User talk:Stifle/Archive 0209b

Regarding the Garena Article
Hi Stifle,

I'm Benj Dalmacio from the Philippines.

I am going to ask about the article on "Garena" which was deleted late last year (2008)

Garena is a gaming platform currently being used by various online gaming leagues around the world such as the leagues organized by Meet Your Makers (which has a separate article here in Wikipedia) and other leagues from other countries.

I have been a Garena moderator ( and currently an administrator for the Philippines) for two years now. I haven't seen the original article created by one of our users, but according to the delete logs that it was "blatant advertising". Would it be possible if I get a copy of the article so that our staff can review it and come up with a more encyclopedic rather than blatantly advertising one?

Are there also any other steps we should undergo in order to get an article up for Garena (without of course getting deleted again) ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Garena

Thank you very much

Mski.benj (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Garena was deleted under criterion 7 (under Articles) of our criteria for speedy deletion because it appeared to be an article about which didn't indicate why it was important or significant. Please see  for details of what might show notability. If you think that these criteria are met, please explain which one and provide citations from reliable sources to back up your claim, and I will consider undeleting the article. Stifle (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi again Stifle
 * I think one of our basic members (who made the last Garena wiki article) failed to indicate the importance of Garena (previously called GG-Game or GG Client), which is a free gaming platform designed to connect gamers from across the globe. Being such, we have no game releases of our own which make us notable, but rather we connect those who play games released by gaming giants such as Blizzard, the makers of Warcraft and Starcraft.
 * We are not really profit-based, for we give these players a chance to connect, try out their gaming skills with other players from other countries as well as promote the worldwide gaming industry for free using our gaming platform. Owing to this, we have neither large ads nor great articles on big gaming magazines but rather we get our significance and importance to how well those people who enjoyed playing on our platform pass it down to their friends and to other people.
 * I have tried gathering a few reliable sources, which I enumerated below (with their underlying category on RS)
 * Other examples
 * See Wikipedia:Reliable source examples for examples of the use of statistical data, advice by subject area (including history, physical sciences, mathematics and medicine, law, business and commerce, popular culture and fiction), and the use of electronic or online sources
 * Under this category I will mention internet statistical data from Alexa http://www.alexa.com/site/company an Amazon.com company which publishes site information as well as site statistics. Garena traffic ranks of 1,569 around the world, traffic rank of 48th in the Philippines, 60th and 74th in Taiwan and Singapore respectively.
 * You can also get info from notable companies such as MeetYourMakers (http://www.mymym.com) which utilizes our gaming platform for their online leagues. We've also been mentioned for quite a lot of times on Dota-Allstars.com, the official website of the famous game of the same title. These two sites have or utilize extensive editing guidelines. Usually, the info from these companies will have to be acquired first hand as Garena have never really given interviews with any of these companies. Though, the name Garena is surely one big name in the online gaming industry.
 * We have also partnered with the organizers of World Cybergames : Asian Championship 2008 (http://asian.worldcybergames.com/about/sponsors) to broadcast their games online for free. As well as the Samsung King of the Hill tournament(http://asian.worldcybergames.com/%5Bvocab-raw%5D/skoth-newbies-guide) which is organized by Samsung, notable sponsor of gaming tournaments.
 * My administrator will also be providing me with the name of a gaming magazine in Indonesia within the day as additional source (which I think is the only magazine who featured us)
 * We also have a few articles regarding some features of our free gaming platform such as the GarenaTV which broadcasts live Dota matches from across the globe (http://dotabestguides.com/category/article/). I also don't know if this forum article will hold: http://hotfilms.org/softwares/garena-ultimate-gaming-tool-dota-cs-52626.html
 * I don't know if any of this proves our importance for the Gaming industry, but if most of what I mentioned here are first-hand sources and won't hold that much then I guess we could just work on a Wikipedia article in the future (but please do wait for the magazine ^^ since we're much known in Southeast Asia than other parts of the world)
 * Thanks for spending time reading my explanation
 * Mski.benj (talk) 18:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The only one of those that is a reliable source is Alexa, where a rank of 1569 should be sufficient to confirm notability. However, I just looked at the page and it appears that the article was most recently deleted by NawlinWiki. You would need to refer to him to request undeletion, but you can just recreate the article if you wish. Stifle (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your time Stifle. I will try create a new article and have it checked too so that it stays neutral. Thanks again ^^ Mski.benj (talk) 20:04, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * NawlinWiki's userpage is semi-protected so I was not able to inform him/her regarding my plans to recreate the Garena article. Anyhow, I made a draft on my sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mski.benj/Sandbox I'll be needing all the help/guidance I can get from editors especially if I was able to cite proper references. Thank you in advance
 * Mski.benj (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hans linneman
Hi. Hans linneman was posted at Copyright_problems/2009_January_29. You noted on February 3rd that you had received a communication, 2394678, but were waiting GFDL release. Since there's been no further action, I've deleted it as unverified, but wanted to drop you a note in case there was some further action that had been missed. :) I'll leave a note to the contributor about it. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Rationales
I appreciate that a lot of things get uploaded to Wikipedia that shouldn't, and gratitude is owed to those who keep an eye on things, and challenge inappropriate material.

