User talk:Stephen/Archive May 2007

deletion review of List of Philippine Presidents by longevity
I've asked for a deletion review of List of Philippine Presidents by longevity. Since you participated in the deletion discussion for this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -Fagles 20:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you comment needs a bit of fine tuning. The argument being made is not "other stuff exists" but "other stuff exists and survived AFD". Having precedent should count for something. Perhaps merging all the lists that can be into each other now we have sortable tables will sort out this mess. - Mgm|(talk) 10:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
So to report it, there is no, "report button" I just leave a comment on their my talk page? Carlson969 00:01, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Cool, I only did it because, James (name) is my name, and I was showing my brother what my name meant, and it was all messed up...Magic beans and all... The article was being pretty bias aswell..Carlson969 00:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes
And some will go down in history :| AT CFD PERHAPS SatuSuro 00:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Ovules
Thanks - it was a quick note - nothing more- it turned up red and therefore hod no article so I scribbled one. Thanks.Osborne 10:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!
You're now an administrator. Have fun using the new tools, and don't hesitate to ask if you're ever unsure about the best way to proceed. Then as you get comfortable, dig in and help clear out the backlogs. Again, congrats. - Taxman Talk 16:41, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations from me too. I hope you enjoy your new responsibilities. If you ever need some advice, feel free to drop a message on my talk page. Gwernol 16:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Congratulations on the succesful RfA! Have fun with mopping. — An as  talk? 16:49, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Accept my congratulations as well. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 18:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Redirects
Thanks for deleting all those broken redirects I tagged, there's one last one that I couldn't tag (List of film clichés by genre) because it's editprotected. If you get a chance? Masaruemoto 04:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybemaybenot
In the good realm of yeahbutnobutyeahbut you might want to watch Human trafficking in Angeles City as an example of what not to get caught up in. It might just put some people off wiki to just watch the edit war - so it up to you - but I suspect it nbeeds a few more admins keeping track of it - its not for the faint hearted - if it looks too yuk - maybe you could let someone else know. I dont want to touch it with even a watchlist item - but - hope your weekend is opposite to the article. cheers SatuSuro 05:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yup absolutely horrible - maybe not a place to start - maybe the battle scarred need to go in with more than a mop into that one - at least you know your limits - thats important! Cheers SatuSuro 06:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

AIV report

 * My pleasure on the support Steve. Ahmm this editor was part of a big kerfuffle some time ago under the tag Banned Gundagai Editor and has a reverted and banned on sight tag - you may need to look through some archives at user:Golden Wattle and /or user:Longhair if that helps?-- VS  talk 05:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Does this help? click here for arb decision-- VS talk 05:44, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Keiron Self
Dammit...I'm still getting used to using VandalProof. That was my bad. Please accept my apologies. Jmlk17 10:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Appreciate it. Jmlk17 10:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding deletion
Yes, if you could please delete the associated images; it would be greatly appreciated. Ksmithtwn 03:40, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Supercrustal
I didn't get any ghits, then I read Craton and couldn't figure out how one could hit and pound the Earth. But you must know more than me about geology (not that difficult). Clarityfiend 02:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Admin Vote List
I just wanted to say how cool the table is on your page with the current votes and percentages for the current Rfa's. Not sure if you created it or not, but I like it! Jmlk17 09:25, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sweet, thanks! By the way, congrats on earning the tools; I was glad to see your Rfa pass! Jmlk17 09:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

France Winddance Twine
In case User:Canticle, who is still fairly inexperienced, does not pick up the corrrespondence on the article page, I have sent him a message, in line with your comment, suggesting that he insert a selected list of referenced publications. Perhaps we could give him a couple of days to do so?--Anthony.bradbury 11:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for stopping 0001.Esmehwp 20:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
what are you talking about? I reverted the edits seconds later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.123.18.168 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 9 May 2007

Austin Spare alleged vandalism?
WIKI RULES state that links 1 ) should be kept to a minimum and avoid linking to multiple pages from the same website. IPSOS has two links to the same site

2) You should not link to sites that primarily exist to sell product(s). IPSOS has created two links to a commercial site! (i.e. Wiki rules state : You can link to a site with links to Amazon but not to Amazon directly)

3) There are no quotes, references or mentions made in the main text to these two articles! 4) The authorised copies of the articles on AustinSpare.co.uk, a non-commercial site, can be found through the External Link for "AustinSpare.co.uk: Articles, Genealogy, and Bibliography" [under the articles section].

