User talk:Stifle/Archive 1208a

Articles for deletion/Office of the president elect
Hi, I just closed Articles for deletion/Office of the president elect as the nominator has withdrawn from the AfD. While this does not always warrant a closure of the AfD, the article in question (United States Office of the President-Elect) has substantially changed in such a way that a closure is warranted in my opinion. If you wish, you can renominate the page for AfD, but the concerns would surely have to be different. Thanks. D ARTH P ANDA duel 03:55, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Your oppose of Cool Hand Luke
Perhaps you know more about the situation than I, but I would just encourage you not to blanket-oppose anyone who has a Wikipedia Review account. While I myself do not have one, I know many pillars of our community do-- New York Brad comes to mind as a shining example of someone who, I think, has used that forum from time to time for meta-discussions.

Obviously, if you know something specifically about the candidate's behavior, I shan't trouble you anymore. But if you just are going on the basic heuristic that people who participate in that forum are generally seen as dramatic, I would encourage you to revisit that assumption and make sure it applies in this specific case.

No reply needed. :) --Alecmconroy (talk) 10:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Images
Hi Stifle, I noticed you've been tagging some Britney Spears related articles (I watchlist them because of the fancraft). I was wondering if you could spare me your thoughts on images of "Special edition" album/single covers that look almost identical to the standard cover image already displayed in articles. I would like to see if we share the same view and if we both deal with them in a similar fashion. I know your an images Wiz and I'm branching in that direction myself. Wisdom appreciated. — Realist  2  11:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * My feeling is that those would almost certainly fail NFCC#3a (using multiple images where one would suffice).
 * Do note that I'm heavily biased towards deleting the entire encyclopedia, though :) Stifle (talk) 11:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, OK. I've been using "disputed fair use" and inserting a copy and paste monologue on why the image is unnecessary. The image does get deleted eventually (it takes 7 days I think). Glad to see we have a very similar viewpoint on it. Would it be possible to consult you if I have any questions in the future? Most the admins I regularly communicate with are not image buffs and obviously aren't keen on handing out advise that might be slightly off. I'm generally up to scratch with images, but there is something new that leaves you confused. — Realist  2  12:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Feel free to drop by at any stage.
 * is probably less monologous than what you're currently using. Stifle (talk) 12:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Cheers, I'll keep in touch. — Realist  2  12:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll certainly weigh into that later today. Only have enough time to check my watchlist then I'm off to Uni :-( — Realist  2  10:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

pokernews.com has been deleted.
Hi, today i did wrote a new page about pokernews.com, our website are also one of the most know poker news site. we are the only site that covers the world series of poker at las-vegas.

Also our site are owned by the well know tony g.

Can you please undelete the page ? and let me understand why you deleted it ?

