User talk:Hmwith/November07

Logo removal
You know, sometimes us (old) musicians have moments of "where am I" and even "who am I". I'll continue to count on you to remove anything in question from my Wikipedia space. Thanks for keeping an eye on me, and my User page :-) --  Rock15  talk / sign 16:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No worries. Because I've talked to you on your talk page before, it's in my watchlist.  нмŵוτн τ  17:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

My UserBox
You deleted my user box at "User:Beano ni/UserBoxes/NIFlagInWiki" on the grounds it was previously deleted by XfD. The reason the previous one was deleted was because I alleged a campaign existed. I have removed that claim from the new one so please leave it alone. beano 10:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Hmwith. I am also involved with this, and have advised the user that I do not intend to restore it at this time. Pedro : Chat  11:44, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Arcangel (Artist)
I see that you have deleted this page before. I live in Puerto Rico, and the most famous reggaeton artists are:
 * Daddy Yankee
 * Zion
 * Divino
 * Arcangel

I was looking for Arcangel's track listings, and the page doesn't exist. May I know the reason for the deletion. Thank you, Lex94  Talk Contributions Signatures 15:05, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello, Lex. I deleted a page titled Arcangel (artist) on October 2nd. Someone had created the page, with the entire article being simply: "fuck". I didn't delete any actual article on the artist.  нмŵוτн τ  23:59, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Poetry Roll Call
WikiProject Poetry is having a revival and we are trying to determine who is still active in the project. If you are, please answer this roll call by placing an *asterisk* next to your name on the list of participants here. Thanks, Wrad 01:16, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hking.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hking.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ The Rambling Man 10:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for helping with the image. Have a great day!  нмŵוτн τ  11:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, of course. Thought I'd help out since you're having problems getting on-line... The Rambling Man 12:02, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


 * OMG, yes, I am dying. Luckily, I have a boyfriend whose computer I can use somewhat regularly.  нмŵוτн τ  03:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Anon threat
I've blocked it for a while. If I were you, if people talk to you like that, block, ignore, move on....! They may well be back but you can just block them again. And again. And again. That's the way it goes! The Rambling Man 14:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I just wanted to make sure that's what I should do, and I didn't want to seem overeager to block. Now, I know. Thanks, Rambling Man!  нмŵוτн τ  14:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Well blocks can be unblocked, there's no need for anyone to speak to you like that. Keep up the good work. The Rambling Man 14:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not fazed, haha. Thanks!  нмŵוτн τ  14:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism??
This is not vandalism: Nickoladze 19:15, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Removing content and sources without explanation is vandalism, as well as spamming other websites.  нмŵוτн τ  20:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:HOTTIE
I must confess I'm a little disappointed to see the closed-mindedness that some people are displaying on the MFD. I'm sorry if you find this offensive, it was all in fun. I'm totally cool with you adding in guys to make it more gender-neutral; I was merely doing it from my point of view. Of course, with a gun to my head, if I had to pick one guy, it would probably be one of the ones you've added, you know? Haha. GlassCobra 18:37, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't find it offensive at all. I never said that. I simply saw that some people did, and I wanted to make it neutral. I commented "delete" for unrelated reasons. However, if it is going to stay, it should have men, as well, haha.  нмŵוτн τ  20:07, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I completely agree! If you look, I did put in a couple of the really exceptional ones even when I first started it. :) GlassCobra 23:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Haha, yeah, I actually did notice that, but not until after I added some boys of my own. =)  нмŵוτн τ  23:43, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:MANGO
Hi, just wanted to give you the heads up on this. This user doesn't exist, and the user page was tagged because it was in mainspace. Someone made this page and many other like it last year to poke fun at MONGO. As I type this, I realize that it's already been deleted, so feel free to ignore this note and happy editing. 202.78.195.106 01:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Ohh, well, that's a mistake on my part, and thank you for letting me know. The tag was on the talk page, saying, "not a user talk page, in main space", & my original thought was, "what?" because it looked as if it was. I should have double-checked. Thanks,  нмŵוτн τ  03:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

