User talk:Tbsdy lives/Archive 4

Re: Your suggestion on incivility blocking
Looks like the definition of incivility is broad enough to deal with my concerns. I think you guys have a pretty solid policy forming there.  Azure Fury  (talk | contribs) 14:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Awesome... :-) We certainly put a lot of effort into it! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 14:35, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.
Thank you for the kinds words. I'm taking a few days break from Wikipedia whilst I get on top of my uni work, but when I get back I look forward to the possibility of working with you in the future. Best regards, Alan16 (talk) 14:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC).
 * No probs - we need more people like you around Alan! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 14:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Jym fitness
Hi Tbsdy,

I'm fairly new to Wiki and I was wondering if you would be able to help me out. A page I created Jym fitness was deleted and I was wondering what I can do to the page so it is more suitable and more of a benefit to the Wikipedia community. For example I don't understand the difference between the page I made and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitbit any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you

Dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidshelf (talk • contribs) 21:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm a bit suprised that the Fitbit article hasn't been taken to articles for deletion also. However, this article seems to be cited in quite a few more reliable sources, such as TechCrunch, the MIT Technical Review, and it shows notability in that it was launced at TechCruch50. While I'm sure that a lot of effort has been put into the device you have invented (kudos on Aussie entrepreneurship - we need more of that!) unfortunately as of yet there isn't enough to show that it is significant enough that it should have an entry in Wikipedia. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:24, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi thank you for clarifying it a little bit although being new to Wiki the whole concept still seems a little strange to me. Unfortunately I’m not the inventor but work in the media, in Australia and met with the inventors and thought it would be good to have another local Aussie invention on Wiki. So basically if this invention is published with favourable or unfavourable reviews on some trusted internet blogs it can be displayed on wiki? It just doesn’t seem right to me that there where no external links where anyone could profit compared to numerous Wiki pages were they link to their own page.

What do I need to do to have this page reinstated? Sorry If it seems like I’m having a go I just really don’t understand.

Thank you for your time,

Dave —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidshelf (talk • contribs) 03:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Dave, I totally understand your concerns. Let's discuss this on your talk page so you don't have to keep looking at my own talk page. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 03:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Article deleted - Mobile Media advertising en España
Hi, First of all, Congrats for the baby, I hope everything it is okay and you will be back soon.

I have a message in my box telling me that you have deleted an article that I wrote: "Mobile Media advertising en España" According to you, the article contained duplicate content from other article (Marketing mobile). I understand that maybe both articles have similar titles, but I would like to notice you that mine analyzes marketing mobile "In Spain" and it was written in Spanish.

The content is about the development of one specifical area of marketing in mobile marketing and it is focus in Spain.

Please, I would like to ask you to consider my article. I am sociologist and I am researching about the effects of mobile advertising over Spanish society, excluding the formats of ads (the table included in the article) the rest of the content is completely different.

Thanks in advanced.

Regards P. Martinez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinezpat (talk • contribs) 17:17, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Martinezpat, thank you for bring this to my attention. However, as this is the English Wikipedia we cannot accept content written in Spanish. Have you considered the Spanish Wikipedia, as it would probably be more appropriate adding the article there. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Your Essay
Regarding your essay you wrote about appealing to Jimbo on things.....Have you considered on his page he makes the direct statement...."Contacting me directly with a complaint should be reserved for after you have exhausted all other remedies." Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I hadn't... but the essay doesn't say never to appeal to Jimbo, only that it almost never works and can be counter-productive. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * wELL YOU HAVE ME THERE...,ROFSD (ROLLING ON THEFLOOR STONEDRINK)Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha
Hi. Thanks for deleting Gotcha. See the recreation at User:Samwb123/GotchaTemplate (hint, hint). There is a related discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Gotcha. Cheers, Jack Merridew 18:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jack, I have participated in the deletion discussion. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll Take A Look
I probably should have been clearer, my main concern is rouge admins going into IAR mode and using an incivility block as a bludgeon against users they don't like or it turning misunderstood and prickly editors into vandals. I'm not against your concept, only worried about it due to those two things.

However, if there's a way I can help iron those two things out and get your idea into policy, I think it'd be a great asset to Wikipedia. Doc Quintana (talk) 20:15, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Doc :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

ImmersiVision
Tbsdy,

I am fairly new to Wikipedia and I am just in the process of creating the first of several pages. The one I am working on right now just got removed I believe. Wondering if you could put it back up so that I might be able to complete it.

Google Streetview came about due to the evolution of a concept that was pioneered by ImmersiVision. There is some very significant relevance from this company to a whole group of related companies which were spawned from the concepts developed by ImmersiVision Interactive Technologies Inc.