Regards sydney@pokernews.com
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * Thanks for using my message wizard. However, rather than choosing "other deletion", you would have found the answer you were looking for under "Speedy deletion".
 * pokernews.com 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 it.
 * You may alternatively file a deletion review request. Stifle (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Stifle,
 * Here are some reliable sources for pokernews.com page :
 * WSOP : http://ibusmedia.com/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=37
 * See pokernews.com http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2867651&name=poker
 * See our news at :http://content.usatoday.com/topics/topic/Pokernews.com
 * Pokernews.com are included to google news:http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLL,GGLL:2008-11,GGLL:en&q=site:www.pokernews.com&um=1&tab=wn&scoring=n
 * Let me know if you need more.
 * Regards
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * I will investigate those sources and make a decision in the next 5 hours. Stifle (talk) 13:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the delay. The page has now been restored. Please make sure you add those sources and inline citations to the page, otherwise it may be deleted again. Stifle (talk) 09:18, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The article was speddied for A7, which plainly applies. Sourcing is irrelevant to that, but the sources are all owned by the company, press releases or in a business relationship with them, partners for an event.  If you are unfamiliar with A7 criteria, you should probably leave it to someone else. 2005 (talk) 11:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that is not correct, and I am highly familiar with speedy deletion. The threshold for avoiding speedy deletion under CSD:A7 is intentionally very low — the article must merely give a hint of why the subject might be notable. This article has such a claim — that the company was contracted to be the data provider to the WSOP in 2007 and 2008. Therefore, speedy deletion is not appropriate and PROD or AFD is. Stifle (talk) 11:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Showcase Presents publications
I've de-proded it because I think it should stay, obviously, however, I am interested to know what "indiscriminate list" means. Duggy 1138 (talk) 12:50, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Basically it refers to a list that WP:LC or WP:INDISCRIMINATE applies to. I'll probably AFD it later. Stifle (talk) 12:52, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:LC says: "In general, a "list of X" should only be created if X itself is a legitimate encyclopedic topic that already has its own article" well, since the list of titles in the "Showcase Presents" series comes directly from the Showcase Presents page, I think we're covered there.  WP:INDISCRIMINATE talks about Frequently Asked Questions, Plot summaries, Lyrics databases, Statistics, News reports, this list is non of those.  It is a list of comics published under the banner "Showcase Presents".  If you have a problem with the page I'm willing to discuss it, but I'm still not sure what that problem is.  And, by all means AFD it, that's the next step in the process and if there's any question about a page (and someone deprods) it should be done. Duggy 1138 (talk) 13:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Removed template
Hello! I just removed a template for a discussion you closed a couple of days prior, which you forgot to remove. I hope that is okay. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 17:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. The AFD closure script I used must have screwed up. Stifle (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Take care.  Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 16:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom vote
Hi there! I was hoping I could explain my answer to Lar 2b with a little more depth. In a perfect world, every member of the community would see every policy being drafted and be able to vote on it as such. Every community member would have a voice and would provide input so that we could draft truly comprehensive and enforceable policy that worked towards bettering the encyclopedia instead of governing the community. But we don't live in that perfect world. If we come across that exceedingly rare instance in which the community lacks the will to change or the ability to overcome vested contributors with respect to an obviously flawed policy, I want ArbCom to be able to handle it. This doesn't mean I want ArbCom to start writing original policies or destroying existing ones, I just want them to be able to resolve grey areas. That's all, nothing sinister or power-trippy. --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 18:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Noted. I'll be revisiting all my votes next week anyway to be sure that I'm still happy with them. Stifle (talk) 19:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reconsideration, it's much appreciated. :) --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 19:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed my vote and am happy with it at this time. Stifle (talk) 12:21, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Viktor Muravin
It looks like speedy was declined once, but Sceptre retagged with A7. Since Kurt created the page, perhaps an AfD would be more reasonable just to avoid drama... See Pcap  ping  23:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's probably because I haven't had any coffee today, but I'm missing what this has to do with me. Could I trouble you for a clarification? Stifle (talk) 09:16, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Account Creator Flag
It's okay that you took it away, because I'm generally rediculously inactive for the entire school year, unlike the summer, where most of my edits take place. AP and honors leave me with sparsely a minute of free time after I do all of my assignments. Would your offer to reinstate back the flag still hold true at the beginning of Summer, when I have the time to participate in ACC? Yamakiri TC    [ §]  12-2-2008 • 03:07:04
 * Sure. Feel free to drop by at any time, or if I'm not around then, call to WP:RPE and link this discussion. Stifle (talk) 09:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Clyde Lucas
Dear Stifle,

I emailing regards to my partner, Clyde Lucas. It seems you have deleted him because of Copyright and self promoting. Although he might have self promoted. I do not see any Copyright problems. The bio on his website is from Wikipedia.

There in Nothing in his Bio that is not true.

I have been his partner since 1985.

I would like to undelete his Bio and please let me know what you would like have taken out of his Bio.

