User talk:Courcelles/Archive 34

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

→

Archive 40

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/2010 Summer Youth Olympics medal table/archive1

Needs a revisit when you get the chance. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:36, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't forgotten... I was monitoring and waiting for them to come up with something to source things. Moved to oppose since I was prodded, though. Courcelles 00:33, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Shaggy Rogers

Can you please remove the sexuality section from Shaggy Rogers based on this discussion: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Cartoon Sexuality and WP:UNDUE --JDDJS (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I've unprotected the article, but I'm not going to start editing it myself. Courcelles 00:29, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Portal redirect deletion

Just noticed a redlink on Portal:History to Wikipedia:Wikiportal/box-footer which you just deleted, and from 'what links here' it's included on between 500 and 1000 other pages, probably mostly high visibility ones like the above portal. Certainly doesn't match the rationale for deletion ("little to no incoming links") at the deletion discussion, I guess it wasn't meant to be in the list so probably needs undeleting.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 01:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Realised though I can't undelete I can recreate so have done so rather than leaving all those red links visible. --JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 01:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Good. There's no attribution needed, as the original redirect was created by a bot. I'll check the others again. Courcelles 02:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I've brought Wikipedia:Wikiportal/box-header back for similar reasoning. Courcelles 02:28, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Rescaled fair use files

Hi Brad, just thought I'd drop a note of your recent activity dealing with rescaled fair use files. Please remember to removed the {{Non-free reduced}} template after deleting the old revisions of the files, as I did here. Thanks! — ξ^xplicit 06:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Whoops. Apparently the script works... but only sometimes. Okay, something to check for next time. Thanks. Courcelles 06:42, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Hi Courcelles, sorry to bother you, but as you are one of the sysops who has recently declined CSDs by User talk:Wuhwuzdat, I would like your advice without anyone thinking I'm overreacting, and without unduly making a fuss over at ANI. Although he is an experienced editor and has written some good stuff, when on NPP he CSDs in under a minute, and has been asked to slow down many times. He appears not to appreciate comment from anyone, and blanks his tp after each message. The whole thing makes quite a lot of work for serious patrollers, particularly those who work on uBLP. Got any tips on what to do? Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 09:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Likely not the best person to ask here, as it seems a good number of CSD's I decline end up as redlnks in short order. Basically, though, if talking to him won't work, yet another RFC/U or an ANI drama fest become the two main options. Seems like his first RFC/U was on similar—though not quite identical—grounds. It's a hard situation to handle well because so many of his CSD tags are entirely valid. Courcelles 16:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Put back Juan Solari article

Hi;

Could you please restore the article "Juan Solari" that you apparently deleted a few days/hours ago? IN Latin America and latin comunity in the UK, this is a well known Mexican artist and Media proffessional that has been referenced even in Wikipedia as a handfull of Mexican British People. He has awards in the Foreign Press Association of London and a couple of Inetrnational Film Festivals.

Thanks.

Giovanna Hernandez —Preceding unsigned comment added by Giovannaposada (talk • contribs) 17:12, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Done - as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored on request. Courcelles 17:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

AnomieBOT

Hahaha, sorry: I think that may have been my fault because I stole the bot's job and added the new section manually... Thanks for fixing. Nightw 18:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm not a bot person... so anyone who wanders by here wanting to handle this some other way should feel free to do so. Courcelles 18:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Be careful; GruntXProductions might DDOS us!

Or shout at his monitor really loud. Something like that. HalfShadow 00:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... he might do anything. What we know, though, is that anyone who makes such threats with their first ever edit is ripe for the RBI treatment. Courcelles 00:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I'm trying to find out why this results in WP:RBI over at User_talk:Bigger_digger#GruntXProductions. Expert opinions welcome!