But File:Siwucha.jpg, File:SirGilesGScott.jpg, File:Hertha thiele.jpg and File:Silverroyalvictorianmedalcrowncopyright.jpg really don't come in to that category.

These are all absolutely standard types of images, that it is completely established are appropriate - an image of a product to show the logos and trade dress of the product; and image of two dead people, and an image of a medal. All images appropriate to illustrate the main topic of the article, and non-replaceable by non-copyright content for the reasons covered in the rationales.

There really isn't any more than that that needs to be said.

If you really think these images shouldn't be on Wikipedia, then take them to IfD. Otherwise stop wasting everybody's time. These rationales are adequate. If you have some personal problem with them, then note WP:NFURG, "Please consider, as an alternative to deletion, fixing the description page, if possible", and fix them to your satisfaction.

But I don't see a problem here, so I'm removing the tags.

What really concerns me, is that here are four completely legitimate images that I happened to pull out in time from an "Images about to be deleted" category, give a rationale to, and save. But goodness knows how many other equally legitimate images there are, uploaded before the present rationale policy, whose uploaders have long since moved on, that have just gone through that category without anybody noticing and now are gone, deleted.

We're trying to build an encyclopedia here. Please review what you've been doing, with these very old image categories. Causing useful, legal content to get deleted really isn't very helpful to the project, or its vision. If you see a legitimate image which you think needs a better rationale, then please either fix it or leave it alone. But holier-than-thou deletions just because the rules for the paperwork have changed really aren't helpful in any way to our readers. Jheald (talk) 20:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We're trying to build a free encyclopedia here. That means that if we're using non-free content, there has to be a really good reason. Wikipedia's policy (which you'll see at WP:F) specifically requires a rationale addressing several points. I hope you will understand why I've restored the tags to those images; please remove them only if you add a full rationale. Stifle (talk) 20:33, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Even more fundamentally, though, we're trying to build something that helps people. Re-usability is of course an important part of that.  But these images, as used on our pages are re-usable.  That is the ultimate purpose of WP:NFC, and these images pass it.
 * Please identify what it is you want added to these rationales, because as far as I can see they are entirely adequate for entirely standard uses. Jheald (talk) 20:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The items in the template Template:Non-free use rationale would be sufficient. Stifle (talk) 21:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Rationales don't have to be templated: WP:NFUR is quite clear on that point. I consider that the rationales I have provided are entirely adequate, in the context of those images and the other material on the image pages, and clearly answer all the questions WP:NFUR raises.
 * So again: please identify exactly what it is you want added to these rationales, or alternatively stop wasting everybody's time. Jheald (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They don't have to be templated, but they do have to include details of how the image meets each and every one of the non-free content criteria, not just the first one. I don't feel I'm wasting anyone's time, although I'm sorry if you feel that your time is being wasted in this; as I mentioned before, the goal here is to create a free encyclopedia. Stifle (talk) 22:01, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but which criterion is it you feel that is in doubt? You would stop wasting my time if you told me, rather than expecting me to be a mind-reader.  As I have said before, it seems to me the present rationales adequately address all of the questions that WP:NFURG raises.  Help me out here.  Specifically, for which of the questions on WP:NFURG do you believe the answers are not already patently obvious, with the rationales in their present state?  Jheald (talk) 22:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * As suggested on WP:NFURG, the rationale should:
 * identify the purpose of the image in the article
 * explain why the image is not replaceable by a free image that exists or could reasonably be created
 * name the article or articles in which the image is being used
 * identify what proportion of the copyrighted work is being used (and, if appropriate, whether it is low-resolution)
 * identify the source and copyright holder of the image
 * confirm that it does not compete with the copyright holder's usage of the work
 * Your rationales covered the first three, but didn't really address the last three. I've amended the rationales at File:Siwucha.jpg and File:SirGilesGScott.jpg to give you an idea of what is required; why don't you try the other two? Stifle (talk) 09:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Image captions
Could you review the tools you're using to add messages to article pages, when you're proposing content on them for CSD or IfD?

