User talk:Explicit/Archive 35

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Explicit. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 30

←

Archive 33

→

The Gates Shopping Centre

Hi Explicit,Could you very kindly possibly restore The Gates Shopping Centre please as there's a few sources here which can be added and which I'll add if undeleted, Many thanks, Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 00:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Davey2010:

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Ə XPLICIT 00:33, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks Explicit much appreciated, Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 00:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Sock

It seems like Surozee, one of the socks of Finrell ausi, is still active, as they attempted to make an edit request on Lee Min-ho. I think everybody watching Lee Min-ho and The King: Eternal Monarch has had enough with this user and their minions of socks. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 07:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I love the way it is limited to extended users, I only make requests.... The page says to make requests, I didn't attend to change it myself.... So what are you trying to say and what do you mean sock... Hope am not misunderstanding you... It's crazy to accuse others.... So crazy Surozee (talk) 09:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I made a request, permission to add updates some content... It's not compulsory I made the edit myself, am an amateur and I don't know how to do it well... Am telling the extended users to do it.... But you are making a blind accusations Surozee (talk) 09:29, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I suggest your re-read my response on Talk:Lee Min-ho (actor) and carefully read the contents of the links I mentioned. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 19:01, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Nkon21: The technical evidence at the investigation concluded that Surozee is not a sockpuppet of Finrell ausi. Ə XPLICIT 00:12, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Very interesting. This user mainly edits the exact same two pages, has the same language tone, and was registered within a short time frame of all the other socks – maybe this one was registered on a different IP or something? But I honestly doubt that there is zero relation between this user and Finrell ausi. Anyways, I'll keep an eye out on their edits. Thanks, ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 19:51, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

"Oh wait, this is too hard"

Yes it is, because I can't read Korean, therefore I can't search it and I have no idea of what websites it would be on. Of course you were just waiting the whole week to come in and add those references so you could write a little spiteful comment at me. This is so disgustingly petty for an administrator that I don't even think you deserve to be one. Do better. And if you couldn't tell from my last reply the other day, I said I would report you if you blocked me. Not that I'd be reporting you regardless. So your reply that you'll be "eagerly waiting for the thread" is nonsensical. I'll be replacing those with Gaon references when the charts update, so you're wasting your time. Ss112 01:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm wasting my time by adding references to cite material? Now that is nonsensical. You are not satisfied when no source is provided, and then you're not satisfied when one is provided. So what justification do you have in replacing it? You not being able to read Korean is not a valid reason. Ə XPLICIT 02:25, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

No, you're wasting your time in intervening before I was going to add the Gaon source, which has been used all other weeks. I already replaced it. You could've just restored the material without a petty comment directed at me; regardless, none of that justifies your comments. You should be conducting yourself better for an administrator, because the way you've been acting lately is nothing but a bad reflection upon you. The WP:BURDEN does not fall on me to provide a source for material others add; the burden falls on the editor adding the unsourced material. You know this. Continue pulling out bits of WP:V at me, WP:BURDEN still exists. Imagine trying to blame me for not adding a source for other editors, and then trying to blame me for not being able to read and type Korean and know which Korean websites to use to find the material for another user. No. Stop blaming me because you have a dislike for me. If you intend to be this petty in future, this is going to lead to an AN thread about you. Sure, say "I have nothing to hide, heh, go ahead" because you think somehow you could never be desysopped for your behaviour, but none of this looks good for you and it's only going to add up if you continue. Now, read: That doesn't mean I'm going to start a thread imminently, today, not necessarily next week, not necessarily ever. It depends on if you continue sniping and using this issue/these articles to have a go at me. You refused to take action by doing anything against the editor causing the problem but decide to intervene just to get back at me as if I'm the cause of the problem. You have gone about this the entire wrong way. Do you really think this is the way an administrator should act? Administrators should not be acting this way and should be doing better than engaging in petty sniping at editors they don't like. All administrators I've talked to tell editors in a dispute to avoid having a go at others in edit summaries, but here you are engaging in it. If you can't avoid doing that and lowering yourself to that level, then you should not be one. Ss112 02:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

You know what, Explicit, I'm not going to wait around for a reply. You can write back and have a go at me—it's your talk page after all, and I think you'll definitely do that in however long you decide to take with a reply. I've asked other admins to look at your behaviour. By all means, look at my contributions page and see who I've contacted to try to get an email to them that they see before mine, whatever. If they don't reprimand you admin-to-admin or disapprove of your actions, which I really believe they should do, then fine. But the bottom line is you obviously could not help yourself in waiting several days for an opportunity to take more petty little shots at me on an article you haven't cared about until I informed you of an issue on it but decided to watch just for said opportunity, but you should have. If you can't stop yourself acting like this, saying things to me, or distancing yourself from this issue you have with me in future, I will take the matter further and ask a wider audience if this is the way an administrator should be conducting themselves because I don't think it is. Ss112 03:07, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "But the previous weeks"—that's nice, but those are previous weeks. This is this week. A reliable source was added. Again, this is where it should have been "the end". But you felt the need to be react in a petty way by not only replacing the source for no valid reason, you're going so far as to discourage me from editing affected the articles. It truly one of the best examples of the calling the kettle black I've ever seen in my time on Wikipedia. You don't own any of the articles you create or maintain. Once you accept that, maybe you can learn how to communicate in a constructive manner.