It would be much appreciated if you would reverse this removal.

iVision4u —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivision4u (talk • contribs) 06:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I am happy to review, however before I do I need you to register a new name that is more appropriate. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:04, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Tbsdy, If you could help me out, I just started editing in Wikipedia and have not really figured out the processes or all the mark-up as of yet. I think there has been a misunderstanding. I use to work for the company I was posting about but that was years ago. I was posting because I am more familiar with the history of that technology than anyone else. I would sincerely like to learn the process for posting and continue posting other pages as well.--BCJade (talk) 07:38, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure... let me post our welcome message on your talk page first, and then when you've read through some of the guides did you want to come back here and we can discuss the article? BTW, I'm sorry that you got blocked, we just have to be careful about conflicts of interest. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I assume I should keep this new username? I would like to review the post on ImmersiVision after I have had a chance to work with the sandbox and other processes a bit more. I think it is a post worth finishing. ImmersiVision was the original streetview technology and ImmersiVisions concepts spawned the birth of a lot of other companies and in the process generated a significant amount of relevance. --BCJade (talk) 07:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi BCJade, I figured I should chime in since I was the one who initially nominated your article for speedy deletion. Please take a look at WP:CORP and see the guidelines for notability for organisations and companies. It's important to note that the company itself must be notable, not just the technology it works with. I know the policy is a bit of a handful at first, but please do check it out. If you need any assistance, feel free to leave a message on my talk page and I'll try to help as well. Sorry for hijacking your talk page Tbsdy. X X X antiuser eh? 07:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs. I've restored the article and moved it to User:BCJade/ImmersiVision. But it might be worthwhile establishing notability before moving to the main namespace. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:04, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You have all been a great help. It will be a pleasure to post and work with you guys on a regular basis. You seem to be very down-to-earth. --BCJade (talk) 08:08, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Midsomer Norton, Radstock & District Journal
I blanked Talk:Midsomer Norton, Radstock & District Journal to remove wildbot's G7 tag. While I was looking fro the correct project banner, you delted the page. I added the proper banner, and then undeleted to preserve the history. This not is a courtesy to indicate why I may have seems to overrule your deletion.

BTW I now routinely decline any and all G7 speedy requests by wikdbot. DES (talk) 07:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Argh! This is the second time now! Sorry DES. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, race conditions happen. But I wish that bot would stop. DES (talk) 07:20, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:AIN you might be interested in.
Hi Tbsdy Lives, I noticed you've had a run-in with User:Nothughthomas as well. I have started a thread at WP:AIN regarding an incident I had with her today. You might want to take a look or chime in. Cheers! X X X antiuser eh? 07:17, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh brother, not that editor again. I've made a comment. I'd advise leave them alone for the time being and let admins handle this one. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's what I figured - I don't understand it, all I did was change a CSD tag and try to explain the policy to them and they just started going off on me and accusing me of threatening/offending them and whatnot. Thanks for commenting. X X X antiuser eh? 07:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There is something not quite right with that editor I'm afraid. Read their user page to see what I mean. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh boy, here we go. X X X antiuser eh? 08:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Dude, don't respond. Let them go for it, the rest of the admins on the board will soon work out who is in the wrong. I've made my recommendation, I'm going to let another admin work out what to do. But please don't respond again to that editor. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:11, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Noted. I just felt like some accusations needed to be addressed, but that'll be my last comment on that discussion unless I'm asked by an admin to comment again. X X X antiuser eh? 08:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I would not be concerned about the accusation, it will be discounted by pretty much every admin on Wikipedia. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I bloody hope so. She still doesn't get it that I declined her speedy because she was using the wrong criterion, and instead assumes I'm some UFO conspiracy nut. I didn't even know who the subject of the article was! :) X X X antiuser eh? 08:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting, she balks at my "lobbying" then goes and does the same thing. X X X antiuser eh? 08:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Like I say, no need to worry. Your reputation is intact. :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:43, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
SS ✞(Kay) 07:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Wikipedians against kitten abuse
I have nominated wikipedians against kitten abuse for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheers. I've opposed the deletion, but won't at all be upset if it is deleted. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 14:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Jim In Miami w-Hat.jpg
Hi, Tbsdy lives! I don't need 5 days, because the photographer contacted me back already (I posted his e-mail on the talk page, and I can show you the e-mail I sent him if needed). My question is this: if David Levine can't find Jeff Simon (and he's in negotiations with the publisher of the book who, as he claims, falsely credits Simon), can WP not simply list the source as Jeff Simon and keep the image? If the man can't be found to work out copyright disputes with the publisher, how can WP face a copyright issue? What do you think? Thank you... Doc9871 (talk) 04:02, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, that's an easy one. You need to file an Open-source Ticket System ticket with the volunteer response team. They will be able to certify the image. Great work - wonderful that you've been able to save this image from deletion :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 04:22, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Awesome! How exactly should I file it?  It looks complicated... Do I include the e-mails from Levine?  I'm not terribly savvy with this part of the process (in that I've never done it before :>)... Doc9871 (talk) 04:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Try Contact us/Permit. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 04:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks! Best to "learn by doing", I agree :> Doc9871 (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to be honest: I've never filed an OTRS ticket before myself :-) But I know that's where you go if you need to! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 04:44, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Heheee! Cool; I'll provide them with all the details.  I'm still psyched that a guy who took pictures at that concert e-mailed me!  I complimented him specifically on the picture of Jim holding the lamb and smiling (see his webpage).  I'll sort it out... Doc9871 (talk) 04:50, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'll just jump in here. Tbsdy, I infer that you intended to close the FfD as keep with respect to everything except the questionable sourcing. Unless this image is freely licensed via OTRS, I intend to take this to DRV because the FfD should have been closed as delete as the image fails NFCC.8 ÷seresin 04:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That is fine by me. But give Doc9871 some time to sort out the OTRS submission. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 05:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I sent them an e-mail with all the official correspondence between me and Mr. Levine. We'll see if it makes it into the Commons; and I really hope it does.  An irreplaceable image of a deceased celebrity at the concert that ended the band's performance career.  All that's really needed is better written content concerning the incident in the article body... Doc9871 (talk) 05:23, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, Tbsdy lives! I just wanted to let you know that I haven't received any response yet from the e-mail I sent to the place you recommended, permissions-commonswikimedia.org.  I'm going to contact one of the administrators directly who watch that project right after I send you this message; but I'm still aware of the five days you allowed me to get this done.  I have concrete, irrefutable proof of my full correspondence with photographer David Levine, and I'm surprised that he got back to me so much faster than WP has yet to.  This image should clearly be in the WP Commons, but I don't want it to get "re-nominated" FFD because of a probable backload.  I've never been in this situation before.  Could I please have an extension, considering the evidence I have already put forth (and am quite eager to present to the appropriate channel)?  I appreciate any consideration you can give in this unique situation... Doc9871 (talk) 08:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, no probs. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Keisha
Hi :)

