend to agree more with WP:TR than WP:DTTR for deletion matters (not warnings as they lead to blocks, but only for deletions), but I'll try to remember your name as not linking templates.) Courcelles 05:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Wikipedia Ambassador Program
I would like to invite you to consider joining the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, which is looking for experienced Wikipedians to be Online Ambassadors. The role of Online Ambassadors is to be mentors for students who are editing Wikipedia as part of class assignments. I know you would be a great mentor and Ambassador, so please look at the Online Ambassador guidelines and you can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. If you are not able to help personally I'd appreciate suggestions of people who you feel have the right attitude and experience, as the Program is starting this month Thruxton (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of The Future Is Wild species
Well gee lookie what I found :) That list seems a little better anyway. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 19:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, that list is better than the one we had. Courcelles 21:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Amazing Grace
I just blocked the IP who was causing trouble. The semi-prot probably isn't necessary now, but I'll leave it up to you. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts?   23:33, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It's an AT&T IP. Those are so easy to refresh that blocking is useless if someone wants to do the tiniest bit of work. Courcelles 23:34, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion
Hi Courcelles,

Could you delete this picture: File:Potrait Utilisateur-Floflo.jpg for me please? I don't contribute very often on en.wp, moreover licenses permitting any use of this pic bother me a little... Thank you. --Floflo (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure thing, G7'ed. I'll let you remove the redlink from your userpage. Courcelles 00:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Thank you very much for your quick action. Cheers + :) --Floflo (talk) 00:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Hope you're well.--5 albert square (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * And you have a reply, mi'lady. Courcelles 03:02, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you re-send it please? There's nothing showing in my inbox.--5 albert square (talk) 14:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Courcelles 19:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Got it and sent you another reply.--5 albert square (talk) 19:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Article: Christoper Stribley
Hello,

I am Christopher Stribley. Last year my brother started this article about me as a gift when I was going through a very hard time. Today I went to see what I could do to update it and was very upset to find that it had been removed. Upon investigation, I found that you are responsible for the removal of my page and, upon informing my brother of this, I found that you did not notify him that [|the article] was going to be removed. I need you to restore it, please. I have numerous ways that you can verify who I am and I will provide you with some of them here. I appreciate your very prompt action in this matter.

Thank You,

Christopher Stribley.

AKA - Plastic Robot

christopherplastic@gmail.com

173.68.32.29 (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have some reliable sources that discuss you in some detail? And how would you propose to verify that you are who you say you are.  (NB: I may be the last person in NATO that doesn't use Facebook, but I won't, and those links do not work without an account, if that was your proposal.) Courcelles 02:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, the user was notified at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Stribs about the proposed deletion of the article. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:38, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Aaah, so he was. When it comes down to it, while this should be restored as a WP:PROD, it's so close to an WP:A7 I'm finding myself quite conflicted here. Courcelles 05:41, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It would not survive AFD, looking at the content that was posted there. I would say keep deleted. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Please consider that I am requesting the reinstatement of this article so that the additional information that I have pointed you to can be added to it, hence making it a viable, verifiable article. Please. This is something that is easily fixed. ChristopherStribley (talk) 06:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Response to Courcelles, RE: Removal of article on Christoper Stribley
Thank You for your prompt response. I hope I am responding in the correct manner. If you checked my site, there are some sources linked there, including an interview with The Pandorian, as well as a few articles about me and my work on this blog. I tried to link them here, but they seem to be causing my response to be disallowed, as this is my fourth attempt to respond to you. My brother is honestly better at handling such things, but he is also exceptionally busy and it's not really fair to him anyway, since he put most of the work into starting this page. I can also put you in touch with several photographers in NY who have photographed me, and numerous friends and fans, all of whom can verify that I am who I claim to be. Additionally, if you Google my name and my moniker, Plastic Robot, you can verify all of what I am telling you.

Thank You for your help.

Sincerely, Christopher Stribley. christopherplastic@gmail.com http://plasticrobot.net

ChristopherStribley (talk) 03:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Original response, triggered by the filter log. Tb hotch Talk and C. 03:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)