Thank you, Derek A. Berry
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * If you wish to have the article restored, please place a notice on www.clydelucas.com or have an email sent from an address ending in @clydelucas.com to permissions-en@wikimedia.org stating that the text is released under version 1.2 or later of the GNU Free Documentation License. Stifle (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Star
Thanks, it did cleaned up nicely. Until the next backlog... Garion96 (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

In response to the proposed deletion of the Trangleball article
I did not invent this sport, nor any of my friends. In fact, I am Israel and the sport originates in the USA. We do, however, play it here, and there are several websites discussing this sport, as well as articles in the news. What more could be required?

advance512 (talk) 21:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You may wish to add citations from reliable sources to the article. Stifle (talk) 09:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Trangleball (2nd nomination)
Since WP:NFT seems not to be the case, you might want to rephrase your nomination or reconsider it. - Mgm|(talk) 22:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Geslen Gas page - Deleted why?
I wish to challenge the deletion of a page that you deleted. Please consider restoring this article. Noblestrawberry (talk) 23:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The page title is Gelsen gas.
 * I have read the reason for deleting the page and I feel it was incorrect because Gelsen Gas is a Nationally Known artist in Mexico who has his works permanently exhibited in UNAM (Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México) and Museo de Arte Moderno (Mexico's National Museum of Modern Art) along side David Alfaro Siqueiros, Diego Rivera and Frida Kahlo. He is well known and respected by many of his contemporaries including Alejandro Jodorowsky whom he directed in his cult film Anticlimax which featured at the Edinburgh International Film Festival and at The Guggenheim Museum in New York. One of his pieces on display at the National Art museum of Mexico titled 'Homenaje a Magritte' - was independently valued at $100,000 USD back in 2000. He has recently been offered a retrospective for next year at the National Museum of Modern Art Mexico and subsequently a Charitable Foundation promoting his works in London and Europe is currently under development. Just last week Once TV aired an interview with him.
 * The following sources back up my claim:
 * http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/press-room/press-releases/press-release-archive/1999/709-june-14-mexperimental-film-series
 * http://www.artesvisuales.com.mx/museos/permanentes/museo.php?PER_CONSECUTIVO=23
 * http://sic.conaculta.gob.mx/ficha.php?table=museo&table_id=658
 * http://servidor.esteticas.unam.mx:16080/%7Ediscrepancia/walkt/source/led705.html
 * Thank you for your request. I'm happy to advise you that this page has now been restored so that the community can better consider its deletion at Articles for deletion/Angel Sanchez Gas. Stifle (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

NZ Classic Car magazine images
Several images were flagged for deletion in NZ Classic Car magazine because of WP:NFCC. I have modified the list as the only one left remaining was a yearbook cover which isn't as relevant as a recent issue cover. The same number of images are still being deleted. Motorracer (talk) 00:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Stifle (talk) 09:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've deleted the image you tagged yourself per WP:CSD. For your own reference if you upload an image (or create a page) and later want it deleted, and there are no other editors, you may tag it db-g7 for deletion. Stifle (talk) 09:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

July 29 in rail transport
I just want to let you know that the July 29 in rail transport ended in a no consensus. I am currently disputing that decision atDeletion review/Log/2008 December 3. If you wish to speak your opinion of the result of the AfD, please do so at the Deletion Review. Thanks for your opinion in the discussion. Tavix (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Stifle (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Question
Could you please redirect or would you be okay with redirects of Debt (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit) and Haunted (Law & Order: Special Victims Unit) to Law_%26_Order:_Special_Victims_Unit_(season_6)? It didn't appear that anyone in the discussion would have opposed a redirect to there. Thanks! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 01:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would have no objection to that; if you wish to merge any of the content then let me know and I will restore the history under a redirect. Stifle (talk) 09:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, I would be happy to merge whatever I can. Thanks!  Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 02:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's done now. Happy merging! Stifle (talk) 09:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I am working on it now. Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 15:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