IPSOS at first made repeated reverts/edits without comment or discussion. . . followed by threats and more or less asserting I am right you wrong. Read his about me comments and the comments of others about his(her) attitude!! He (she) states "The main problem with Wikipedia is that complete fools cribbing from books consider themselves the equals of people who have studied a field and are intimately acquainted with it . . . When those who don't really know insist they are right rather than admit that they don't really know, I suggest that they simply leave Wikipedia. " Such arrogance from IPSOS. It's a shame you decided to side with him without bothering to discuss it with me either. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.152.49.226 (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

Jake Dinwiddie
You wrote, "Cutting the filmography from IMDB and pasting it directly into an article, and retaining the formatting that obviously shows it's a cut-and-paste is a copyright violation. There is no clean version to revert to so I deleted again." But under Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, a simple list of facts, such as a filmography, does not have copyright protection, so there is no copyright violation here. You should also note that in the latest revision the formatting of the filmography had been significantly altered by my edits. I might add that I had mentioned the Feist decision on the article's talk page. Since I do not want to engage in a delete/undelete war, i will be taking this to deletion reveiw. DES (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

See Deletion review, where a discussion is in progress. DES (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I didn't think you were going to edit war with me, i meant merely that re-undeleting would have been warrign with you, and I wasn't about to. And yes, my contention is that under the Feist rule, a straight copy of the IMDB page, such as the inital version of thsi articel is not a copyvio, becaue such list as not protected by copyright under US law. This comes up a good deal here, becaise lists of facts are not infrequent componets of articels, but usually it is in the context of including or deleting a ssection, not a whole article. DES (talk) 23:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would also suggest that when deleting, particualrly when re-deleting after anoteh admin has restored, it is worthwhile to double check the current status, the talk page, and the history including edit summeries about why the deletion was undoen. I apologize for not having put a msg on your talk page after I undelted, I thought I had done so. DES (talk) 23:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the degree of originality here might be debated. Let's consider. 1) Selection: The IMDB claims and apparently attempts to include every role in every production in which an action has appeared. This is not very selective, there seems no originality in the criterion "include them all". 2) Arrangement: Thew IMDB orders appearances in a strictly chronological order. This has no more originality, IMO than the alphabetical order condemned in Feist. Ther might be a trace of originality in the decision as to which bits of information about a given role are included I suppose, but the choices made by the IMDB are pretty much identical to those made by any provider of a filmography: show title, episode title, date, role played. This is not much more than the "Name, town and number" of the Feist decision.
 * In any case, even if the arrangment of the IMDB list is protected, the protection is so thin (a mere re-ordering will destroy any claim of copyright infringement) that I don't think speedy deletion is the proper answer in such cases. DES (talk) 00:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Category:Proposed deletion as of 3 May 2007
If you snooze you lose ;) Malla  nox  00:00, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

User page deletions
Here's a page that doesn't need PRODding, it needs immediate nuking from orbit: User:NS Jonas Lie. --Calton | Talk 05:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Palm Island
Hi Steve, I was going to revert that edit also until I looked on the map... PI is actually NW of Townsville due to the coastline going North West at a very steep angle. Thanks, WikiTownsvillian 03:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

7DS
You previously notified a user that the article at 7ds was tagged for WP:CSD. I assume that was carried out, as an article at that location was created again today, and subsequently moved to 7DS. Would you please verify that it's not the same as what was deleted before & make a note at Talk:7DS? Many thanks, MrZaius  talk  09:20, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Glad
I'm glad you approve of my work. I am keen to learn more and help where I can.(Ninja Shewolf 10:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC))

Wild Desert Bikers
Hi there, you deleted this as an expired prod, could you restore it for me? Thanks. --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

7DS
Hi - read your comments on the talk page about this one and have prodded it. Seems to have been prodded previously, but the prod was removed by the user who put up the speedy tag, and then someone took down the speedy. I wonder if you could look at it and perhaps make it go away? It seems entirely non-notable, and a prod was up for several months with no effect earlier. Thanks! Philippe 23:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Reporting vandals
Reply on my talk page. Sincerely, Sir intellegent - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 22:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Alienware Bot
What sense does this make? There is no Alienware bot... -Mike Payne 04:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Streetfoo212
Diolch yn fawr :-)

Not that he'd done any serious damage as yet, but it's nice when you will be blocked without further warning means what it says. Congrats on your relatively-recent mop acquisition, by the way. Cheers, --YFB ¿  00:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Replied at my talk :-) --YFB ¿  01:31, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Council for a Livable World's entry
Why did you delete our (Council for a Livable World's) Wikipedia entry yesterday? (as indicated on http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Council_for_a_Livable_World)

Please restore this entry as soon as possible. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.194.197.66 (talk) 17:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC).