Error is probably on my part here, but I"m really confused as to what's going on with the moving of this page. Could you clarify please? Thanks. SS  ✞(Kay) 07:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * TBSDY, have you looked into this? I didn't want to treat on your acts, but it looks to me as if the move that was intended is reasonable, and your action made it a trifle harder. Would you object if i carried out the move, in the process undoing your action on this matter? I happened to notice this when reading your talk page on the adjacent matter. DES (talk) 16:04, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry I now see you've already attended to the matter, my apologies. DES (talk) 16:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs - the answer will always be yes, btw. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:BEFORE
Before nominating more articles at AFD, please reread WP:BEFORE, which requests that you consider tagging an article which needs inline references, and which requests that you make an effort to see if sources exist to substantiate notability. Please see my comments at Articles for deletion/Chris Baines. He has been a much quoted author and presenter on several network television programs. I strongly agree with you that many articles are about subjects lacking notability, but not every poorly referenced article should go straight to AFD if sources exist and are easy to find. Thanks for your hard work to weed out the non-notable. Edison (talk) 17:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your note. I have been going through the dab page Chris and added a few articles I considered non-notable to AFD. I take your concerns on board, but also ask you to consider that I have added a number of articles to AFD that really weren't notable. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:09, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Tsbdy, I honestly wasn't following you, I bumped into the Chris Baines deletion proposal by chance, I'd gone to the current deletion proposals after a reminder of a previous intervention. But the Chris Baines proposal is actually quite a good example of why Wikipedia contributors flip.  The article you wanted to delete had lots of information there, its general accuracy was easily checkable, all that was needed to alert readers to the absence of verification was a flag (and making sure readers aren't misled is the object of the whole exercise, I presume), so no harm would be done letting the article rest as it was until someone with time and energy came along and filled the gaps.  Rules are rules, but Wikipedia is a very large place and priorities communicate their own message.  For some reason you were happy to throw it all away.


 * I understood that the basic vision for Wikipedia was an assembly of all knowledge in one place - information readily accessible to those who need it. Good ideas need structure to achieve their goal.  The Wikipedia rules are there to avoid the user of the information being mislead.  They are very important but it's also important for them to be applied in a way that ensures that their basic purpose isn't perverted - they still facilitate the use of Wikipedia's assemblage of information.


 * It's also important not to destroy the impetus to contribute. People (like Bosniak, to pluck an example from nowhere in particular) with a stock of knowledge about a subject tend to have a lot of information they are anxious to have codified in Wikipedia - information they may legitimately regard as important beyond their personal preoccupations.  They create articles, though quite often they do it imperfectly.  Getting it done is the prime consideration, because they have a distance to cover.  They often leave expansion and polishing to others, which is after all one of the basic ideas of Wikipedia, though that doesn't mean that they haven't put a fair amount of work into what they've created.