The method you're using at the moment appears to be suppressing any existing caption for the image; which can often be significant information, both for readers of the article, and for editors trying to assess the IfD. Jheald (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a known issue with Twinkle. There's been a bug request filed with the maintainer of the script, User:AzaToth. Stifle (talk) 20:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, well can you please do your edits some other way until it's fixed. Thx. Jheald (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think that'll be practical. Stifle (talk) 21:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's entirely practical. If you know a tool doesn't work, then don't use it.  Jheald (talk) 21:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Flickr permissions
Thanks for contacting me about the image permissions. I have asked authors to do that in the past, but they usually marked the wrong license, didn't know how, or didn't want to have to change the license for every single image in a set (sometimes the permission I get can be for 30-100 images. I figure since the authors are willing to provide us their image for an article that lacks one or has a poor one, I can deal with a little more work. I've been fortunate to find so many free images and believe my current practice is more successful. Thanks for the heads-up and if you have any further questions, please let me know on my talk page. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 21:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

List of computer games that require Pixel Shaders
Do you mind temporarily recreating List of computer games that require Pixel Shaders so I can extract some information ? GoldDragon (talk) 03:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll move it to User:GoldDragon/List of computer games that require Pixel Shaders; please tag it db-userreq when done. Stifle (talk) 09:19, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Your response on Articles for deletion/Camberwell Baptist Church
I find your response on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camberwell Baptist Church, as someone who is active on the AfD circuit, I have found that you usually vote delete on almost every article, making your user name a fitting one. And yet with this church, citing no policy, you wrote: "Keep, churches tend to be notable." If you don't mind, can you explain this possible contradiction?

Also the message wizard you have tends to be very confusing. When I click "You're replying to a comment I left on another page" the page is protected. I would suggest getting rid of it completely. Ikip (talk) 11:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * On User talk:Stifle/wizard/comment, you will see that the page suggests that if you are replying to a comment on another page, you should leave that reply on the other page, but if you think it is important, there is a link to leave me a message.
 * The message wizard is not intended to sort messages (and is protected so that people don't leave messages on a page where I won't see them). It's designed so that the questions I am asked most frequently are answered straight away, and that questions any admin or any user can answer are directed to an appropriate noticeboard. That way, users may not have to wait for me to come back online to get an answer to their problem. I have found it very useful and I think I will keep it.
 * To your actual issue, I'm satisfied with my contribution to this AFD and the admin who closes it will give it whatever weight he feels it deserves. I would have thought that the implied comments in your message are beneath Wikipedia editors. Stifle (talk) 11:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Carnegie Heritage Centre
Hi. This one has note of a ticket, 2009020310034545, with an indication that you requested further details on February 3rd. Any update on that? Its time has come. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope; the permission is from an unrelated email address and there hasn't been a reply to my email asking for it to be sent from an address associated with the website. Stifle (talk) 14:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 15:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, just to let you know, the tmbox template you had on your wizard page was using an invalid  parameter that was causing an error to be thrown by the template, so I removed it.  Sorry if this was overstepping my bounds.  Also, you recently received an "RfA Thanks" on that page as well that you might want to move or remove.  Ioeth (talk contribs twinkle friendly) 16:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Stifle (talk) 16:21, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