Ta
Hehe, thanks! I'm using a different laptop and the keyboard is acting up on me. OK, bad excuse, I'm just scrappy :) Cheers mate, – Rianaऋ 09:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

IP 58.169.25.55
Hey Stephen, someone at this IP posted an unblock request. The request was interesting enough that I thought others should see it. Pastordavid 19:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation's entry
Likewise, why did you delete the Center for Arms Control's Wikipedia entry, which was located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Arms_Control_and_Non-Proliferation? There was no copyright violation whatsoever on either of the entries for Council for a Livable World or the Center for Arms Control.

Please restore this entry as soon as possible. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.194.197.66 (talk • contribs) 07:55, 17 May 2007
 * Both articles were blatant cut-and-paste copyright violations from their respective web sites. Please recreate the articles in your own words. --Steve (Stephen)talk 22:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

If I am able to verify that I am an official from the two organizations Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation (through email for example), am I right to believe that will void the copyright violation and the two sites can be restored?

Also, if you look at both of the web sites of the Council (www.clw.org) and the Center (www.armscontrolcenter.org), the material there is not copyrighted (e.g. "some rights reserved"). The Wikipedia entries, therefore, could not have violated any copyright agreements. Furthermore, the material on the Wikipedia entries is the same as that found on the organizations' web sites because they are the same authors. Again, the entries could not be in violation of copyright agreements if the material was authored by the same source. (Please note that Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control are sister organizations and often have overlapping staff and hence authors). Feel free to contact us at http://www.clw.org/contact/ (or I can give you my personal email if needbe) to confirm any specific information.
 * The website clw.org has © 2006 Council for a Livable World at the bottom, so it's copyright text. However, Donating copyrighted materials gives advice in releasing your material, and providing permissions.  However, you may also want to read the policies on conflict of interest about creating articles on things with which you are related. --Steve (Stephen)talk 04:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Why??
Why did you delete Battle Animals? I worked real hard to make the article! Runewiki  777  22:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Deleted page "Hard border"
I have noticed that you deleted this page Hard_border but left the tag on the article. Could you please remove that tag? It makes no sense to deleted articles on the wikify backlog list. 22:18, May 5, 2007 Stephen (Talk | contribs) deleted "Hard border" (Expired prod, concern was: violates WP:OR) Thank you in advance Dbiel 05:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Block of User:Poobumweeface
Per discussion at WT:UAA, I've tweaked this block to enable autoblocking and disable account creation. There have been an extremely high number of "poo" or "poop" or "poopy" usernames lately; we think there might be a pattern. Just a heads up, in case you block any more like this in the near future. Mango juice talk 13:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of "American Political Commentators
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=American_political_commentators "concern was: unannotated list, unnecessary with categories, fails WP:BLP". Here's my complaint: instead of fixing some of these things (not sure how a Biographies of living persons applies to a list of people), you nominated it for deletion. The page was made to get the list off of another page (which now has a dead link). The biggest problem the page had was that it wasn't linked to from a bunch of pages, so no one could improve it. Again, instead of working to improve it, you nominated the page for deletion. Can you give a reason not to restore the page? 171.71.37.103 19:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I didn't nominate the page, as an admin I deleted it as an expired WP:PROD. And WP:BLP applies because you are categorising people without a single reference.  How is a reader to know whether or not someone has been properly assigned, and that you haven't put, say,  a liberal commentator in a conservative category, which might be highly embarrassing and controversial for that person.  There is no reason not to restore the page, and the WP:PROD process allows you to just ask for it to be restored so that you can continue working on it.  Is that what you are asking? --Steve (Stephen)talk 22:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, you just click the delete button, not start the process. I suggest it be restored, but changed so that people who don't have wikipedia pages be recatagorized as "Uncategorized."  If someone wants to confirm, the corresponding wikipedia entry should be able to back up the categorization.171.71.37.103 18:16, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No, each article, i.e.. that list of commentators, must be referenced in its own right. You can't use the argument that references exist on another page, but you can of course copy appropriate citations to the list page.  --Steve (Stephen)talk 23:17, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I can use the argument, but where is it/why is it against wikipedia policies that doing that's bad?
 * WP:BLP, every fact about a living person needs a reference. I've restored the article for you. Good luck --Steve (Stephen)talk 05:41, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed- I need it. 171.71.37.103 19:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The more I look at the page, the less I care about it. What bugs me more is the double standards that show up on wikipedia.  Sometimes there are indeed lists (and quite long ones).  I also don't see anyone creating topics for these people, or adding them to topics. Citation standards also vary widely.  The article on William Sledd was deleted because the sources were all youtube, but it's OK when there's original research on Penny Arcade or Star Trek pages.  171.71.37.103 19:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?
I read was that I was blocked during to vandalism. Could you please define the reason? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.165.250.10 (talk • contribs) 07:57, 18 May 2007
 * There is no block against this IP or user account. If you are being autoblocked; the IP is blocked as it was recently used by a blocked user, then follow the unblock instructions on the page you are given when you try to log in or edit. --Steve (Stephen)talk 22:23, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Why Did You Block Me?
I (a guest) just edited the Pokemon Glitches page to add a glitch and you blocked me for vandalism, why?