Thanks for the explanation Courcelles. Bigger digger (talk) 18:02, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transmedia Activism (2nd nomination)

Hi, Courcelles. Orangemike moved this article to Transmedia activism while I was in the middle of Afd-ing it, which apparently has caused some confusion. You deleted the redirect Transmedia Activism but Transmedia activism is still kicking. Cheers. -- Rrburke (talk) 03:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I hate when that happens! Our script has the ability to delete redirects, but won't tell you when you just deleted a redirect and nothing else besides. Sorted, thanks. Courcelles 03:13, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Help Deleting

Can you delete the redirect page Countess of Champagne so I can move Countess consort of Champagne there?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

G6'ed. And don't bring Champagne things here... now I want to get into the Bolly. ;) Courcelles 06:01, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Juan Solari

Thanks, as I am the only one contesting notability, I had a first stab at improving the article instead. Superp (talk) 10:37, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Courcelles 16:57, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

You may have missed my question to you

Hi Courcelles.

I was wandering if you had a chance to look/examine an area of concern which I asked about a month ago.

http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Courcelles&diff=prev&oldid=390081099

Thanks Zylog79 (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I think I was rather busy then, sorry about that. But there's nothing I can do to help. What you need is a mediator... and maybe one who knows the subject. I'm sort of the second, but have absolutely no time for the first. Try medcab. Courcelles 17:01, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hindawi Programming System page deletion

Hi, Would you mind helping with undeleting the Hindawi Programming System page? I feel the search was not thorough. Please consider the following links:

1. http://www.inclusion.in/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=332&Itemid=97

2. Dataquest http://dqindia.ciol.com/content/Innovator/2008/108051001.asp Scans available at [1]

3. FOSS India Awards : The Show Stealers Linux for you: Issue: April 2008 Page: 22-26 Author: Samartha Vashishtha Scan copy of original magazine article can be found at [2] Validate on the magazine's website [3]

4. Linux Magazine published from Germany [4]

5. Sarai FLOSS fellowship [5] (for 2008) [6] (for 2006)

6. http://www.efytimes.com/efytimes/24867/news.htm (Only this was mentioned to have been found, which is surprising.)

7. CDAC is a Government Department [7]

8. TDIL, Govt. of India site [8]

Most of these could be searched from the earlier page on Hindawi Programming System. I am sure these make the software notable.

Regards, Dr Sweta Choudhary for Project Hindawi (now a part of GramSheel) http://hindawi.gramsheel.com/ PS: GramSheel project is a finalist at Stockholm Challenge 2010 Sweta at GramSheel (talk) 10:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a little unusual, but when I close 14-day AFD's with no commentary as delete, it's always with the idea that they will be restored if anyone contestes it, like a contested PROD. So, restored, though it will not prevent another deletion discussion. Courcelles 16:14, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Editnotice

Hi Courcelles, it occurred to me that I should seek feedback before implementing the editnotice, and I have placed a draft for review at WP:BLPN#Editnotice. Input welcome. I'll implement the editnotice if and when there is consensus and will let you know when I'm done. Cheers, JN466 12:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. Courcelles 18:53, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolling permission

Thanks so much - and especially for your kind comments which are really encouraging. Cheers and best wishes, John Hill (talk) 14:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure- happy editing. Courcelles 18:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Gary Larson

The Gary Larson page has been featured on Reddit and the front page of Fark because someone added a joke picture to the article (a picture showing Gary Larson as a plastic mannequin), and the joke picture is being repeatedly put back in place. The picture is also a copywrite violation from one of Larson's books.

Could you delete the picture or lock the article down temporarily? --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 19:34, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Semi'ed the article for a week. Courcelles 20:21, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Black Friday

Hi Courcelle. I left a suggestion (for Tinss) on the Black Friday Talk Page. Just FYI. Regards, --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 23:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It's just semi'ed, so I don't see anything I need to get involved in there. Courcelles 23:53, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Islamic Prophets

FYI Daniel most certainly is a prophet in Islam. Da'oud Nkrumah (talk) 23:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Okay... I'm going to need some help here. Are we discussing a particular article, or...? Courcelles 00:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

It was an article that I seen you marked for deletion because you said "Daniel is certainly not a prophet in Islam. He is not mentioned in the Quran once. He is not mentioned in the sahih hadit" Although, the article was deleted and I don't have a clue what was in it. I was just letting you know that all Biblical prophets are Islamic prophets and that includes Daniel. Also the "Sahih" Hadith are not Sahih to Shi'a and are considered works of fiction produced with the influence of gold coins. Hadith are judged according to the narrators and chain or transmission. The Bible and Torah are both valid religious doctrines though Muslims consider them to contain errors due to the influence of man, the truth within is the truth. Thus all their prophets are recognized as prophets.