 * Then along comes someone - maybe well-intentioned. maybe with other, subtle, less well-intentioned motives - who issues an ultimatum and then proceeds to jettison information about what is sometimes literally a matter of life and death, not in favour of something better but in favour of a void.


 * I get annoyed (personal point of view I know) when this is done to an article like Chris Baines, or Harish Gaonkar (Marcello Guido's deletion I opposed but it was prima facie reasonable). Losing that information means that someone is eventually going to start from scratch again and waste their time recompiling all or perhaps only some of the information, while potential users have been deprived of it in the interim.


 * (However important the subjects, the availability at Wikipedia of the information those articles contain is nevertheless - personal point of view, I know - secondary in importance on the global scale to information about subjects that have real consequences for lives in the world in which we all actually live, crimes against humanity, for example, that are being discussed in ignorance of the information scattered throughout the public domain. That information is important above all to people who know that it is important.)


 * Civility is not simply a matter of refraining from abusive language. Ignoring the impact of formally legitmate actions is equally uncivil.  Over the three and a half years that I've been involved with Wikipedia editing I've seen quite a lot of malevolence provoking stupid reactions from people whose basic preoccupation is to get on with what they regard as important, who react with impatience when they feel their time and effort is being purposelessly wasted.  They understandably react with sometimes an increasingly short fuse to what they see as obstruction and sabotage.  But at least obstruction and sabotage acknowledges the fundamental value and importance of the subject.


 * Where people are genuinely working together conventional "manners" are important. No question.  But civility goes beyond language and personal attack.  It includes respect for what other people do and the commitment they have made.  I'd urge you not to set the destruction of people's work in motion without thinking about the wider consequences. Opbeith (talk) 10:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Apologies if I've gone over the top a bit, but it's a subject that as you can see I do feel rather strongly about - I'm afraid you ended up in the line of fire when I let off steam. Opbeith (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC).
 * No, not at all. That's quite a well reasoned and polite note on my talk page. I will endeavour to be more careful in future when submitting to AFD. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 12:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Opbeith (talk) 13:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs - a pleasure to actually have someone make a cogent argument on my talk page for once. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 13:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

More from Nothughthomas
Now she's commenting on my ER... WP:Editor review/antiuser. I feel like I have to reply but at the same time I don't want to fuel the drama. Funny, since I've been on WP for 4 and a half years and over 3000 edits without so much as a warning while she's only been around for 3 months and has been blocked 3 times already. X X X antiuser eh? 19:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree... definitely getting disruptive. I've removed her comments from your review page. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Could you maybe chime in at Wikipedia talk:Editor review/antiuser? You seem to be better at articulating their madness than myself. By the way, congratulations on being a new dad! X X X antiuser eh? 03:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Human Rights Believer (II appearance)
is obvious sock of.

By comparing contributions, you will see that Mex Ray Trex reverted all my recent edits, with same revert stile as HRB, and both of them edited Jason Taylor (guitarist)‎ article. Also, Mex Ray Trex edit summary "Serbo-nationalist, goodbye" is also quite familiar. For more info, i am here. --Tadija (talk) 20:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm nobody's sockpuppet. I personally attack nobody, I am not impolite like Human Rights Believer and I don't evade topic bands. Thankyou. Mex Ray Trex (talk) 20:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Blocked, see User_talk:MuZemike. --Tadija (talk) 21:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