Feel free to contact as many administrators as you'd like. It worked so well when you tried it in the thread above by pinging AO, right? But wait, did you not just threaten to take me to WP:AN? Now you're resorting to privately emailing two separate administrators, forum shopping yet again? Oh, sweet pea... Ə XPLICIT 03:43, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Digital Postcards and Certifications

Dear Participants and Organizers,

Because of the COVID19 pandemic, there are a lot of countries’ international postal systems not reopened yet. We would like to send all the participants digital postcards and digital certifications for organizers to your email account in the upcoming weeks. For the paper ones, we will track the latest status of the international postal systems of all the countries and hope the postcards and certifications can be delivered to your mailboxes as soon as possible.

Take good care and wish you all the best.

This message was sent by Wikipedia Asian Month International Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Protection for Gaon number-one pages

Hi Explicit. I've just noticed that for the past couple of weeks, an IP editor in the IP 112.215.xxx.xxx range has been updating List of Gaon Album Chart number ones of 2020 and List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2020 hours before the site updates. Obviously these claims are unsourced at the time they add them, and this editor does not appear to be abating with this behaviour any time soon—they return every week to do it. Can you consider protecting both of these pages for a while? This is not the first time this editor has engaged in this type of behaviour on these articles. Thanks. Ss112 01:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ss112: I'm not really seeing the issue here. News articles publish the rankings and sales earlier than Gaon does, like Newsen did at 8:37 am KST. The IP then adds the source directly from Gaon once they update their charts an hour or two later as they did last week. Not ideal to insert unsourced numbers first, but a reference is provided within three hours after the original edit. This is clearly not disruptive. Why take punitive action against an editor who ends up making constructive edits? Ə XPLICIT 11:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Because material needs to be sourced at the time it's added? I thought most people, especially admins, were pretty unanimous on this. Years ago, I added Australian charts when they were announced on a radio show before the Australian chart website updated, and I had multiple editors (including an administrator) tell me material must, without any exceptions, be supported by a source when it's added otherwise one should wait or not add it at all. I've come to agree. It really just seems like this IP editor is doing it just to beat users to the punch. I don't think it matters that they eventually add a source, they should either know how to or learn how to add one at the time they add it to the article or wait for Gaon. I'm really quite taken aback that you're this lenient on users not sourcing material at the time they add it to an article. Ss112 10:59, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Besides that, when the IP editor eventually does provide source the material, they provide a URL pointing to the generic Gaon landing page like so. This is essentially useless, because in seven days, the Gaon landing page that provides the top five positions for the digital and album charts will say the number-ones for the next week and the previous week's number ones will be unverified then too. I would say this is pretty incompetent (WP:CIR) behaviour—not providing a source before a chart updates and when they do, providing one that will be outdated/gone in a week. Sure, you might have the opinion "just change the URL for them", and it looks that has been being done by another editor, but really, users need to know how to provide a proper source when they add material. At the very least, anyone is well within their rights to be reverting editors for not sourcing material at the time it's added, and I think steps should be taken to prevent unsourced material being added by users who don't know how to do so (competently or until hours later). I previously asked @Ad Orientem: to consider protecting the page or doing something about the user, and now that they've taken the step of adding unsourced material, I think it's time to ask AO to reconsider if you're not seeing an issue with editors adding unsourced material to Wikipedia at the time they add it. Ss112 11:14, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. You are more concerned about taking credit, your editing history has made that abundantly evident. The anonymous editor is acting in good faith and may be unaware of the non-static nature of the URL. Instead of leaving the user templated warning messages which provide no real information to improve their editing behavior, you could have just as easily written a message all by yourself simply pointing out the URL issue and to provide it in their first edit, instead of automatically branding them as disruptive in their clear attempts to improve these pages. You should practice the same competence you claim the IP editor fails to possess, including the competence to fix a simple detail like providing a static URL. Your bitey approach to newcomers is far more harmful to the project. Ə XPLICIT 11:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