US-Airport Template
There has been some discussion on the talk page for the US-Airport Template. I was wondering if you would mind viewing the page and possibly commenting on what has been said. Thank you. Template Talk:US-airport - Neilh89 (talk) 04:06, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Stifle (talk) 09:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays


 Marlith  (Talk)  has given you a kitten! Gifts of kittens promote Wikilove and holiday spirt. Hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and raise the holiday spirit! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.  Marlith  (Talk)  04:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

warning
reply. Thanks for the welcome. 86.44.20.50 (talk) 13:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Batman222.jpg
Hi! FYI, I've left a question about your tagging of Image:Batman222.jpg at Media copyright questions. Cheers! --Captain Infinity (talk) 18:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Gelsen Gas
Thanks for reinstating the page. Can I ask you to send me the content as I intend to improve upon it and add to it over the coming weeks and substantiate some more of the sources. Thanks Noblestrawberry (talk) 18:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The content has already been restored. Stifle (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

land yacht (automobile)
You deleated the land yacht article, because Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

I understand and agree that it is not, but this article was not a mere defination.

Would you delete "muscle car", "sports car", "pickup truck" or "Chevrolet"? They are are all automobiles and one could argue that the article "automobile" should include all that information. I feel such an article would be too long and it's easier for the user to find information in a "sports car" article or a "pickup truck' article. The "Land yacht" article should be undeleated, because it also contains information specific to a narrowly defined rage of vehicles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdbailey (talk • contribs) 22:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?
 * I will consider undeleting this article if you provide details of where it has been written about in newspapers or reliable sources. Stifle (talk) 22:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Old Bot Request
I was looking through some old archives of WP:BOTREQ and found a request for a PUI bot. I can code a bot to do this if it is still needed. LegoKontribsTalkM 06:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That would be greatly appreciated. Stifle (talk) 09:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Bots/Requests for approval/Legobot 10 LegoKontribsTalkM 01:50, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The bot is now running and should update one minute after midnight. LegoKontribsTalkM 02:08, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Non-encyclopedic content? Theological dispute? Personal research?
In my opinion, you are not being consistent in your evaluation. What is expressed in the article "The Masculine Gender ...," though perhaps inferior in writing style to the article "Comma Johanneum," from which it is linked, is no more non-encyclopedic in content and no more a theological dispute and no more personal research than what is expressed in the article "Comma Johanneum."

In both articles, the subject is the Johannine Comma. In both articles, there is disagreement on whether or not the Comma belongs in the text. In both articles, different sources expressing the various views on the subject are cited. In neither article is the author's personal opinion stated. None of the the three views presented in the article "The Masculine Gender ..." is the author's personal invention. To the contrary, those are in fact the three views that have been held by various people regarding this subject, as confirmed by the two cited sources. That is in fact what is out there.

So what's all this talk about "non-encyclopedic content" and "theological dispute" and "personal research?" If those accusations are true of the article "The Masculine Gender ...," then they are also true of the article "Comma Johanneum." Conversely, if they are not true of the article "Comma Johanneum," then neither are true of the article "The Masculine Gender ...." In applying these accusations to the one article but not to the other, you are not being consistent in your evaluation and you are showing personal prejudice. I submit that the article in question demonstrates more neutrality than do the ones who are making these accusations against it.

As for the writing style, maybe the article is inferior in style. Perhaps YOU should fix it instead of complaining about it and asking for its deletion. I myself don't know how to write it better than it is written. However, the information presented in the article is valid information, and it is NOT personal research, and it IS pertinent to the information presented in the the article "Comma Johanneum," and it DOES cite two sources (Dr. Wallace and Dr. Hills; if you click the links ["pages 331-332" and "chapter 8" in the text of the article], you can read what they say about it yourself) that attest to the three views which have been held by various people regarding this subject, which are explained in the article in question.