speedy
You have just deleted Laurie Matheson Gravestone. ass NN. I doubt it is notable, but it does not fall within any of the categories for A7, being neither a living person, group, club, band, or company. I suggest you undelete it and send it to afd or prod. I have no particular interest in the article, just in giving users no grounds to complain that we admins are sometimes a little over-hasty.DGG (talk) 19:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I thought that it was sort of an "etcetera" thing. So non-notable "things" can't be speedy deleted? Where's it say that? I believe you, of course, I'd just like to refer to the page, so I can see exactly what is says.  нмŵוτн τ  19:18, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

according to WP:CSD "No indication of importance/significance. An article about a real person, group of people, band, club, company, organisation, or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources. If controversial, list the article at Articles for deletion instead". , and under "Non criteria" "Failure to assert importance but not an A7 category. There is no consensus to speedily delete articles of types not specifically listed in A7 under that criterion." There have been some proposals to change this, either for specific types of things or in general--you will find them in the WP:CSD talk page archives--they have all been soundly reject, on the grounds that it's harder to tell unambiguously and people should have a chance to look at it. Of course, "things" can be speedy-deleted if they meet another criteria,and any article can be deleted via Prod. DGG (talk) 19:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I'll list it for deletion then. Thanks for the heads up, and I'll try to avoid speedy deleting "things" in the future.  нмŵוτн τ  19:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I really appreciate you letting me know, rather than just undeleting it yourself. =)  нмŵוτн τ  19:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I have never or almost never undeleted something another admin deleted, as you can see from my log. You'll also see i went very slow with deleting in the beginning-- I had to learn to watch out for A7s, as ANY show of importance is enough to avoid a speedy. I've been increasingly using prods, and when I see a possibly invalid speedy, often converting it to a prod. Prod is under-used--it works most of the time and avoids argument. DGG (talk) 19:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I've never used them much. Perhaps I now will.  нмŵוτн τ  19:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Zuhair murad couture
Hayley; you correctly picked up on this userpage as being an advertisement, but did not quite follow through with the complete process. Deleting the page is of course correct, but it is better in this sort of edit to apply a username block to the editor as well. This username clearly fails wiki guidelines in that it is, as you recognised, the name of a commercial organisation. I have applied a username softblock. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 12:02, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * True, my mistake. I didn't even think about that, for no apparent reason. Now, I'll remember to do it in the future. Thanks for the notification.  нмŵוτн τ  20:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. We all overlook things sometimes - me more than most, I think. -- Anthony.bradbury "talk" 21:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

No humor, please!

 * Haha, well, then I must make sure to stick only to encylcopedic-sounding conversation at all times, so as not to let people enjoy themselves. God forbid that happens... the consequences could be monumental.  нмŵוτн τ  01:57, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Deleting Image:Gail Porter publicity shot.jpg
You deleted this image without notifying me! That was impolite. Also, you ignored my rationale. simonthebold (talk) 14:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't "ignore your rationale". I read it. However, the image illustrates a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information. Please read Non-free content if you have any other further questions. Have a great day.  нмŵוτн τ  15:08, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

On the red link for the image its says: "contribs) deleted 'Image:Gail Porter publicity shot.jpg' ‎(Speedy deleted per (CSD I7), was an image with an invalid fair use rationale and the uploader was notified more than 48 hours ago.)"

Only you didn't bother to notify me with 48 hours or otherwise so I could expand my rationale or defend my argument. You made a unanimous decision without consultation.

Furthermore this image doesn't contravene the non-free content policy 2 and is wholly consistent with policy 1. I searched long and hard for a free image but there isn't one. It is entirely reasonable to use a publicity photo with full diclosure of its source until a free alternative comes to light. simonthebold (talk) 15:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * If the publicity shot were to be released under a free use license, we can use it. Otherwise, no, we can't just use it until a free version comes along. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 16:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The person who uploaded the tag should have notified you. I'm sorry that they didn't do that, but please assume good faith in others before jumping to conclusions and pointing fingers.