...Wow. Instead of actually addressing the problem of users adding unsourced material, in your reply you choose to ignore that and essentially attack me by accusing me of editing in bad faith because you think I want to...up my edit count (I'm aware you didn't use those words exactly but I believe it's what you meant) and "take credit" for doing things. This is pretty poor conduct on your part. Did you remember to assume good faith of me? I guess not. Explicit, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have semi-retired and stopped updating Wikipedia with all of the chart information I used to if I cared about credit or upping my edit count, but you evidently don't know or care about that. Do you have a personal issue with me? Because it really seems as if you do and it's clouding your judgement. Do you just regularly accuse experienced editors of this kind of thing, or is it just me? Let me make it clear to you: I created the pages in question. I believe they should be updated properly. I think the same of every article, even if I didn't have a hand in building it. Material needs to be sourced at the time it's added. I'm sure you're very familiar with WP:V. I am very much of the opinion that editors should be reverted outright if they are unaware how or are unwilling to learn to source material they add, properly or not. You accuse me of "biting" new editors, yet seem to be ignoring I'm acting in line with the standard nature of Wikipedia—template-warn new editors if they add unsourced material. There's countless editors doing that every minute, yet you single me out for it. Do you regularly make it heard around the project that you disagree with this very common practice? Because if you feel this strongly to make out like it's my problem, you should care about it more broadly. I understand you may be busy or offline, yet you also say I should take the time to explain. You seem aware of a solution, so why do you not address the editor on their talk page rather than attack me? I believe I have explained to this user on at least one of their IP addresses why they were reverted and why what they were doing is not the best. I'm sure they either don't care or are unaware I ever posted there. Clearly you're one of the more tolerant on Wikipedia who's more likely to tag unsourced material rather than revert it outright. I'll know not to come to you in future because you've shown you'd rather accuse experienced editors of having the issue, rather than confront and try to stop one of the biggest and most enduring problems on Wikipedia, which is that of random users adding unsourced material to the project. Ss112 13:43, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I've just noticed that in every other section on your talk page currently, you've helped out the editors who've come here without question. You didn't attack any of them, accuse them of acting in bad faith, nor try to excuse or forget that they've made you aware there's editors repeatedly adding unsourced material to an article. I'm the only one you've done this to. I think you've made it abundantly clear you have an issue with me. I'm aware administrators are not saints and are editors too who also have their disputes with others, but attacking me and chastising me for "biting newcomers" should not be making you try to excuse or conveniently forget adding unsourced material (and it is unsourced at the time it's added) plagues Wikipedia far more often and has a bigger and more enduring effect than whether editors you're presuming are new get a warm hello. Ss112 14:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Finally, in this set of replies, I would like to say that you should be aware that my refusal to correct other editors' issues because they refuse to learn how to source material correctly is not a "competence" issue. You are too busy attacking me that you're forgetting not wanting to do something (in this instance) is not the same as not knowing how to do it. Not that you would know or care, but I've explained countless times to editors on their talk pages what to do to no avail and fixed countless edits like this over the years. But you know what? I'm not obligated to. Nobody is, because WP:BURDEN is a thing. You shouldn't be forgetting that. Ss112 14:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

My issue isn't with you specifically, it is your approach to a well-intentioned editor who simply does not know all the ins and outs of Wikipedia. You are not the first user I have been highly critical of in these regards. Similar to you and the Gaon articles, I created and maintain List of Inkigayo Chart winners (2020), which faces the exact same issue and went through a similar set of circumstances a few months ago. Sometimes editors provide an unreliable source like Soompi, other times nothing is provided at all. So an editor reverted those additions, and then restored the exact same content but with a source some minutes later—this is what I meant about taking credit, it has nothing to do with your edit count—and I'm seeing the exact same pattern here. The difference in my dealing of the matter here is that it would simply signal me to add an adequate source. The end. Not a difficult concept to grasp or approach to take because I know that 99% of the time, these editors are simply avid fans who want to provide the information in real-time. They are not and should not be punished for trying to help, even if the manner they do it in is misguided. Expecting non-experienced editors to know all guidelines and policies from the start, while simultaneously lacking the will to efficiently and effectively communicate with the user directly without a warning template shows your disregard of WP:AGF#Good faith and newcomers. Their additions are not malicious and you know that very well, so stop treating them like criminals. Lastly, the fact that two separate administrators have declined your request to semi-protect these pages should be a indicator on how incredibly off the mark you are on both assessing the severity of the situation and your understanding of the page protection policy. Instead of feeling like a target, consider the observations taken here and evaluate if your approach is really the best one in light of the {{cn}} alternative suggested by AO below, which is taken directly from WP:UNSOURCED section of the WP:V policy. Ə XPLICIT 01:27, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Great. Ignore my point that newcomers are templated by editors all the time, this is a common practice, and continue to act like I'm the only one doing so. Templating editors and saying they shouldn't add unsourced material is not "treating someone like a criminal". I also just told you I believe I have explained to this IP editor on at least one of their IP talk pages, as they also did this last year. I repeat: they either don't care or are unaware, and I'm not going to repeatedly attempt to explain to somebody how to source material, nor do I have to. I might be "off the mark" about requesting page protection, but it is a recurring issue, and you can have a different take on that all you like. You can also keep quoting bits of different sections of guidelines at me, but do not forget WP:V also says "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source". I will not be tagging the material. I will be removing it outright in future, and it should not be restored by anybody, with or without a cn tag, because this doesn't justify adding the material in the first place—I don't know if what the IP editor adds is true, and frankly, it's not official until Gaon themselves post about it anyway. Another editor has also told me on my talk page they'll be looking out for it too, so I also have somebody backing me up in challenging it. AO does not entirely agree with your approach, he's made that much that clear by saying adding unsourced material should not be done. I'm not just "feeling" like a target, you did target me with what you said, because you claim I want to "take credit" as if I give a crap about editors seeing my name in the history that I'm the one who added the latest number ones, like any registered editor or external visitor cares at all about this. Don't assume bad faith of me and then lecture me about assuming good faith of others. Continue excusing unsourced material and I'll continue removing the material. Thank you for nothing at all. Ss112 01:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Ss112, I think your commentary is unnecessarily strident and unhelpful. You have made a request and received a response from two admins. Clearly you are unhappy with at least some aspects of our advice. That's your right. But having made that point, perhaps it would be best if we agreed to disagree and move on. I think this discussion has run its useful course. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