X X X antiuser eh? 06:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Ok, i agree completely. We needed urgent reaction, so i hoped that you are online, and you are familiar with situation. Hope that i will never need WP:AN/I for this kind of action again. Anyway, thank you, all best! --Tadija (talk) 13:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
File:BridgnorthCliffRailway-looking-down.jpg IngerAlHaosului (talk) 16:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I am so confused :( Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 16:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Not so confused now... but somewhat suprised to see a massive picture of what looked to be a tram on a terrifyingly steep gradient taking up a large proportion of my user talk page! :-) I've responded... I think it's a criteria confusion issue. CSD #F8, not CSD #G8. It's all terribly confusing. Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 16:11, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Editor review/antiuser
With respect to your coments at the above-captioned talk page, I have acceded to However, I note that your tone is unnecessarily minatory and disagreeable. It is certainly not becoming of an admin. Bongo  matic  10:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no talkback or other comment on my talk page is required.
 * your order "don't readd it back in again" by not re-inserting the commentary; and
 * your implicit threat that "we'd better get some answers".
 * Your sarcastic assertion that the contributor should apply to oversight when they were clearly concerned with how the editor review would reflect upon their reputation was unwarranted. You also reverted the review, even though it was by a troll/disruptive editor who has now been indefinitely blocked. Furthermore the "review" (if you could call it that) contained unsubstantiated assertions that the editor was a POV-pusher. Unfortunately, I must continue, as you also said that editors who put themselves up for review should just take these sort of comments from such editors, and there is nothing they can do to it. That is ridiculous, if this was the case then I doubt anyone would put themselves forward - certainly these people have a great deal of courage for doing so, and I believe they should be sheltered from unreasonable attack. You also cited the purpose of the editor review, but you neglected to say in what way the review was constructive, and more to the point you forgot to note that normal behavioural policies are expected and the norm for each editor review. I stand by my comments. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 10:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I totally and unreservedly retract the statement that asserts Bongomatic was being sarcastic about oversight. This was a failure of WP:AGF, was unwarranted and it was unfortunate I made this statement. I apologise to Bongomatic for any distress this may have caused. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Apology accepted. No distress caused in the first place. The point about GF at the discussion, and about your tone and (potentially unintentional but nonetheless perceived) veiled threats here has nothing to do with the merits of who is right or wrong. As you are an administrator, such actions are particularly regrettable as they come with an implicit possibility of a summary block&mdash;and in the process suggest that you might decide to take administrative action on issues that you have become involved in as an editor&mdash;a perception I'm sure you do not intend to project. Bongo  matic  01:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I would definitely not have blocked you over this issue. I'm sorry about my tone, but I was extremely concerned about the review that was posted, which in my view and the view of others (and now confirmed by the original editor) was an attack on AntiUser and not meant to be constructive. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 01:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * As I said, no distress caused (I have a reasonably thick skin), and I posted my comments here (you may have seen that I had originally put them at the review talk page) because they were for your consideration as an editor and an admin, not to air any personal grievances. I have no more to say on either the review or your actions relating thereto. Bongo  matic  01:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you, your comments are noted and appreciated. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 01:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
IngerAlHaosului (talk) 17:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Hemispheres
Sorry about inundating you with these pages, as you can see it's my first time trying to make a wiki article. I just realized I'm not allowed to just copy and paste from our website. Thanks again, I'll make a new one in my own words —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cblack01 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If you are associated with the website, please read Conflict of interest, and in particular Conflict of interest. We do appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Scribble Maps
Hello,

I am new to Wikipedia so I am trying to understand. What separates a stand-alone application (which are listed in bulk on Wikipedia) from a rich internet application, and what constitutes importance? Scribble Maps is the first flash based RIA that has full layer support for KML. I would like your advice on how I could of improved the article.

Thanks,

JonathanDMWagner (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Jonathan, the problem with the article is that it didn't seem to have any reliable third party references. I am happy to undelete and move to your userspace to work on this, or alternatively I can undelete and take it to Articles for deletion where further community discussion can be had.
 * If you are associated with Scribble Maps then may I suggest reading up on our article on confict of interest before you continue, if you haven't already. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I am in a COI, but I tried to stay as neutral as possible, so I would like it to be moved to the articles for deletion so it can be at they very least debated, and made as neutral as possible. If someone comes to wikipedia and types in Scribble Maps, they're looking for information on this application, so I would like that information to be there. As for references, all kinds come up on Google. JonathanDMWagner (talk) 08:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Jonathan, I've now restored it and added it to AFD. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

G7 speedy of talk page
Hello. The creator of Talk:C. James Block is asking there why you G7'd it: could you please reply there? Thanks, MuffledThud (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The only edits were by a bot. I will respond there. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Telecast Show
Hi! We seemed to be reviewing the article at the same time. I was just declining the CSD, just as you were deleting it! I was also going to revert it to the last time it was a redirect, only because the page has been a redirect for a significant period of time in the past, so it should be deleted by RFD, or reverted to the redirect. I agree that the article shouldn't exist in it's "Up and coming You Tube sketch show", but I don't think it is a straight-forward deletion. Anyway, I'm not into wheel-warring, so I thought I would run it past you first. Would you object to me pulling up the old redirect version? Stephen! Coming... 23:11, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs, if you think it isn't a speedy deletion candidate I have no issues with you undeleting :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:15, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorted. Having had a look at what it redirects to, I think it might be a candidate for RFD.  I'll have to look at it when I have a bit more time.  At the moment, my bed is calling! Stephen! Coming... 23:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Marina 106
I was in the middle of adding more information (including additional references) when you deleted it. Did you not see the hangon or the (brief) discussion on the talk page? I reckoned I would have a few hours at least. Astronaut (talk) 23:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be best to take this to WP:DRV, it was previously listed for deletion. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Closing Ffd Debates
Hi formerly Ta bu shi da yu. Just a courtesy note. For images that have been deleted without comment in Ffd (such as the ones I have done where they are uncontested), User:AnomieBOT can do the closure and save you an edit. I see that you are closing the one for File:JD Salinger.jpg - I have been looking at this today and deciding if I have time to close it, but have not yet analysed the debate (though I can see the OTRS complaint) - I hope you chose wisely as any decision is going to be contentious - Peripitus (Talk) 03:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah... no probs. I'll let the bot do these in future. Sorry about that. I'm still reading through the J. D. Salinger deletion. I'm a fool for getting involved, no matter what I do I know that someone is going to scream at me. As I said in the edit summary... this is going to take a while. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 03:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

One more thing - there is a very useful script - see the first line of USer:Peripitus/monobook.js for FfD's. It displays a thumbnail image of non-deleted files next to the debate. Incredibly useful I find - Peripitus (Talk) 03:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice. Well, I've just written a mammoth justification for that J.D. Salinger image decision. Hopefully that will be the end of it, but something tells me it won't. We'll see. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 05:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

How was FormatFactory spam?
It survived an AfD not long ago: Articles_for_deletion/FormatFactory Pcap ping  06:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops? I will restore. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 06:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yingli Solar yadda yadda AfD
So there's another duplicate, Yingli Solar. My suggestion is we redirect the other two to this page, and do the rewrite there. Thoughts? Throwaway85 (talk) 07:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Help Me
I would like to ask for guidance how to make an article page that contains general information about the TOP 1 Oil. I have tried to create a page about it but you say that my page was breaching unambiguous advertising or promotion issue. I tried to compare my writing with an article that talked about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrol Castrol Brand, and my writing seems to have the content that is not much different from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrol pages. Thanks for your help. (Ainsleycole (talk) 10:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC))
 * Hi Ainsleycole, I think the main reason that it got flagged as an advertisement is that you used a number of superlatives in describing the company. This is suitable for marketing literature and advertisements, but is strictly not allowed in Wikipedia. I strongly recommend that you read our neutral point of view policy before recreating the article. You must also be able to find external sources that demonstrate the notability of the company, unfortunately these can only largely come from reliable sources. Please see Verifiable sources for more information on this.
 * If you could provide me with some verifiable sources that give information on the significance of this company, then I will consider unsalting the article and restore it to a page in your userspace, after which you can edit this freely. When it is finally ready, please only then consider moving to main article space.
 * Alternatively, I can undelete the article and submit it to Articles for deletion, however in its current form I must warn you that it will almost certainly be deleted. The other alternative is that you can contest my deletion at deletion review. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Re Crillon Fashion Show (Hoax?)
Hallo I see you decided to delete this article referring to it as a Hoax. It may sound a bit ridiculous to you that this kind of event is so popular in this day and age.

Everything in it is factually correct. Let me now what kind of evidence you need if you don't believe me! There are no links to newspaper articles that exist, because in 1991 they were not on line and haven't been put on line since.

Kind regards

Fiona —Preceding unsigned comment added by Divento (talk • contribs) 10:43, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Fiona, I apologise for deleting it as a hoax, the following may be cold comfort but I have undeleted and deleted as a non-notable event. Certainly I do not mean to have offended with that deletion reason, unfortunately that was what it was tagged as and this is what I deleted as. For the record, I don't find it ridiculous at all, my mother loves these sort of things and she is a woman of good taste, if somewhat old fashioned.


 * The reason that this was tagged in this way is because it has no references with which we can verify the information. It also, unfortunately, means that we have no way of knowing the notability of the article. It is actually possible to cite newspapers on Wikipedia, even if they aren't online.


 * I think the problem may be that nobody has pointed you to any guides or policies on Wikipedia. There is a very good article that guides new editors through how to contribute to Wikipedia - that article is Five pillars. We also have an excellent resource for newer editors at New contributors' help page. If you were to visit there firstly and ask for some help to understand how to edit on Wikipedia, I would be more than happy to undelete the article and move it to your user page where you can work on it to get it to a standard that proves how notable the event is and improve the article quality.


 * Please understand that I really have no more power than any other editor, except that I can do a few administrative functions on the site, such as delete pages, blocked editors and lock pages so that others cannot edit them, and I can only do these things in a very limited set of circumstances. I will not be able to sway consensus one way or another if the article is eventually taken to Articles for deletion, which can be very confronting, especially if you are new to Wikipedia. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:14, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Salinger FfD closure
I don't normally thank admins who close deletion debates in favor of the position I was supporting (I think it's tacky and smacks of currying favor), but I am doing so here, mainly because I was about to post the results of my communication with UNH regarding the image.

The gist: They have no problem with us exhibiting it per se. They just want proper attribution (which they got), notice on the page that it shouldn't be copied (already covered by "Use of this elsewhere may be copyright infringment") inline credit to Jacobi in the article infobox a la Edward Steichen and the image reduced to less than 300px. So I'm going to take care of those latter things as well.

And, while we're at it, nice to see you back. It's been a long time. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Daniel :-) Great work in contact UNH. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 01:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

thank you Tbsdy
thank you so much. It has been good to work with you, and I hope we do it again, now back to the unpleasant job of sourcing BLPs :( Okip (formerly Ikip) 19:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Do me a huge favour - see if you can see any issues with David Tweed. There's a complaint about it, but they won't say what the issue is. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 16:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Apology
I'm sorry, i've had a pretty bad week. I'll try to get in a comment in on your initiative today. Thank you for all the time you've put into it! Doc Quintana (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, no probs - you should see the monster issue I've inadvertantly caused with a suggestion that we soft-block all AOL 172.x addresses! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 15:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ut-oh! I didn't know that AOL still had people using it! I'm sure we'll figure it out in the end though. Doc Quintana (talk) 16:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

File:Cherry cemetery.jpg
You recently deleted "File:Cherry cemetery.jpg" stating (F3: Media file with improper license). I was the original uploader, and wasn't notified of the pending deletion.

My recollection is that the photo in question, originally licensed CC-NC, was relicensed to CC-attribution by the photographer.

Would you restore the file so we can go through this properly Thanks, Pete Tillman (talk) 00:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If you can provide me with the information, I'll undelete it. However, the Flickr page is clear that this is CC-by-NC-SA. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 01:07, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


 * If you'd notified me first, this would be easier. Why did you undelete & then delete again?


 * Neverthless, I'll look through my email files &, if necessary, contact the photographer again. --Pete Tillman (talk) 17:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

FYI: Hutch48
got himself indef'd. Kinda predictable. Pcap ping  18:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * They never learn. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

May I assist?
Wow, you've done an amazing job of keeping everything alphabetized on your subpage, but I did notice a few entries that need to be adjusted. I have a little free time on my hands right now. Would you mind if I edited that page (I promise to do nothing but alphabetize entries), or would you rather no one edit it but you? 152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, many thanks :-) I didn't think anyone had noticed! But I'm editing fairly heavily right now and I think it might cause an edit conflict... But one thing you might want to consider is to try the same thing I'm doing at William. :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 10:36, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll check that out. BTW, it is good to see you again.  I rarely log in any more, but I'm User:SWAdair.  I recognzied your name the first time I saw your sig.  It has been a long time.  I'll see you around.  Take care.  152.16.16.75 (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, long time no see! Good to see you too :-) Thanks for the offer of help, I do appreciate it. I think of this little project as "wikignoming on steroids". Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 10:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Many thanks
Toddst1 (talk) 22:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion review for Crescent (tools)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Crescent (tools). 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. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Typhoon (talk • contribs) 16:22, 8 February 2010

Hi, Tbsdy. Would you undelete Crescent (tools)? I will expand and source the article with a couple of sources I have found on Google News Archive and Google Books (e.g. this and this). Thanks, Cunard (talk) 09:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, done. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 09:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm working on it right now. Cunard (talk) 09:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm done now. I've retitled the article to be about the company instead of the tools. Cheers, Cunard (talk) 10:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Good work :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 10:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words! The DRV can be speedy closed now. Cunard (talk) 10:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And it's just been closed by . Cunard (talk) 10:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sean Patrick O'Dwyer
Hello,

I am looking for information on Sean Patrick O'Dwyer and noticed you recently deleted the page on him (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Patrick_O'Dwyer). I was wondering if you had a copy of the content, or if there was some way to access it via Wikipedia archives or backups? There doesn't seem to be a page history available.

Thanks! 124.186.104.174 (talk) 08:08, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've restored and moved it to User talk:Tbsdy lives/Sean Patrick O'Dwyer. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much 124.186.104.174 (talk) 11:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No probs. You should consider creating an account for yourself. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 12:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Tim Harrison Page
Hello, my name is Tim Harrison and for the first time I tried to put up a page about myself which was deleted by you.

I believe that I meet the criterion of credible individuals as many of my peers are on Wikipedia and virtually all events of which I have been artistic director at one time or another also appear here.

My own music has beem worked on by Stan Rogers and Daniel Lanois and I have recorded eight original CDs which have garnered world wide review, and as a recording engineer have recorded 15 CDs of other artists which have been released world wide.

You deleted my page because there was no reference to the Owen Sound Summerfolk Festival which in fact is referenced on the Owen Sound page and the Mariposa Festival is referenced on its own page as is the Northwind Festival, all of which I have been artistic director of at one time or another.

SO...how do I publish this page now, and how do I prevent editors from taking it down again...I believe I meet the Wikipedia criteria.

