User talk:Geo Swan/archive/2014-02

__NOINDEX__

'''If you are considering initiating an xfd on material I started

People infoboxes
Hi. For retired military people you may want to use the infobox military person template - that is the norm for retired admirals etc. Forgive me if you know this already Gbawden (talk) 10:09, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I am aware of Infobox military person, and have used it in the past.  Currently, I often choose not to use the more specific infobox, when I don't know any information to fill into the fields specific for that infobox.  Why? Expediency and portability.  The wikipedia is not the only wiki I contribute to, and using special purpose templates makes my contributions less portable  Some other wikis support infobox person, but not any of the more specific infoboxen which should be supersets of it.  One unfortunate phenomenon is that some infoboxen work differently than other infoboxen.  I find this a highly annoying cognitive burden.  The field for the name of the topic of the article should probably be "name" in all infoboxen.  If it is not "name" in all infoboxen it should nevertheless be the same in all infoboxen.  Some infoboxen expect the names of images to be bare, not preceded by a "File:" or "Image:".  Other infoboxen expect the prefix.  Yet other infoboxen expect a full wikilink to the image.  All infoboxen should all use the same syntax for referring to all images.  Feel free to change any infobox person I have used to a more specific infobox, provided you test it afterwards to make sure it still works here.
 * Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 11:38, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:The John Irwin House, supported on temporary piles, 2014-01-26.png
Thanks for uploading File:The John Irwin House, supported on temporary piles, 2014-01-26.png. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text   below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:49, 5 February 2014 (UTC)


 * I disputed this nomination. Geo Swan (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 13
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Flyway Film Festival, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages The Rocket and Volume One (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

TTC loops
Firstly let me thank you for the develoment of articles about historic streetcar loops. The TTC capitalizes "Loop" in their naming (see TTC Map of 501 Queen for example) and most references about loops also do that. I have created the new Category:Toronto streetcar loops. You raised the subject before, so do you think there any additional loops currently in use that might merit an article? Humber and Long Branch perhaps? Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, I agree both Humber and Long Branch merit articles. I am cross with myself as I remember drafting an article about the pre-TTC streetcar line from Roncesvalles to Port Credit, with lots of references, and now I can't find it.


 * I used lower case 'l' loop to be consistent with lower case 's' for station at Mount Dennis LRT station, but have no objection to upper case. Geo Swan (talk) 13:57, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * This is the difference between a proper noun/name and a generic descriptive term. Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)


 * FYI. Just uploaded File:Birchmount Loop s0071 it6590.jpg and File:Birchmount Loop s0071 it6444.jpg for Birchmount Loop.Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks.
 * Your TPL-fu and COTA-fu continues to exceed mine. Geo Swan (talk) 21:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 20
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Bloor streetcar line (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to University Theatre


 * Luttrell loop (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Don Valley

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ Geo Swan (talk) 10:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Undeletion Request


Hello Geo Swan. I was looking over your request for undeletion at WP:REFUND and I'm unclear exactly what you want. Do you want the deleted revisions themselves restored or just a copy of the deleted revisions listing?

I took a look at the current and deleted history and can't see any suppressed (i.e. oversighted) revisions, but I'm not sure I whether I should be able to or not. You'd probably need to talk to someone with oversight permissions about that; I think the way oversight works may have changed in the intervening years but I am uncertain.

I don't understand what this all has to do with the paid editing debate but I haven't really followed that particular kerfuffle.

Bearing in mind I can't do anything with regard to suppressed revisions, whatever you want done with the revisions I deleted back in 2008, I would be willing to do. The approach to BLP has matured in the five years since I deleted that article and today deletion would not be my first choice. Given that the article has since been rewritten I see no reason today that the old revisions need to remain deleted.

However, I am no longer able to be so active on Wikipedia as I once was; I am often unavailable for significant periods of time. If I am unavailable when you decide what is needed, feel free to ask any other admin to act with my blessing.

CIreland (talk) 22:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * It's OK, I responded to the WP:REFUND request and restored the deleted contribution history because the sanctions have expired on that article. Previously the history went back only to 19 September 2008, now it goes back earlier. Fortunately there was no overlap between the deleted and non-deleted contributions.


 * If I acted out of hand, CIreland, by all means delete the history again from 14 January 2008 and earlier, but you might want to wait until Geo Swan has extracted anything needed. ~Amatulić (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks.


 * Should someone re-obfuscate the earlier revisions, after I am finished with them -- I don't see any need for that, and would in fact find it very unusual. A large fraction of our articles will temporarily have passages that lapse from NPOV, NOR, or even COPYVIO.  We edit those articles, leaving a version that doesn't lapse from policy.  Unless I am mistaken, isn't suppressing versions reserved for genuine emergencies, like versions that contained genuine slander, or personal details, like private phone numbers?


 * Um, you restored the earlier revisions to the article itself, but you didn't restore the earlier versions of its talk page, including this version. Can I ask you to restore the deleted versions of the talk page too?   Geo Swan (talk) 00:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for restoring the talk page. Geo Swan (talk) 06:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome - it hadn't occurred to me that you might need the talk page too. ~Amatulić (talk) 08:39, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * CIreland, I am just about to archive February. I shouldn't use this as an opportunity to get the last word, so I will be brief.  I checked your talk page, and I saw you did eventually leave an explanation, and an apology of sorts -- but you left it without telling me about it, and I spent the subsequent years regarding you as an administrator who couldn't be bothered explaining yourself.  Geo Swan (talk) 05:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Qian Zhijun
Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The TTC's Birchmount Loop in 1953.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:The TTC's Birchmount Loop in 1953.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Redundant -- I'd already placed a db-u5 tag on the image when User:SecondaryWaltz found a free alternate image. Geo Swan (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 12:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Ahmed Siddiqu, son of Aafia Siddiqui, in 2008.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Ahmed Siddiqu, son of Aafia Siddiqui, in 2008.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 21:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Bin Laden family (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to The Washingtonian


 * Maersk Peary (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tanker


 * The Carlyle Group (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to The Washingtonian


 * Zaky Mallah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to SBS

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅ Geo Swan (talk)