User talk:Stifle/Archive 0710

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Batzarro.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Batzarro.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

RFC
I noticed that you participated in a previous RFC at Wikipedia talk:Notability (events). I was wondering if you might share your opinion here: RFC: Should Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts) be merged with Wikipedia:Notability (events) and Wikipedia:Notability (people)? Thanks! Location (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 21:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

File:L1 northiceland.gif
Re the OTRS for File:L1 northiceland.gif: I question whether CO2 science can give permission, since I don't think it is there copyright. Do they, in their email, assert copyright? William M. Connolley (talk) 14:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and I'm sure I recall that being discussed, perhaps on the talk page. Did you restore it? William M. Connolley (talk) 14:02, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't see the talk page, which makes the OTRS ticket insufficient. Deleted. Stifle (talk) 14:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, thank you. Quick service :-) William M. Connolley (talk) 14:15, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

File talk:L1 northiceland.gif
I got all excited when i sw you restored this with permissions received, and now you`ve deleted it again? What gives? mark nutley (talk) 14:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * See the message right above this. The organization from whom purported permission was received does not appear to have the ownership of the copyright. Stifle (talk) 14:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Saw it after i had posted, sorry about that mark nutley (talk) 14:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

wmf duncare boutDISABLD!
-----Please note, I have &#91;&#91;Repetitive Strain Injury&#93;&#93; and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 15:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You have yet to indicate a specific, actionable problem, so I am unable to assist you. Stifle (talk) 15:57, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

en.wt blokme outprejudis
leaVOISmsg noposs
 * wmfIGNORSme-----Please note, I have &#91;&#91;Repetitive Strain Injury&#93;&#93; and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 16:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I told you, we don't deal with Wiktionary here. Stifle (talk) 18:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 16:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

soitoluWMFduncar
nu rpart ofaRUDentity[wmf
 * now"action"onVOISenablin.-----Please note, I have &#91;&#91;Repetitive Strain Injury&#93;&#93; and find typing very hard. I use a form of shorthand, which may be difficult to understand. I can be contacted through MSN (sven70) or Skype (sven0921) if my meaning is unclear. (talk) 22:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not a part of the WMF. I am a volunteer on one of their sites.
 * Unfortunately, I am unable to assist with your issues, and further repetitious requests will not receive a reply. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Long-term_abuse/General_Tojo
We're cleaning up LTA to make it more effective, so I'm going over every report. Is the user mentioned above still active? Thanks. Netalarm talk 11:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not that I'm aware of. Please don't delete the page, however. Stifle (talk) 13:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Shuki AE
Hi. At the discussion, you requested "that all comments relating to this request are added here, not at my talk page." Not entirely sure what exactly that means, but I think that led an involved non-admin to edit the section that is set aside for uninvolved admins. I removed the non-admins comment, not realizing that perhaps that's what you wanted. So you can either revert me or modify your comment to remove any ambiguity. Or neither :) Best, -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 16:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I meant "on WP:AE". Thanks. Stifle (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Re your comment on that request, if you can't be bothered reading the diffs given (actually much easier than it looks at first sight) & assessing what if anything needs to be done, could you please leave it to an admin who can be bothered? Misarxist (talk) 16:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you're going for with that one; the proposed sanction would appear to be adequate to remove the disruption, isn't that what AE is for? Stifle (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * @Misarxist, I am not sure what you mean either. As I understand it Stifle, just asked the editors to keep all the comments in one place for more convince. There's absolutely nothing wrong with such request and such approach, and with that I believe we all should leave this talk page alone.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, all I ask is that people post follow-ups to the AE thread on that thread rather than bringing them here. Stifle (talk) 18:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Stifle
Sent you an e-mail  Jaakobou Chalk Talk  06:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Received and noted. Stifle (talk) 08:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Mikie Da Poet
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Mikie Da Poet. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 98.212.29.179 (talk) 06:43, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

RfC on Sven70
Hello, I've started an RfC on Sven70's conduct. You may wish to view the RfC and add your input. Thank you. Netalarm talk 22:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Afghans in Pakistan
Hi, can you please revert that page to my version. User:Saki's version contains too much falsified information. I explained some of that on Talk:Afghans in Pakistan.--119.73.6.164 (talk) 09:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not getting involved in your content dispute; try WP:3O. Stifle (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Inre Deletion review/Log/2010 July 19
I opined a "keep" at Articles for deletion/Stephano Barberis with the comment that that the article "needs cleanup for style and tone, and the addition of proper (and available) sourcing" as a surmountable issue... but had never stepped up and put actions to my words. So, since the DRV, I've been working the last couple days on a rewrite that would address concerns brought up at the AFD... in order to show that what I believed was possible, could in fact be done. Please compare THIS to my work at User:MichaelQSchmidt/workspace/Stephano Barberis and offer an opinion. And yes... I think the "Select videography" section will need massive trimming. Thank you, -- Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 23:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for working on an article as opposed to the easy actions engaged in by other users of vigorous handwaving and saying that sources exist somewhere and someone will add them sometime. Stifle (talk) 08:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It was a fun treasure hunt... and I even found his birth announcement in archives of the Kitimat Public Library... his hometown. Best,  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 10:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

RE: ACC
✅ Fun  Pika  00:48, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Request quotations Peter Holmes a Court

 * Please refer to the extracts below from the entry's discussion page initiated by you: —Preceding unsigned comment added by Everton Dasent (talk • contribs) 23:39, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Please quote the relevant sections from the sources in the case of refs 3, 4, 5, 7 (of this version of the article). Stifle (talk) 13:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello Stifle. I have found the quotations you requested and they are listed here:

For ref 3 the passage you questioned was: 'In 1994 Holmes à Court put together an off-Broadway rock musical, Fallen Angel. The show lasted only 3 weeks and lost most of Holmes à Court's available capital as well as the capital put in by investors.'

From the reference - "Newly married, Peter Holmes a Court was impatient for success and not interested in working in a hands-on way to learn the theatre business, as someone like Cameron Mackintosh had done. Peter had some tough lessons early. Billy Boesky's rock and roll musical, Fallen Angel, was Peter's first off-Broadway show, which he put together in 1994. It stayed open three weeks and lost most of Peter's available capital and that of some investor's close to home who weren't happy with the result".

As you can see with that one the actual author's language was used but the tone of the passage in Peter's own mother's official biography is far worse that what was reproduced in the version produced here.

For ref 4 the passage you questioned was: 'Janet's biographer, Patricia Edgar, details the incident in another book, Bloodbath: a memoir of Australian television, stating that Back Row Productions was also in financial trouble. Edgar describes how Janet initially reacted to the situation by attempting to force Peter to meet his obligations, but later wanted to assume the Back Row Productions' debt and pay out of her own pocket to save her son from ignominy.'

From the reference - "At the same time as Janet's problems with Heytesbury were growing, Peter Holmes a Court was in trouble with his company Back Row Productions. As executive producer and distributor of 'Lift-Off Live', Peter had planned a schedule for a tour which had opened successfully in Sydney. Now his company wanted to close the show down but contractually he was committed and we had a tour booked... A distributor/executive producer is expected to get behind a show and help work for its success, not run when profits aren't such easy takings, but Back Row Productions had serious financial difficulties itself... As Heytesbury was an investor in 'Lift-Off' with an interest in income from ancillary rights, Janet was entitled to all information and I briefed her regularly. Her first response was that I should pursue Peter firmly to meet his obligations. I phoned Peter, with Janet sitting listening to the phone call, to tell him we intended to continue with the contractually agreed performance schedule... ''Janet suggested that she assume Back Row's debt with the Foundation and pay out of her own pocket. She knew Peter was in financial difficulties and this was a way to avert further damage..."''

For ref 5 the passage you questioned was: 'In 2000 Holmes à Court settled out of court with his family to gain his inheritance from the family company, Heytesbury. The family was forced to sell off much of its asset base to make the payout. Holmes à Court's father, Robert Holmes à Court, died intestate leaving his wife Janet one third of the family fortune with the four children getting the other two thirds. The amount Peter Holmes à Court received was reported as A$35 million.'

The original reference - AAP Ben Ready (2009-08-26). "New York to Outback - Peter Holmes a Court comes of age" - does not appear to be available online in any form any more. I will endeavour to find a printed copy of this. But in another reference http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/the-pride-and-the-passion/story-e6frezb9-1111114706333. Holmes a Court admits as much to having 'inherited' AUS$35 million. In this reference in a one-on-one interview the question of the $35 million is put to him and he does not deny it - http://www.abc.net.au/insidebusiness/content/2003/s825742.htm

For ref 7 the passage you questioned was: 'In 2004 Holmes à Court was deposed from the post of CEO of the AACo. Some senior management and board members of AACo held Holmes à Court responsible for some of AACo's poor decisions and the failure to buy AMP's Stanbroke Pastoral Co'

For this reference there is an article abstract available from The Bulletin, one of the oldest and most respected publications in Australia,  which states: "Peter Holmes a Court, the chief executive officer of the Australian Agricultural Co. (AACo), has been deposed from the post. Some senior management and board members of AACo have held Holmes a Court responsible for some of AACo's poor decisions and the failure to buy AMP's Stanbroke Pastoral Co." author: Hoy, Anthony Publisher: A C P Computer Publications Publication Name: The Bulletin with Newsweek Subject: News, opinion and commentary ISSN: 1440-7485 Read more: http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/News-opinion-and-commentary/Body-of-evidence-Gunfight-at-the-AACo-corral.html

Ref 8 http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/16/1073878030980.html also shows that Holmes a Court's 'resignation' might have been prompted - "The public reasons given for the change - Holmes a Court stepped aside because he did not want to uproot his young family - have been largely accepted by the sharemarket and the media. But some have questioned the spin. Senior AACo sources have told the Herald that investors and sections of the board lost faith in Holmes a Court's ambitious plans to turn AACo into a global "paddock to plate" food company that owned pie shops as well as cattle stations. There are also suggestions Holmes a Court's high profile, outspokenness and the failure to acquire AMP's Stanbroke Pastoral group last year worked against him." The article also refers to Peter's 'inheritance' but suggests a rough $30 million figure rather than the $35 million found elsewhere.

I have also located one of the references listed as a 'dead link' which appears to have been caused by the Sydney Morning Herald reorganising its archiving. The dead link at reference 9 (in the version you quoted) was http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-leaguenews/news/richardson-quits-as-souths-ceo/2007/10/31/1193618941602.html. The original story is now available at http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/richardson-quits-as-souths-ceo/2007/10/31/1193618941602.html

I would point out that many of the changes made to this material (i.e. deleting it wholesale) were done by sockpuppetry and the complaint of WP:undue was also made by one of these sockpuppets.

I accept that some of the material is not flattering, but that does not make it any the less factual. I think there needs to be some sort of compromise on the language used but the material is relevant and does give a history of the individual.Edasent (talk) 02:55, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thhank yoou; I will look into this soon. Stifle (talk) 20:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You did not respond to this discussion. So I took the liberty of amending the entry with the information. That entry has since been the victim of sockpuppetry again. I now note that you have reverted practically all of these revisions without any discussion on the relevant page as you yourself instructed. The material you removed was verifiable and referenced. Some of the material comes from the subject's own mother's official biography. I don't know where you would find a better first level source.

Please engage in discussion without making these large deletions and reversions, since this is your own direction to other contributors it seems only fair that you comply with your own instructions for others. Everton Dasent (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, I am unable to engage further regarding this article. I will not be making further reversions and will not be involving myself with it. Stifle (talk) 08:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:05, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

topic ban
Hello Stifle. I dont believe that ARBPIA allows you to impose topic bans for topics outside of the ARBPIA "area of conflict". The ban you imposed bans me and Shuki from a number of articles that are outside of any possible interpretation of the area of conflict covered by ARBPIA, such as the article on Shibin el-Kom or articles on random cities in a number of countries. Could I trouble you to take a closer look at how broad this ban is and whether or not it is allowed under ARBPIA? Thanks.  nableezy  - 00:12, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The last entry of the discretionary sanctions remedy allows administrators to take "any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project", which I believe is sufficient. If there are one or more articles that you feel particularly inclined to edit but are prevented from by the topic ban, please specify them and I will consider exempting them on a case-by-case basis. Stifle (talk) 08:07, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

"Kitsch controversy in Sarasota, Florida"
Stifle, would you care to elaborate on your very terse "The result was keep" to Articles for deletion/Kitsch controversy in Sarasota, Florida?