In the beginning
Techincally, in the beginning, when it all first started, it wasn't a policy and wasn't supposed to be a policy. Apparently, only one person made the decision that it should be a policy; and because it was a relatively unknown and hidden offshoot of NPOV, it went unnoticed for a long time. This does not coneensus for it being a policy make - to paraphrase Yoda. Dreadstar †
 * Actually, there's a good timeline put together by Slimvirgin: . Dreadstar †  21:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Tom Mitchell's Doctor Who
Why did you delete Tom Mitchell's Doctor Who? Apart from the fact that I had declined deletion just before, I don't think you can really say it was vandalism - not with assuming bad faith on side of the creator anyway. And that was clearly a good faith attempt at an article, albeit a mess. I think you should explain your reasoning for deletion to its creator, otherwise they might feel bitten. Regards  So Why  22:11, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am guessing that you are not familiar with Doctor Who. The content is a patent hoax — the author is claiming to be the chief writer of the series and to have cast a nine-year-old boy as the Eleventh Doctor, cited only to his bebo page. I've left the creator a hoax warning. You're welcome to DRV it if you disagree. Stifle (talk) 09:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation
File:New copy.jpg

I noticed you've done some work on suspected copyright violations. I'd like to call your attention to the photo "File:New copy.jpg" (shown) and the track record of the uploader User:Simon Cheakkanal. You might also check out other photos this user has uploaded. Their image size and resolution indicate to me that they have been lifted off the web. I acknowledge I'm not assuming good faith, but I think someone savvy in such things should take at least take a look. Thanks for all your work for Wikipedia. -- --Boston (talk) 13:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have a look. Thanks. Stifle (talk) 14:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Bernard_ Madoff. jpg
Response to your message below:

This link and the subject matter will give you a small consensus of the decision not to use the photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content_review#File:Bernard_Madoff.jpg

I really have no clue about posting the photo legally or even the physical method to post. I just found it and asked for assistence. If it is a no-go, then just delete the entire page or whatever you do to end the proposed request. If you believe it is ok to post, then please, by all means, do so.

Your message:

"Replaceable fair use Image:Bernard Madoff.jpg Thanks for uploading Image:Bernard Madoff.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all. Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media 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 taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 12:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)"

thanx. Furtive admirer (talk) 16:03, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've read the non-free content review page. The problem with this image is that non-free images of people who are still alive are almost never permitted, because someone could take a photo of the person and release it under a free license. Stifle (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

ok. thanx. just delete it or whatever. Furtive admirer (talk) 16:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Color Portrait Marshall Strabala.jpg
Stifle,

What further evidence or information is needed to have Marshall Strabala's image cleared for posting on his Wikipedia page? He personally provided me this image, as my PR firm, Pirages Communications (www.piragescom.com) has been representing him for four months. And, this same photo has been provided to media worldwide as a Public Domain image.

Marshall and I will appreciate your assistance so we can correct this error. Thank you.

Mykjoseph (talk) 13:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Mykjoseph
 * Thanks for your message. Next time, rather than automatically choosing the "other" option to leave a message, please try to choose an option that relates to your message as it often results in being able to find the answer for yourself and not wait for my reply.
 * In order for File:MarshallStrabalajpg.jpg, which was originally published on www.gensler.com, to be restored, an email must be sent from an address ending in @gensler.com to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, quoting that exact file name, and stating that the image is released into the public domain (or under an acceptable free license). Stifle (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Why the Page "Promotions and Transfers" is being deleted
Subject is my enquiry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjivkumarsharma (talk • contribs) 17:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see the reasons at Articles for deletion/Promotions and Transfers. Stifle (talk) 20:13, 16 February 2009 (UTC)