Specifically from Hadith:

Ibn Abi Al-Dunya narrated the following, based on a chain of citations. Nabuchadnezzar captured the two lions and threw them into a pit. He then brought Daniel and threw him at them; yet they did not pounce at him; rather, he remained as Allah wished. When then he desired food and drink, Allah revealed to Jeremiah, who was in Sham (Palestine/Syria): "Prepare food and drink for Daniel." He said: "O Lord I am in Jerusalem while Daniel is in Babylon (Iraq)." Allah revealed to him: "Do what I have commanded you to do, and I shall send you one who will carry you and what you have prepared." Jeremiah did so and Allah sent him something that would carry him until he arrived at the brink of the pit.

Then Daniel asked: "Who is this?" He answered: "I am Jeremiah." He asked: "What brought you?" He answered: "Your Lord sent me to you." He said: "And so my Lord has remembered me?" He said: "Yes." Daniel said: "Praise be to Allah Who never forgets those who appeal to Him! And Praise be to Him Who compensates good with good, rewards patience with safety, dispels harm after distress, assures us when we are overwhelmed, and is our hope when skill fails us."

If you have any concerns or need Islamic articles cleaned up or clarified please feel free to contact me via my talk page. I intend to be active and available for these task.Da'oud Nkrumah (talk) 00:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't write that... I think there was an article somewhere that I deleted an expired WP:PROD for that had a reasoning similar to that... but I can't find the title, and my deletion log is ~10,000 items deep. If you give me a link, and say you contest the deletion, I'm pretty sure I can restore the article. (I mean, I think it was a PROD and not an AFD.) Courcelles 00:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I will contest it. The article was here Islamic view of Daniel Da'oud Nkrumah (talk) 00:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Article restored. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:35, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, HJ. Courcelles 03:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you both for your assistance. Da'oud Nkrumah (talk) 22:56, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Removing inactive from project template

I would like to remove the inactive from the WikiProject Vet template. I'm not sure what the "highly visible" templates warning means on the edit page. Can you explain this to me? Thanks. --Kleopatra (talk) 00:59, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)WP:WikiProject Vet doesn't exist. Could you provide a link to the page you're referring to? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:31, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

My bad. I do like to keep things easily accessible for stalkers. Wikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicine is the project, and the template is at Template:WikiProject Veterinary medicine. Thanks. --Kleopatra (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm unsure about editing the template:

(Batch semi-protection of highly visible templates listed on Wikipedia:Database reports/Unprotected templates with many transclusions/4 Any that were full-protected I will restore. using TW) (hist)

If the template has "many transclutions" is this something I should edit only in the wee hours, or seek permission first, or does it matter at all? --Kleopatra (talk) 01:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Nah, go ahead and edit it. The system can handle just about anything we can throw at it. It just means that template is on a lot of pages (presumably talk pages of articles in the project's scope) and therefore that vandalism of the template would result in a mess on lots and lots of pages, which, of course, is a Very Bad Thing. As long as you;re not planning to vandalise it, I wouldn;t worry too much! :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, the semi-protection is just to keep vandals from messing with 1,000 pages at a time, which is a problem. Ordinary editing. however, is not. Courcelles 03:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I seem to have edited it properly without sinking the ship, articles now show the project as active. So, un intentional vandalism woulda been okay... ;)--Kleopatra (talk) 16:40, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement appeals

Hi Courcelles, I noticed you just handled an AE appeal. Could you have a look at the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration#Appeals_process_for_discretionary_sanctions? I'd discussed the appeals process with Coren there a while back, and as a result am trying to put together an AE subpage outlining the appeals process, so editors can be clear on what procedure to follow. But at the moment I feel less than clear myself as to what such a subpage should say.