As I have been pinged here and asked for an opinion, I took a look at the pages in question and their history. I have a few observations. First, adding unsourced material is a no no. WP:V is policy and WP:CITE is a one of our more important guidelines as it directly supports one of the policies essential to ensuring the integrity of the project. However, the normal course when encountering unsourced claims, assuming one does not suspect the claims to be false or malicious, is to tag the claim ({{cn}}) and alert the editor who posted them that they need to cite a source. If one is not provided in a reasonable period of time, the challenged material can be removed. If the material is known or believed to be correct, then just add the citation if you have one. If an editor is repeatedly adding unsourced content after being sufficiently warned, then the matter can be brought to the attention of an admin or the issue can be raised at ANI. Editors using dynamic IPs can be a headache. And if the problem is really pervasive, and assuming the range is not too wide, a range block can be applied. I haven't looked into that as I don't think we have reached that point yet. Regards page protection, that is generally a last resort and only done to prevent a sustained and high level of disruptive editing when lesser measures, including blocks, have either failed or are obviously impracticable. Nothing in either of the page histories I looked at comes close to meeting that bar. I am sympathetic to the problem of unsourced material in articles and have occasionally been accused of being a citation nazi... but it is also one of the more common issues and for the most part we just have to roll with these minor irritants and fix them while trying to educate the ill informed vis a vis our WP:PAG. And as I noted; deliberately disruptive behavior is different and can be handled by other means. This doesn't look like that though. Beyond all of that I would encourage everybody to remember we are all on the same team here. Happy editing. (P.S. Nice to see you back Ss112. I hope your break was pleasant.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: Thank you for looking into the matter. However, I'm not back, and I'm not merely on nor had I been taking a break—I thought you were aware of this. I am still semi-retired and intend to remain that way. I was trying to prevent the addition of unsourced addition to these articles from happening in the future as I had noticed it had been happening for several weeks, and I have encountered this IP editor before. That being said, if this problem persists, I still intend to revert this editor for adding unsourced material, as anyone is within their rights to do. I am not going to just tag the material or wait for them to add an inadequate source. (I also still have pings them off.) Ss112 22:44, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Explicit, I'm really not meaning to continue an argument here but I'm really confused by your behaviour. I just checked back for a reply from you, and looked at your contributions, and I notice you have just templated an IP editor for adding unsourced material in the same manner that I did. What's the difference between what I did to the editor who added material on the Gaon lists and what you just did? You said that's WP:BITEy behaviour and drives away new editors, and that we should rather explain what they did was wrong and to source their material, but you have done neither. Where's the welcome to the IP editor? Please don't criticise me for not doing something you don't do yourself. That's hypocrisy. Ss112 08:09, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ss112: I figured you wouldn't be able to discern the difference, so I will explain it to you like in terms maybe your capable of understanding. The editor you reverted has a long history of eventually providing sources for their edits, and the content is easy to cite from news sources or directly from Gaon. In the grand scheme of things, they are being constructive and should be nudged in the right direction. The editor I reverted does not and is one of the occasional drive-by editors who adds member positions, which is generally taken from the unreliable KProfiles.com, or stems from the user's own feelings on who is assigned what role and is ultimately original research. Users with fleeting interest in the project aren't worth writing out dedicated messages to. If you had an ounce of clue, you would be able to make that distinction.

Now, in terms of your behavior, you clearly have a chip on your shoulder and have resorted to taking up a battleground mentality. That, in addition to your forum shopping by asking me, then pinging AO, and then making a request at WP:RPP in a failed attempt to get those articles semi-protected, and your incessant wikilawyering throughout this discussion thread to make a point, is quickly becoming disruptive. I highly suggest dismounting from your high horse unless you want to be dealt with by administrative action. Ə XPLICIT 08:41, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Pings don't work for me as I've turned them off, and that sounds like a very weak attempt to explain it away after I called called out your blatant hypocrisy. I'm done here. Don't threaten me with "administrative action", because if you blocked me over your hypocritical criticism of and very obvious dislike of me, I would consider that an abuse of your power and I would report you to both WP:AN and the WMF. You are allowed to be called out and you should be, as admins have more power than the average user, they are held to a higher standard. As you should know. Goodbye. Ss112 08:46, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