Here are all the not-votes:
 * 1) Markeer not-voted "keep" on the strength of newspaper coverage. I pointed out in response that none of these newspaper articles was about a kitsch controversy in Sarasota, Florida. Nobody later challenged this assertion of mine. (In particular, when Markeer returned two days after I posted this, he/she chose not to respond.)
 * 2) Ethicoaestheticist not-voted "Keep and move to Unconditional surrender (sculpture)." I questioned that. Markeer said I was wrong. I said Markeer was wrong. I shan't summarize all of this here, but would point out that (i) Ethicoaestheticist wrote The so-called kitsch controversy doesn't seem to exist and (ii) your verdict was "keep", not "keep and move".
 * 3) IJA not-voted "Keep, but make it un-essay-fied". I asked IJA what this "it" was -- what it was that merited being de-essay-fied and preserved. No response.

Do you believe that the article (or googling) shows there was a significant "Kitsch controversy in Sarasota, Florida"? If so, what evidence would you adduce for it; and if not, what form do you think the article should take?

This talk page of yours is on my watchlist; you're most welcome to respond here. -- Hoary (talk) 10:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There is no way that a discussion where only the nominator supports deletion can be closed as delete. It would instantly be taken to DRV. Stifle (talk) 11:00, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, in a sense it was one against three. However, and as even a quick reading of the AfD will show, the three didn't agree among themselves. Further: "Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument, and underlying policy (if any)" (here);  and "the closer [of an AfD] is recommended to give a rationale as to how he/she weighed the arguments" (here). -- Hoary (talk) 02:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm fully aware of AFD rules, thank you. Perhaps "no consensus" might have been a more appropriate outcome, but it would also lead to a keep. Stifle (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Nobody at the AfD seemed to notice the existence of Unconditional Surrender (2005), an article about the same work. Given this, please can you clarify what exactly was kept - an article about the 'controversy' or an article about the work. I've renamed the controversy article and worked on de-essaying it, but with two articles now about the same thing it could become a tangled mess. Your help would be much appreciated. Thanks,--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 11:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The closure took place before the move/redirect, so the article that was present at that time was kept. However, nothing is stopping people from engaging in further editorial actions relating to the page. Stifle (talk) 12:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Tell him
If it covers talkpages or not: He is discussing parks and reserves in Israeli-occupied territories. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 11:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Greatest freak out ever
You just deleted this page, after it was nominated for deletion a week ago. That's fine, but I think I'm at least entitled to an explanation given the work that I put into it. The reason given, was lack of notability, yet I referenced many reliable sources that write on the subject, including dailykos, huffington post, know your meme, giantbomb and others. How does that not establish notability. Specifically, could you point me to the section of the wiki guidelines that justify its deletion. ThankyouNoodleki (talk) 14:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Deletion guidelines for administrators. Stifle (talk) 14:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * "If an argument for deletion is that the page lacks sources, but an editor adds the missing references, said argument is no longer relevant." - direct quote. That's exactly what happened here.Noodleki (talk) 16:44, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am happy that my closure reflected the consensus of the discussion and you are welcome to list at WP:DRV if you disagree with it. Stifle (talk) 08:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

For your future reference
Sockpuppet investigations/ElPilotoDi/Archive, should come handy. And by the way, congrats on the marriage. Where did you go for honey moon? — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 09:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Pete Nottage
You closed Articles for deletion/Pete Nottage (2nd nomination) as delete, despite their being three !votes each for "keep" & "delete". How come? Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 14:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question is answered in my FAQs. They're linked at the top of my talk page and in the editnotice. Why not check them out next time?
 * Two of the keep !votes were from IP editors; these are routinely discounted. Stifle (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No, that's not in your FAQ (at least not where I could see it). If IP's comments are "routinely discounted", then that should be made abundantly clear (if it is: where?); or such comments should be prohibited. Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * FAQ entry is under User talk:Stifle/FAQs. WP:DGFA does (in section 2) obliquely point to discounting of !votes from IPs, although I agree it could be made clearer. Stifle (talk) 15:26, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Nothing in that FAQ entry (which I had read) that answers my question. Thank you for the DGFA link (also not in your FAQ). Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)  Andy Mabbett (User: Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 15:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Your assistance please
Could you please userify the full revision history of the following articles? Could you userify their talk pages?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 22:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I will, but please post any future similar requests to WP:REFUND. Stifle (talk) 08:09, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * All done now; talk pages containing only WikiProject banners (along with empty talk pages) have not been included. Stifle (talk) 08:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)