It seems to me that the AE appeals process at present is poorly defined. The standard wording of arbitration remedies, telling sanctioned editors to appeal (first) to the sanctioning admin, then to AE, and then to arbcom, is not in line with WP:AEBLOCK for example, which says e.g. that editors do not have the right to ask for community review at a board like AE, but have to go through an admin, as in the case you just handled. Would be grateful for your input. Cheers, --JN466 09:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Remember that if someone is blocked for an AE action, they techincally cannot place their appeal on AE, so an admin's involvement is necessary... Courcelles 23:17, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I am aware that blocked editors can't post to AE while the block is in force. I mentioned this over at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration (09:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)). However, following Coren, if they are unhappy with a block, they are not supposed to appeal to arbcom until they first have appealed at AE, and AEBLOCK says that they have no right to ask for community review of the block at AE. Editors sometimes complain (successfully) about blocks after they have expired; see YellowMonkey's RfC/U, for example. --JN466 06:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

So if an admin refuses to post the appeal, they forward it to ArbCom. Or they try again and hope to get another admin who will post it. Or they e-mail unblock-en-l where hundreds of admins will have their request in their inboxes with their morning coffee. No admin can stop the appeal from being heard by someone, though admins have no obligation to copy over an obviously frivolous appeal. In this respect, it is like any other block- if no one will open a noticeboard appeal, the next step is ArbCom, whether an block is logged as Arbitrator Enforcement or not. The fact that an admin may decide an appeal obviously has no merit whatsoever, and decide not to waste noticeboard time with it, is the source of what disparity you perceived between the two pages. Placing a positive right to an AE noticeboard appeal would remove that discretion from admins. Courcelles 06:17, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I understand that. But if we draft an appeals guide, then it mustn't say that editors should go through AE before appealing to arbcom. I guess the process is different for topic bans and blocks. I don't want to pester you with this on your talk page; if you have ideas how to write an easy-to-understand AE appeals guide, which outlines the process in one place, please join us at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration#Appeals_process_for_discretionary_sanctions. Note that Coren is ill at the moment; he won't be able to contribute for a while. Cheers, --JN466 06:52, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I guess I'm having that problem where it seems so simple to me how the process is done... yet writing it down isn't actually that easy. To be perfectly honest I don't like that AE is the forum for appeals to the community, since AE is the forum that hands down the sanctions in most cases. If I recall, at one time, the appeals were made to AN, not AE, which made a little more sense to me. The core problem is that a blocked user can't file their own appeal and must find someone to file it for them, usually the admin who responds to an {{unblock}} request. Though... there's nothing from stopping any user from filing the appeal (of course, creating a sockpuppet to file the appeal will always lead to more trouble, and whatever basis the appeal may have had will almost surely get lost in the SPI.) It seems like a simple line that "If the responding admin refuses to file the appeal, you may forward it to ArbCom as if your talk page access had been revoked" would solve the problem, but pre-thinking Wikilawyers is not something I excel at. And, well, ArbCom may not appreciate the extra business. Courcelles 07:28, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree about AE not being a good place to appeal, really, because there are so few admins there that the people commenting on the appeal may be largely the same people that decided the original sanction. But that is the current standard arbcom remedy wording, e.g. Wikipedia:ARBR&I#Remedies: "Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently arbitration enforcement), or the Committee". Note that this says, specifically, "blocks", even though as we both know a user can't post at AE while the block is in place. And the arbcom wording tells users they are entitled to appeal at AE, while WP:AEBLOCK tells them they are not entitled to a community review at that venue, unless an admin first certifies their appeal. To the user who wants to appeal, it's confusing and contradictory. I think no one has ever really sat down and tried to do a user-friendly write-up of how to appeal an AE sanction, or really worked out a flow-chart for how it should work. --JN466 09:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Back that up two steps. No one has ever sat down and produced a user-friendly guide to dealing with Arbitration here, at least not one I've ever seen. Courcelles 09:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)