No where in my message did I say I would block you. WP:INVOLVED would not allow such an action. And no, it is clearly not hypocrisy based on my edits on List of Inkigayo Chart winners (2020). Different situations, different approaches. Please feel free to report my actions, I will patiently wait for the thread. Ə XPLICIT 08:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but I ran into this discussion, following seeing this [1] petty remark, then finding a series of combativeness on that article's contributor talk, with Ss112 even complaining about him creating short yet legitimate articles, and annoyed that the user beat him up to create an article about that song after he created the album's article! Telling him "Can't you find your own things to do? Jesus." and "That's really lazy of you" because he copied a sentence from his album article... [2]. These is unacceptable. This is the reason people wonder why should they contribute, as if they weren't they wouldn't waste any time, energy, and without encountering such undermining unappreciative remarks in turn, so they don't even get joy or satisfaction from their effort, which is the reason, the feeling to get from contributing... These linked remarks were made already few months ago. But I really, kindly ask that if an administrator notices such remarks again in the future from this or any other user, to do anything to stop this. This truly sums up the wrong-dark side of Wikipedia which drives VOLUNTEERS away. Sorry for interfering but these had to be shown in this context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.228.204.156 (talk) 19:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Editors vandalizing the pages

Hi, I really don't know what to do to Lee Min-ho (actor) and The King: Eternal Monarch. Those two pages have been vandalized daily. User User:Ginglepio keeps adding fake claims that are not stated in the sources they use, while User:Surozee has been removing thing that they don't like and adding unreliable sources to try to prove their narrative. Is there are way to report them to admins or at least get them to stop? CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@CherryPie94: I have blocked Ginglepio for 72 hours and Surozee for 48 hours, both for disruptive editing. I have also semi-protected Lee Min-ho (actor) as I suspect there is some sockpuppetry going on, but I can't pin which accounts might be aiding each other just yet. Ə XPLICIT 00:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk)

Another vandalizer, User: Finrell ausi, showed up on Lee Min-ho’s page and re-vandalize The King: Eternal Monarch following a block. Might be one of the sick puppets. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 13:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Lizzydarcy2008 is vandalizing The King: Eternal Monarch. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@CherryPie94: From what I can tell, this doesn't appear to be a sockpuppet of Finrell ausi as they never appeared to have any interest in downplaying the show's controversy. However, it is a sleeper account with oddly interesting timing... I'll keep an eye on it and take the appropriate measures if necessary. You may want to switch over to the {{uw-disruptive1}} warning template series, though, as the edits are not outright vandalism. Ə XPLICIT 00:24, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Explicit: Kim Go-eun is being targeted now by new User: Buckwheatflower and User: Dangshinuskevietenese. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 23:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Vasm

The Vasm page was deleted by you. Vasm is a real product with recent updates: http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/index.php?view=binrel JoaquinFerrero (talk) 17:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@JoaquinFerrero: The page was proposed for deletion by another editor and went uncontested for seven days. If it can be demonstrated that the product satisfies WP:NSOFT, the article can be restored upon request. Ə XPLICIT 23:29, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

So ... Can I propose deleting the Microsoft Windows 98 page? :-) Yes, it had historical relevance, but where do we mark that a software is relevant or not? The thing is that Vasm continues to be used, has new versions and appears in more than 24,000 results on Google and 186 on Google Scholar (search for Vasm assembly, which is what WP: NSOFT asks for). Are you sure that the proponent of the deletion had good intentions? More than once I have had to remove deletion proposals from editors who have not even bothered to check the relevance. JoaquinFerrero (talk) 19:23, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I forgot this: you need to fix the pages that pointed to the Vasm page: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Vasm JoaquinFerrero (talk) 19:39, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@JoaquinFerrero: I have restored the article. Please make the necessary changes to address the concerns of the deletion rationale, as the article may still be subject to a deletion discussion at WP:AFD. Ə XPLICIT 01:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Image deletion

Hi, I understand you have deleted the image File:Villa Holzner Raumplan, Czech Republic designed and realised by Henry Kulka in 1937.jpg due to permission requirements. I have sent 3 emails to the permssion team to verify permission granted for this image and a series of other images, however I have had no response from anyone except the deletion of images. Could you please help me get this and the other images back up so I can attach them to the correct wiki page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasuwatanabe (talk • contribs) 00:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Wasuwatanabe: Hi, you should have received a confirmation email and accompanying ticket number shortly after contacting the OTRS team. If you did not receive any response, then your emails were likely not received, but sending multiple emails can also slow down the process. Did you receive a ticket number? Ə XPLICIT 11:16, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, You have just deleted a series of images I have uploaded. As above, I have emailed numerous times permission and have had no response,no accompanying ticket number either. Could you plese let me know who I am suppose to email, other than the permissions team... Plese help. ThanksWasuwatanabe (talk) 00:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

The copyright holder(s) of the images should email OTRS directly via permissions-commons

wikimedia.org. They should receive a response with the ticket number shortly after. Ə XPLICIT 01:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

92.47.78.239

Could you please block user:92.47.78.239 ASAP. They are really getting annoying. CLCStudent (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Done. Ə XPLICIT 01:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Refund

Can I request a refund of Roll on Columbia: Woody Guthrie and the Columbia River Songs? I meant to contest the PROD but missed the deadline. ☆ Bri (talk) 00:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Bri:

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Ə XPLICIT 01:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	In recognition of your professionalism and efforts in keeping Wikipedia fair and tidy. Kangaresearch 02:33, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Ə XPLICIT 00:12, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Cast images of Empty Nest