7Jim7 (talk) 14:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if there's anything I can say which will change your mind, but if you feel that any other Wikipedia article that should not be included, feel free to nominate it for deletion using the deletion process. Stifle (talk) 14:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

land yacht
I see your point that the term "land yacht" is slang, but I hate for that information to be lost. What do you think about placing it under "sedan"? I would be willing to edit it.Kdbailey (talk) 15:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for using my message wizard. However, you selected the wrong option — you should have selected "Proposed deletion" rather than "speedy deletion".
 * If you wish, I can restore the article land yacht (Automobile) and redirect it to sedan (car). You can then use the history to merge the content into that article. Stifle (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deacom Inc.
I wish to challenge this deletion - as I have done so in the past. Please review my talk page for previous "speedy deletion" lift.


 * There is no rational reason for this deletion based on other company stub articles in the same genre. Review BatchMaster and Consona - the Deacom Inc. company stub article was modeled identically from the BatchMaster and Consona company stub articles. Not to mention that the speedy deletion was lifted (review my talk page) back at the beg. of Nov. I so much disagree with this deletion and am asking for reconsideration. Thank you in advance for reconsidering.

And forgive my being a newbie on Wikipedia and not knowing where the heck to post my responses... it's certainly not clear or easy. Thanks. Vdc ent (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Deacom Inc. 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 it.
 * You may alternatively file a deletion review request.
 * I note that an administrator chose not to delete the article earlier in November. This was because the article was requested for deletion on the basis of being an advertisement, but Cunard chose not to delete it on that basis. That does not remove the possibility of the article being deleted for other reasons.
 * If you feel that other articles should not be included in Wikipedia, you are welcome to recommend their deletion using the deletion process. Stifle (talk) 16:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

land yacht
Yes, please redirect and I will try to merge. Thank you Kdbailey (talk) 19:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Stifle (talk) 19:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Frontier Ruckus potential deletion
I am a bit confused as to why the Frontier Ruckus article has been flagged for deletion. Can you provide any information as to why this is the case? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.253.190 (talk) 22:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You will find more information about this at Articles for deletion/Frontier Ruckus. Stifle (talk) 09:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I have reviewed the criteria and protocol required of an artist or musician page and I am still unclear as to your objection. I have also noted that several other administrators have weighed in, suggesting to keep the site. What sort of consensus needs to be reached in order to remove the deletion rhetoric at the top of the page? 71.205.253.190 (talk) 00:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Recovering the contents of the "IUS Engineering Group" article
Dear Stifle,

Would you kindly provide me with a copy of the recently deleted article "IUS Enginnering Group". It seems that the article was not mature enough for publication and so we decided to work more on it, off-line, and only try to put it on-line again when we are sure it will not be deleted again. Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of this article (that was being constructed with the help of some other IUS faculties around the world) and would be thankful if you could send me by email or put it in my restricted area in Wikipedia. I'm new to Wikipedia and apologise for this inconvenience.