I would like to ask you what edit I made that you have categorized as vandalism. Unfortunately, I am not the only user on this IP address, and am therefore unable to keep tabs on all the edits it makes. If there is a problem I would like to know what in particular, and then set about finding a way to remedy the situation by holding the appropriate person accountable. I use Wikipedia seriously, and I too make attempts to make contributions, often in the form of reverting vandalism, with my account on user:Chopin-Ate-Liszt!. I understand your concern and appreciate your vigilance in anti-vandalism, however I would like to contest this block for the above stated reasons. Thank you very much. ---72.192.208.154 23:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Permanent block request for 81.68.92.38
Hello, I am Link 486. I apologize for adding a personal attack to the anonoymous user who excessively damaged the List of Celebrity Deathmatch episodes, but I feel that he should be stripped of all editing priveliges. Once his block ends, there is a danger that the article might be vandalized by the same person; I don't want to take that chance. This conflict has to be resolved or else the article will spiral into a further state of disrepair. It will be for the greater good of this article, and as a member of WikiProject: Celebrity Deathmatch, I want to help restore the article. Please consider this, and I expect your answer soon. Link 486 12:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

re:Insidious vandals
Aye, bad Riana! ;) No, something was screwing up on the Sunrise page, and I just tested it to see if it was the template - it wasn't, just someone's crappy coding in the actual article, CJ fixed it :) – Riana ⁂  10:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
 * We must uphold the standards they have set for us, absolutely. – Riana ⁂  11:02, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Diagonal Method
Dear Stephen, I am disappointed that I have not been notified of your deletion proposal (as suggested in WP:PROD). As a result, I would like to discuss the deletion of the Diagonal Method article in your discussion page with you.

The reason for deletion you have given is that this method is not verifiable from a reliable source. Note that the Diagonal Method concerns a theory in aesthetics, an area in cognitive sciences we know too little about to actually be certain about anything (i.e. Studying aesthetics in photographic images using a computational approach by Datta, Joshi, Li, & Wang, 2006; full reference by request).

That same source (Datta et al., 2006) nicely puts that the rule of thirds is “a sloppy approximation of the Golden Ratio” (para 2.3). The rule of thirds is often used in photography but any more experienced photographer knows the rule of thirds is ambiguous. Thus, basing myself on the reason you provided, the article on the rule of thirds (which I did translate to Dutch; Regel van derden) should be removed also. Note that the article on the rule of thirds lacks any reference and only mentions a few Web sites that blindly follow the rule of thirds.

On the basis of No original research it can be said that the article provided sufficient information to not lure the reader into blindly believing it has all been confirmed (as the rule of thirds suggests), that it was not the place where the Diagonal Method is first proposed, and that the article does not draw its own inferences. Outside from Wikipedia, the Diagonal Method has been published in the Dutch photography magazine Focus (February 2007) and is starting to be analysed at the universities of Twente and Utrecht, and at Saxion Hogeschool Enschede (all in the Netherlands).