Hey again. I would like both images File:Empty Nest Cast Pre-1992.jpg and File:Empty nest cast 1993 1995.jpg to be undeleted only to be taken to FFD and reinserted into “Empty Nest”. They were deliberately orphaned last year; I thought it abrupt to understanding the TV series. What prompted me into asking you this was the recent FFD results on “Friends” cast image discussion... Well, one is kept. --George Ho (talk) 05:12, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@George Ho:

Done, files restored. The remaining actions should be executed by the user(s) interested in keeping the content. Ə XPLICIT 00:12, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 June 18#File:Derek Chauvin mugshot.jpg

Hi Explicit. I'm wondering if this image would qualify for speedy deletion per WP:G4 based upon Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 June 4#File:Derek Chauvin.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks for pointing that discussion out, I was not aware that the mugshot was previously discussed and deleted. The file has been deleted accordingly. Ə XPLICIT 00:12, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

File:Mohawk Warrior Society flag.jpg

Hi Explicit. Just wanted to let you know was that the reason this was orphaned was because somebody uploaded the same file to Commons. However, the licensing on the Commons file is questionable (see c:COM:VPC#File:Flag of Mohawk Warrior Society.svg which means it might end up deleted as well. I was going to restore the non-free to the article where it was being used to "de-orphan" it, but do you think it's best to wait for the Commons file to be resolved before requesting a REFUND. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:45, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 June 25

Hi Explicit, as someone who determined the original consensus to retain the image of the Reverse of the Australian Antarctic Medal, following a speedy deletion tag being placed on it, this is a courtesy notice that the original tagger has re-nominated the file for deletion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 June 25.

If you have a few moments to contribute to a second RfC on the retention of an image of the Reverse of the Australian Antarctic Medal, it would be appreciated. The history is fairly short, so takes no more than a minute or two of reading, and you are welcome to express any opinion you think is appropriate. Thanks in advance if you can spare the time. Kangaresearch 04:29, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)(Non-administrator comment) @Kangaresearch: Please be careful of how you notify others of an ongoing WP:XFD discussion; notifying others can be a bit tricky and is something that can often be mistaken for WP:CANVASSing. It's generally considered OK to let others know about a discussion, etc., but it's usually better to notify WikiProjects or post more general notices per WP:APPNOTE than individual notifications like this and this since the latter can be seen as a sort of "campaigning". You should also try to refrain from "thanking" editors like you did here for similar reasons, at least until the relevant discussion has run its course and has been formally closed. Finally, you might also want to try and avoid closing a discussion you start and "declaring" a consensus has been established either way like you did here, particularly when the participants are people you specifically sought out for comments. Most talk page discussions don't require a formal close and if this one did, then Explicit would've most likely done so since he was the administrator who declined the CSD tag. I believe you acted in good-faith here and probably weren't aware of these kinds of things since your account is relatively new, but please keep them in mind for future reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Marchjuly. As the purpose of user talk pages is to draw the attention or discuss the edits of a user [on their specific user talk page] WP:OWNTALK Wikipedia guidelines prefer you to place your edit on the appropriate user talk page (which would be mine given your comments are directed solely at me). A short note - giving notice - may have been a better approach here if you absolutely wanted to leave something here. Happy to discuss your views at User Talk:Kangaresearch. Kangaresearch 05:10, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

All That Festival Page

Do you happen to still have the file of the page you deleted, I want to still view that page for All That Music and More Festival to just feel some nostalgia of the 90's? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasthedarkenguine (talk • contribs) 20:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

@Thomasthedarkenguine: You can find a copy of the article's contents here. Ə XPLICIT 00:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@Explicit: thank you, I am also working on a better version of the article to put on Wikipedia again, i'm taking good care of that page like it's my baby.

Thomasthedarkenguine, I don't know what you found in that pastebin, but there are some issues here: All That Music and More Festival is, of course, mostly a copy of that older article, but there is not a shred of that old article in the history, and it had 77 edits. Explicit, how are we going to satisfy that requirement? I placed a zero edit to say where it came from, but really the history should be undeleted and merged... Drmies (talk) 01:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Thomasthedarkenguine: If your plan was to recreate the article, you should have just asked for it to be undeleted per WP:CONTESTED. Your original message did not imply that was your intent. Attribution is legally required. I will take this recreation as contesting the deletion and will restore the history, Drmies. Ə XPLICIT 01:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Explicit: this is practically the same thing, also I never knew you can have an article undeleted, either way i apologize.

Thanks Explicit, and thanks for clarifying: now I understand the background. Thomas, it's no big deal--but I'm glad Explicit is doing the paperwork, haha. Drmies (talk) 02:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

User:FaisalMusicFan99 pages

Thank you for deleting all those pages made by socks of User:FaisalMusicFan99. As you can see from User:Arjayay/Albert I have been pursuing and logging these for some time. As it takes time to understand the operation of this sockmaster, and linking to my information in every deletion request informs the sock what I know, would you object if I contacted you directly in future? - Thanks again - Arjayay (talk) 11:42, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Arjayay: No problem at all. Feel free to contact me directly when this editor pops up again.