Best Regards,

Hemerson Pistori Dom Bosco Catholic University - Brazil http://www.gpec.ucdb.br/pistori —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemerson.pistori (talk • contribs) 02:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * I've sent it to your registered email address. Stifle (talk) 09:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Crahan All Hope Is Gone DVD.jpg
Hey man, just wanted to know how it fails that policy when I have explained in the fair-use rationale how I believe it passes that. So to quote myself; "The photo is being used solely for informational purposes and its inclusion in the article adds significantly to the article because the photo and its historical significance are the object of discussion in the article." The photo does increase the readers understanding of the topic because it shows one of the band members working on it. REZTER  TALK &oslash;  14:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Same again... to quote myself: "The image is used for identification in the context of critical commentary of the work for which it served as a promotional image. It makes a significant contribution to the user's understanding of the article, which could not practically be conveyed by words alone." The image is used to visually identify the masks they used during their promotion. Also, see the replaceable? section of the image. REZTER  TALK &oslash;  14:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?
 * While you have written that, it is my case that neither image actually contributes to readers' understanding of the article. They are used only to decorate and as well they are replaceable by a textual description of the content of the image.
 * You have several options on where to go forward from here:
 * If you agree with my explanation why the images are not usable on Wikipedia, you may tag them as db-g7 and they will be deleted shortly.
 * If you would like one other administrator to adjudicate whether the images are usable on Wikipedia or not, do nothing. In approximately a week, a neutral administrator will decide whether or not to delete the image or remove the tag.
 * If you still feel that the images meet all the criteria at WP:NFCC, you may remove the deletion tags from the images. However, I will then nominate them for consideration of deletion by the community at WP:IFD.
 * If you require further information on image copyright, please see Media copyright questions. Stifle (talk) 14:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review
An editor challenged your decision at Articles for deletion/Ashkenazi intelligence (3rd). The discussion is at Deletion_review/Log/2008_December_5. Cheers. —BradV 05:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: The guy with the Glasses AfD deja-vu
I saw that this AfD was just closed, and I knew I remembered a previous AfD further back than either one listed. After a little searching, I found this from back in June. I don't know if it's really to relevant now that the AfD is closed, but it should probably be linked to the closed AfDs or something as it was obviously on the same subject, so I am bringing it to your attention as the most recent closing admin. Thanks Beeblebrox (talk) 09:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to let you know, after reviewing this further and at the suggestion of your talk page wizard, I have taken this to DRV. Beeblebrox (talk) 11:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Image
Hi Stifle, replied at mine, sorry, I never meant to tag it under copyright vio. It's a music video so they need a fair use claim. He say's he created the image himself which is impossible unless he was the director. If they want to use the image a fair use rational is needed. Sorry about the tagging mix up. Bad day. — Realist  2  23:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:BustaRhymes3.jpg
I think this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BustaRhymes3.jpg ) is a valid & necc pic. It's a screencap of the We Made It (song) music vid. Why do you think it should be deleted? Thx. 70.108.141.137 (talk) 01:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read Non-free content criteria. I feel that this image does not meet criterion 8. Stifle (talk) 12:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look
Image:Chinese crossbow man.jpg and Image:Peruvian crossbow usage.jpg were uploaded without specifying a source and their fair use is as problematic as Image:Serbia crossbow usage.jpg. I wouldn't mind if they were used to illustrate modern use of crossbows, but I have doubts that the user who uploaded them described them correctly. The Chinese crossbow man looks conspiciously like a policeman. Thanks Wandalstouring (talk) 17:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've deleted one of them; the other two are marked for deletion as bad fair use. Thanks for dropping by. Stifle (talk) 18:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Behind The Set Deletion
Dear Stifle,

I'm confused as to why you deleted the Behind The Set page. The page was a starting point for people to modify and more to the point. It was created based upon several other pages that are still in existence, including Hulu, Veoh, etc.

There were several Wikipedial users that found this page useful based on the fact that they came to the Behind The Set website by using the link on the page.

I'm hopeful that you'll reverse this decision. The only other possible "fair" thing to do is to go through and delete most of the company pages that are in existence (which doesn't really make sense).

Best wishes.

Chris Squires —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.245.33.47 (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message. In future, please sign your messages by typing ~ at the end.
 * I notice that you used my message wizard but you chose "other deletion reason" when the correct reason you should have chosen was "Speedy deletion".
 * Behind the Set 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 it.
 * You may alternatively file a deletion review request.
 * If you feel other articles on Wikipedia do not meet the criteria for inclusion, you're free to recommend their deletion through the deletion process. Stifle (talk) 09:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 03:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Further to request to reinstate Simon Chorley Art & Antiques, to be further worked on from my TAS06 page
I am just confirming that the message you left on my page, where I was working on Simon Chorley Art & Antiques before I moved it, has been replied to - when and where you suggested. Thank you for your recommendations and I hope you will be able to allow the page to be further improved as you suggested.

User:TAS06
 * Replying on your talk. Stifle (talk) 12:31, 9 December 2008 (UTC)