'''In conclusion, the Diagonal Method has shown to be useful in the analysis of two-dimensional art and photography, similar to the rule of thirds which is widely used but has no proper basis and is ambiguous (the reason it is so popular is because it does serve as a proper method to prevent beginning photographers from making basic mistakes). Though at this time there has been no additional published research on the Diagonal Method, I deem it sufficiently justified to be mentioned on Wikipedia, with research-founded updates expected to be added in the relatively nearby future.'''

Sorry, forgot my name ;-) Eddyspeeder 13:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Dear Stephen, thank you for offering me the chance to see and join in with the discussion on the Diagonal Method. As mentioned there, I agree with deleting the article until the method can be confirmed by third party research. You're doing a good job Stephen, carry on! Eddyspeeder 21:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Xputer
I see that you have placed a "prod" tag on this and some associated articles. I'm not an expert on the subject, but it seems reasonably clear to be that a/there is indeed massive COI, but b/ that the subject is notable anyway--there are dozens of references, although  most seem from the same group. I've notified the editors who have worked on these articles and also the Wikiproject Computing in the hope of getting some feedback. Thaks for spotting all this. DGG 22:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

My images
All these where deleted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_dino_spin.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_popfunny.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_pano_rock_strata.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_limestone_cowboy.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_dino_2_bird.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_washington_humors.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rush_hitler_textbooks.jpg

There where cropped/resized screenshots from free videos found on this page --> http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php

There has to be a way to easily clear these. The man said several times, in the videos, that he wants the material to be shared. Should I crop the video where he says this?

How does one go about this?

Was I just using the wrong tag?

The files are all in this folder: http://www.rush4hire.com/creation/img/ They are very small.


 * O, those are such good pictures. There has to be a way I can share them.  I have submitted a request to that web site.  If they like my ideas, they will make a page giving permission to use screenshots for wikipedia type posts.
 * lol. I didn't mean to make that tag. I was tricked.

SD Franchise Circle
Sorry, I missed the previous SD decline. I'll AfD this if the other SD proposer doesn't. Groupthink

Stop?
I have no idea what you are talking about. I am very confused and all you guys give me are 3 words and a delete. I politely asked for some guidance and the admins just ignored me.Kazurincwl 13:54, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Jsw46
Stephan: After User:Jsw48 and his sockpuppet were blocked yesterday for vandalizing, he has changed his username to User:Jsw46 and has madethreatening comments on my talk page. Can you help me out again? I've also posted this on WP:ANI. Thanks. --Evb-wiki 03:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The posting at WP:ANI worked. Thanks. --Evb-wiki 05:03, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Gstaad Palace
Dear Stephen, I am disappointed that you deleted this page. I don't understand the deletion. Many different user changed every day the content. In the end the user startet to write KEEP. I am new here and really tried to changes everything to WIKI style. So in the end i am very frustraited because my work of days is gone. There are million hotel articels which are not so informatively like this. I really dont understand the users of Wikipedia. Nobody really helps new writers.

THANK YOU ALSO FOR YOUR HELP!!! User:milehnort 14:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: User:IBMSupport
That wasn't me. See //  Pilotguy  hold short  20:11, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks on user pages
Hello, I came across someone using their userpage as a personal attack against someone else: User:Raffoosh. Someone slapped a speedy-tag on it, and then removed it, commenting: "Removed speedy delete tag, if i had actually looked, i would have noticed that it was someones userpage".

What is the proper cause of action here? The page should clearly not be allowed to stand as it is, but I guess it is wrong to delete someones userpage too? Dr bab 10:13, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Why Stephen
I don't understand it Stephen why did you block me. I did not vandalize anyone's work, I simply sought to start pages based on new information unfamiliar to many. Isn't that what Wikipedia is all about? Now I come to our page and find that I have been included in your listings of blocked editors. Why display this listing so prominantly? It seems that you derive a certain joy from deleting pages and blocking editors, even if it is completely unjustified (as it was in my case). Do not shut me out Stephen, surely we can discuss this as men of reason and good will. Let us work together to build a better Wikipedia.JJAshfiel 16:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Oz Linux
Stephen, I am a bit confused with the process here. As a developer of Oz Linux I was surprised to see that the article was removed. As a retired moderator of ubuntuforums.org, and having also helped with the Sabayon Linux project, I fail to see how Oz Linux is any different then any number of Linux distribution articles. Oz Linux does still actively exist, the article was a factual article not an ad. Please help me out here since you deleted the article how can it be rewritten to pass your muster. Two new version of Oz Linux were developed, Oz Rx and Oz Enterprise I was going to add the information but now the article is gone.