Ə XPLICIT 11:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much - have a good day - Arjayay (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

A question

Hello

I had a question, I tagged those articles because I had seen another edittor do the same, there was much protest and great articles were lost because of the same situation. Mass tagging, and mass deletion. The creator of the articles was not a confirmed sock, only a suspected one.

Question is, how do you react to something like that? Should I contact and admin and ask for a roll back to seek a different deletion process, or if not how do i proceed otherwise? I apologize if I am bothering you, I am a new editor, if I may use that as an excuse

Thank you Atlonche (talk) 02:17, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Atlonche: Hi, it really depends on the situation. The articles you tagged have been on the project an average of nine to ten years and have received several edits by other editors since then. WP:CSD#G5 does not define was constitutes a "substantial edit", so while you may not feel that adding references to an article counts as such (as you stated on your talk page), others do. If there is an article that was deleted was under CSD that you feel did not fit the bill, you should should discuss it with the deleting administrator first. If the issue can not be resolved, it can be listed at deletion review. Ə XPLICIT 03:31, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

I see, well the other editor managed to get all the articles of the one guy deleted, even though there was protest and someone even filed a complaint, he ingored us with the help of (ill have to say it) a clearly biased admin, who blocked the acc on being a suspected spa, tyen tagged him as being a confirmed one. Is there a way to stop the articles being deleted for further review before being deleted if the admin doesnt listen to complaints? Will a rollback be necesary?

I see that you thought the deletions were unjustified, but I was in the same boat as you and nothing was done to stop that sort of lynching behavior. I know you must be busy but please take some time out of your day if possible to respond. I appreciate it Atlonche (talk) 12:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Atlonche: The most important articles created by Fa alk were kept. On the articles of Zoupan, I did not check them all, but two of them that I checked actually had substantial edits made by other editors. Well, the meaning of "substantial" in the relevant policy is not clearly defined; hence it is open to interpretation. In any case, it should be obvious that it is easier to get deleted an article that was created a few weeks ago rather than to get deleted an article that was created several years, if not a decade, ago. If there is a specific article of Fa alk that you want to write by yourself, you can ask an admin to give you the sources that Fa alk used. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 17:54, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Disruption warning

I've cleaned up some of your mess. You left rd's to red links, even ones linked from templates, that would've been bot-deleted. It's quite likely there are more. If you're going to make an edit, at least be responsible enough to clean up after yourself, rather than making more work for all of us just so you can feel self-righteous. If you can't be bothered to fix things, at least don't make them worse. — kwami (talk) 21:46, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Yes, it's my fault that you decided to disruptively move 21 pages against policy, like renaming Ho'opi'i Falls to Hoʻopiʻi Falls (), and make a mess of these articles and their redirects simply because you couldn't muster up the willpower to request page moves at WP:RM. It's too bad you've decided to deflect from your poor editing behavior and take absolutely no responsibility. Ə XPLICIT 23:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

You left dozens of broken links to be deleted. That's irresponsible. I'm glad you feel superior, but that's not really the point of WP. — kwami (talk) 00:51, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Could you restore

Talk:Kandor (comics)? The article has been recreated and is not eligible for speedy, so... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:52, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Piotrus:

Done. Ə XPLICIT 06:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Henry Heth

Hi, I noticed you removed my edit for Harry Heth and the connection to Henry Heth. I'm afraid what I was trying to accomplish was not fully finished thanks to my failure to completely delete the "Harry Heth" page. I did put a delete request but I should have explained that I wanted to delete it because I wanted to move the Henry Heth (businessman) page to Harry Heth. I have now posted my reasons for attempting to do this on the Harry Heth and Henry Heth talk pages. If you have a different opinion than me on this issue, I would very much like to hear it. The Heth family is very important to me as their house and coal mine is located a mile away from my house. I look forward to discussing this with you. Bradylang (talk) 23:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

@Bradylang: Hi, the type of page deletion you sought in moving Henry Heth (businessman) to the desired page title was essentially a request for an uncontroversial maintenance deletion. However, the redirect Harry Heth has pointed to Henry Heth for well over 13 years, so this attempt would not have been deemed uncontroversial, which is why I declined performing the action. If you can prove that the primary topic for the name "Henry Heth" is the businessman and not Harry Heth, you can submit a request for have the page moved at requested moves. Ə XPLICIT 00:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have not made myself clear in what I am trying to do. I am not suggesting that the page Henry Heth should be about the businessman. It should be about the general, which it currently is about and that is good. I am trying to move Henry Heth (businessman) to the current redirect Harry Heth as the businessman was known as Harry for pretty much his entire business career. Also, if the page is moved to Harry Heth, we could put a note at the top saying "For the Confederate General, see Henry Heth." Additionally, disambiguation pages could be made if you feel like this move would create confusion.