 * Also, the number 2 in that policy link doesn't mean #2 under policy, it is simply a technicality in a link that directs you the the 2nd heading titled "Policy", for future reference. Thanks,  нмŵוτн τ  16:50, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Reverted reversion
I reverted your revert edit to Swatjester's candidate questions page. You may not have noticed, but several other questions and answers were erased along with your revert. Avruch Talk 03:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Omg, haha, I had no idea what you were talking about at first. Then, I realized... I didn't mean to click revert there. I have Twinkle, and I think I must have accidentally bumped "Restore this version" instead of the link under it to view the previous version. Thank you very much for correcting that. That was an accidental bump on my part that caused a great deal of damage.  нмŵוτн τ  03:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tgilmore.jpg
Hi! I see you deleted Image:Tgilmore.jpg per CSD I1, "a same or better image exists on Wikipedia" - so I was wondering, what's the filename of the image that is the same or better? Cheers! --Stormie (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It's Image:Tomgilmore.jpg.  нмŵוτн τ  00:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Stormie (talk) 00:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions
I don't think cutting and pasting is allowed, and only administrators (which I am not) can move pages. The existing pages and recommendation new locations:


 * User:CrazyC83/Ingrid07 --> Tropical Storm Ingrid (2007)
 * User:CrazyC83/Jerry07 --> Tropical Storm Jerry (2007)
 * User:CrazyC83/Melissa07 --> Tropical Storm Melissa (2007)

(I was able to move Karen as no redirect existed at its proper location) CrazyC83 (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You're not cutting and pasting articles, though. You made edits in your userspace, and you can cut and paste what you've created into the article, which is essentially the same thing as creating that article all there, in front of you. Copy/paste moves in the mainspace are discouraged due to the histories being "screwed up" (for lack of a better term), but there is no reason to keep the edit history of what you've created in your userspace, as you've been the only editor.


 * I can do it if you'd prefer, but the credit would go to me on my contributions, and these are great contributions, for which I'm sure you'd want "credit". Also, anyone can move a page, not just admins. However, normal editors can only move pages to an article name that doesn't already exist.  нмŵוτн τ  17:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll let you do it, since a move of the userspace page to the mainspace page maintains the history (I have had all these moves done before with other articles). CrazyC83 (talk) 18:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * There's just no reason for it, since you've been the only editor. It won't preserve the history, which there's no need to preserve, since you've written it all. We don't need the steps along the way. It's the equivalent of composing the article in an external editor. Do you still want the articles you wrote copied there?  нмŵוτн τ  18:03, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll do such moves then. If someone else complains, I'll refer them to your comments. CrazyC83 (talk) 18:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, that sounds great. I'm actually just showing you how to do it easier. Now, if you wanted to move the page Gerbil to Gerbilization, for some reason, you could simply use the "move" feature at the top of the page. Or for other moves, you can add it to Requested moves. See WP:MOVE if you have any further questions, and I hope that you have a great day!  нмŵוτн τ  22:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Omgili page
Yesterday you removed a page about "Omgili". This page has been there since Ma 2007. It was moderated by an editor who decided it was of value and importance. Can any editor, at any time, reverse a decision of a fellow editor? I think that that is illogical. I also think that Omgili, being a popular forum search engine, is a term of public interest. Please consider reinstating the page.Yoav Pridor (talk) 11:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't personally make this decision. User:Hu12 tagged it for speedy deletion, and I deleted it due to lack of demonstrated notability. There were no references. It was deleted before for the same reasons, and they were not addressed in 8 months. See WP:N and WP:RS for relevant guidelines.  нмŵוτн  τ  15:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

OFF Rangers FC
Why was this page deleted? this had beren discussed with a number of users and it was agreed it would be kept, then you come along and delte it? Do you even know what Football is in Ireland? Seriously, less of the power trip here buddy! At least 3 other users agreed to keep this page, if you looked into "Dave Murphy" as part of the page you would have seen this.. What gives you the right to decide if a football club (Soccer to you of course) should be delted, Its an absolute disgrace.

ScottyCCFC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottyccfc (talk • contribs) 08:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello, Scottyccfc. This isn't a "power trip". It was nominated for deletion by User:Dennisthe2, as it fails to meet notability requirements. See Notability for more information. The article was about an amateur sports team, therefore, it did "not satisfy notability criteria for football (soccer) in Ireland," according to another Wikipedian at the AfD for this article. Have a great day, and let me know if you have any further questions. Also, always remember to assume good faith, remain civil, and stay cool.


 * Some more tips: Sign all of your comments with ~, always post at the bottom of a talk page, and created new heading for new conversations, using == , like ==OFF Rangers FC== .  нмŵוτн τ  16:18, 30 November 2007 (UTC)