Here's my main beef the article existed in peace until I made an edit on the List of Linux Distributions page and the following post in the discussion of that page:

"Adding Ubuntu as a separate Category that other Distributions are based on is not needed, since Ubuntu is based on Debian, thus every distribution based on Ubuntu is based on Debian. A sub-list under Ubuntu has been made, but this belongs under the main header of Debian. Adding a new header of Ubuntu equates to nothing less then SPAM. Please do not continue to add Ubuntu as a main header, Ubuntu is based on Debian. ravtux 22:43 13 May 2007 (UTC)"

It was only after making this post did anyone take action against Oz Linux. I feel the action was politically motivated in retribution for my edit and voicing my concern on the List of Linux Distributions page.

Anyway please let me know how do I go about restoring or reversing the Oz Linux article, I understand that you have committed to quality but I honestly fail to see where the Oz Linux failed on this. I am troubled that it existed in peace until the above mentioned edit was made. Ravtux 23:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of pages
Hey, Stephen. Thanks for deleting all of those subpages I just marked for deletion. I have a question though: did I accidentely mark my awards page for deletion? Sorry for the trouble, but could you undelete it for me? Thanks!  *Cremepuff 222*  " As cool as grapes... "  00:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi again. Could you undelete the User:Cremepuff222/Archives page too? Thanks, and sorry for being such a nuisance.  *Cremepuff 222*  " As cool as grapes... "  00:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * :) Thanks.  *Cremepuff 222*  " As cool as grapes... "  00:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

La Toya Jackson image
Yeah, so much for WP:AGF. Rhythmnation2004 01:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

David j Stewart
Hello, Stephen,

Just wanted to let you know that this is the second time I've seen this user create this page today, and thought you may want to consider protecting it from creation. He seems to be out with the attempt to disrupt Wikipedia, and thought I'd let you know.

Thanks, Curran (talk 01:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

The Match Logo
This logo is from Portland Enterprises and I work for them. The logo does have a copyright but would like to use it on the Wikipedia page. Ryoga3099 02:43, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of User:Jsw48
Hi, Steve. Can you take a look at this puppet too. Thanks. --Evb-wiki 03:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Stephen, please see User:Evb-wiki's talk page. Apparently there is additional sock activity going on there from this JSW person, could you investigate please? Thanks, Postoak 04:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Rodney K Moore
I still don't think he merits an article here. I have nominated Rodney K Moore for deletion. You may wish to participate in the debate at Articles for deletion/Rodney K Moore. Ground Zero | t 05:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Doom.exe
. Just saw this popup on my watchlist... are you sure about this? Doom.exe is, I think, much more widely known as the popular computer game Doom than as a virus (haven't even heard of that, nor can find it). And it's a plus that the user's only edit was to revert vandalism. -SpuriousQ (talk) 02:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kim Deal... 2.png
You recently removed an image I uploaded to the Wikipedia. The deletion log is here. Now I'm not sure whether you read the edit summary or not, but the source of the image was the Wikipedia Commons, and its fair use rationale was spelled out there in a way I couldn't duplicate on the Wikipedia. In fact whole process was extremely confusing. Whatever the correct way to do it was, I did it wrong, but it would have been nice to receive some feedback about it, or even a nudge to revert the article the new image was used in.

Ylem 04:04, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Q.U.E.S.T.
Thanks for yr speedy response to my ((db-repost))-ing this sadly recurring article.  tomasz.  09:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No probs, the author may get blocked if he tries again --Steve (Stephen)talk 09:25, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
 * back again, i'm afraid.  tomasz.  11:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Ballyoulster United's page
Can I just ask why? I'm a bit confused here.

thanks

PS is there any way, if deletion is not overtuned, to get the text back?

Cahillgod 17:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

828 Entertainment
I saw that you declined the speedy as potentially notable when the nominator was just short of calling for a G11 (spam) nomination. An assertion of notability should really only protect an article from an A7 speedy. If it fails to pass muster under a different category, in this case spam, it should still be speediable under that category. DarkAudit 04:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Smashboards
I noticed that you redeleted Smashboards. Mind telling me what policies I didn't follow this time? Deletion Quality 23:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Destruction of Tommorow
It is two users (or socks) taking turns creating it. Crakitoa and Zeelo. IrishGuy talk 01:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)