Tim Harrison

Thpharrison (talk) 12:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Tim, it is possible to have the page created, but it really should not be created or edited by yourself, as we have a clear conflict of interest policy. Try following the procedure at Articles for creation. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 12:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Image deletion
Hi Tbsdy! When you deleted File:A soldier of the Great War, known unto God; Essex Farm cemetery 2999986145.JPG, did you miss the nocommons tag on the page? Please can you reverse your deletion? Thanks. ⇦REDVERS⇨ 14:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I did... I've messaged Multichill to ask him not to include the nowcommons tag on such pages. I have restored, sorry about that. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:Civil reforms
Howdy Tbsdy. I think Giano's comments & edit summary (fascist stuff) were meant for me, as I'm the one who used the "...wise to reform" comment. GoodDay (talk) 22:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I realise, but then he has not added anything to the discussion except mean-spirited sniping. Why should be allowed to continue this behaviour? I say, remove him from the conversation if he has nothing to add. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 22:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Giano's bark is much worst then his bite. Don't let it get to ya. GoodDay (talk) 23:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It tends to derail discussion. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * He's locked horns with administratros in the past, over being blocked for civilty breaches (mostly getting the blocks reversed). Therefore, it's not a total surprise, he'd be against strengthening administrators in this area. GoodDay (talk) 23:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * So he's disruptive then. Look, I don't really care much about Giano and I'll stay as well clear of him as possible. However, I'm not going to disengage from the policy proposal, so if he thinks he can constantly snipe without any productive discussion I might as well ask the participants whether his comments should be removed. It will probably be declined, but then at least I've tried. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Ya gotta do what ya feel is right, nobody can fault a fella for that. Most important, don't leave the discussion (on account of Giano's comments), stick to your values. GoodDay (talk) 23:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I wasn't planning on leaving it! I'll probably withdraw that suggestion and just start off new threads when Giano makes an ad hominem attack. I've found the best way of stopping those who wish to prevent forward momentum is to create more forward momentum. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 23:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Giggle giggle. GoodDay (talk) 23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Please restore
Broadway Chamber Building, an 18-story building built in 1903. As the article was 100% descriptive, I do not understand your deletion as promotional. It was unreferenced, but it should be easy enough to show it notable, since it was the work of a famous, not merely notable, architect. (I know I have the ability to do so myself, but I want to ask you first.)    DGG ( talk ) 00:10, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, but a. there was no references, b. it was created by the editor Feldman Realty Group, and c. there was no evidence of notability. But I'm fine with restoring :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 04:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:31, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Once Upon a Midnight
Hi, congratulations on your new baby boy. Why have you deleted the production image from this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Once_Upon_a_Midnight ? After discussion, it was decided that one image from the production was valid to portray the actual event. It was sourced with permission of the creative team. If you look at the pages on other musical theatre projects you will find production images, for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cats_(musical) It helps the look of the site, overall, to break up the words and is relevent to the topic to give a visual sense. (129.96.113.183 (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 05:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC).
 * Please see Files for deletion/2010 January 24. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 09:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Copy right violation of Shafagh Cave Article
(donkarlo (talk)) hello, you have removed Shafagh cave cause of copyright violation, while the author of the apge is me, I dont know how can i identify myself. Please help me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donkarlo (talk • contribs) 07:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be worthwhile contacting one of our OTRS volunteers. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:13, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please undelete Cornered!_(Film)
Hi, you have deleted Cornered!_(film) on Feb 4th 2010, stating as reason "Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.mazefilms.com/cornered.html"I am acting on behalf of the copyright owner of the site you mentionned, as wel as the copyright owner of the movie itself. This is why I'm asking you to reinstate the article.

Thanks & best regards, TomStaels (talk) 12:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC) for Daniel_Maze, Mazefilms inc.
 * It might be worthwhile contacting one of our OTRS volunteers. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 12:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually...
I have a sad suspicion that it might not be all over just yet. Nothughthomas will probably log on tomorrow and see the block and a #$%@storm might ensue. Hope I'm wrong, but we'll see. X X X antiuser eh? 06:50, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If that happens, all they can do is edit their talk page. I am almost certain they will say or do something stupid that will convince the rest of the admins that they can't be trusted. But I won't be going there, lest NotHughThomas accuse me of baiting her, just make sure that you don't leave any talk page messages there. For me, I'm going to read the page with interest, but as a spectator and not as a participant. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 06:53, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Same. I want to stay as far away from them as possible. X X X antiuser eh? 06:59, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A very well thought through move, I dare say :-) Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 07:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I would just like to say thank you to NotHughThomas for being so civil and for withdrawing from the project without much drama. Perhaps it might be best to remove a number of user talk pages from your watchlist? Thanks! - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 08:49, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess I speak too soon - they've added three unblock templates before their talk page was protected. I guess she didn't mean any of what she said. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 03:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)