I don't exactly know the process for deleting Harry Heth (the redirect page) so that we can move Henry Heth (businessman) over to it, so if you could help me accomplish that that would be awesome.Bradylang (talk) 12:48, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Bradylang: I understand your intent. My was point was this: when people search the name "Harry Heth", are they looking for the businessman or are they looking for the general? Search patterns suggest the latter, which is why Harry Heth redirects to Henry Heth. However, if you feel that is not the case, you can add the following code at the bottom of Talk:Henry Heth (businessman):

{{subst:requested move|reason=(the reason for the page move goes here).|current1=Henry Heth (businessman)|new1=Harry Heth}}

Simply fill in your reason and save the page. A bot will take care of everything else, and a discussion will take place over the next seven days to determine if there is consensus to move the page. Ə XPLICIT 23:59, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Slowest Animals deleted?

Hi, I just wanted to know why Slowest animals was deleted? Pacingpal (talk) 16:18, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Pacingpal: Hi, as the deletion rationale suggests, it was proposed for deletion due to its "longstanding issues relating to poor quality, notability of topic, and potential OR". Ə XPLICIT 00:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Assignment Berlin

Hello,

I noticed you deleted the film article mentioned above on October 29, 2011. Therefore, there's a question I'd to ask you: was the article you deleted about the 1982 film or the 1998 film? Hitcher vs. Candyman (talk) 19:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@Hitcher vs. Candyman: Hi, the article was about the 1998 film. Ə XPLICIT 00:09, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk page access

Hi, I see that you blocked The Abbasid Alsayeid Al Abbasi but I think you'll also need to revoke talk page access. They keep posting their autobiographical garbage on the talk page over and over, even after your block. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Drm310:

Done. Ə XPLICIT 12:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Sock

Hi Explicit - on 30 June (above) you offered to deal with any future User:FaisalMusicFan99 socks - Draft:Mike Smith (animator), one of the articles you deleted on 30 June, has been recreated by a new IP sock - please could you deal with both? - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Arjayay:

Done, page deleted and IP blocked. Ə XPLICIT 11:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 11:24, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion before giving me the opportunity to re-edit

Hi, you deleted the article on Atisuto that I have created and was nominated for speedy deletion. The reason for your deletion was "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion", but you did not give me time to re-edit the article and improve it. It was my first article and I tried following the guidelines mentioned in Your first article, but I do not understand why to delete the article without giving me the opportunity to make it better. Can you retrieve the page so I can remove any alleged promotional content? Thank you Ta,jhk (talk) 13:35, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ta,jhk: Hi, the speedy deletion policy does not require any administrator to give you time to edit the article if it has been tagged for deletion. A copy of the page's contents can be found here. I suggest running your attempt at your first article through the articles for creation process. Ə XPLICIT 00:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Please undelete https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/David_Katz_(author)

Please undelete my page https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/David_Katz_(author) I am the author of 3 books about the music and culture of Jamaica and the wider Caribbean, including the authorised biography of the Jamaican producer and performer Lee 'Scratch' Perry, and I have produced several documentaries for Public Radio International and the BBC, I have also run a monthly music event in Brixton, south London, during the last 16 years. Please undelete my page, you were not correct to delete it on the grounds that I am somehow not "notable"! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.123.254 (talk) 15:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Care re: deletion

After a bit of searching, I now understand why the 2025 Winter Universiade page qualified for speedy deletion, but I would have appreciated an answer to the question I left on the Talk page before you deleted it. I didn't even receive a message on my own talk page referring to the issue. It's fine in the end, but I think sometimes administrators could be a little more careful. Trappy (talk) 20:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy birthday

Happy Birthday!

Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 00:05, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! My account is officially a teenager. Ə XPLICIT 00:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy...

Hey, Explicit. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! CommanderWaterford (talk) 07:35, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Copy-paste move

Would you mind taking a look at the recent activity at Rania (group) and B.S. (group)? It looks like a copy-paste article move but I'm not sure how it should be handled. TIA, Alex (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Villanuco de Las Encartaciones

Hi, Explicit! I think the deletion of Villanuco de Las Encartaciones was – through no fault of yours – a mistake. There are numerous sources which clearly establish notability, and I plan to recreate the page making use of some of them, as long as you have no objection? I'm in two minds about restoring the previous history – our text seems to have been translated from the Spanish wp page, which in turn is a copyvio from this or some similar source. Is it better to restore and revdelete, or just leave it in limbo, do you think? Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Hi, the deleted version here is definitely a translated version of the Spanish article. I found similarities between the latter and this, but I can't definitively conclude which came first. If it indeed a copyright violation, it's best to keep it deleted as it would have qualified for WP:CSD#G12. Ə XPLICIT 02:26, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Requested Moves

I did before with these three but no response ever since then. So I try to get them deleted so I can do the move but everyone did the same thing you did and I failed at acquiring the page mover rights. Now, I'm stuck and just about to give up. SpectresWrath (talk) 20:10, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

SpectresWrath, I'm a (talk page watcher) commenting. You can request page moves at WP:RM. Since you opened the move discussions and nobody commented, you can submit them as technical requests, just mention that there were no objections to the move discussions. Schazjmd (talk) 20:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

I used the RM before but never heard back from anyone. SpectresWrath (talk) 20:32, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

SpectresWrath, well, I looked at your contributions and don't see that you've ever posted a request at the WP:RM board. Schazjmd (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

It was on July 3 but I don't see it in my contributions anymore either. SpectresWrath (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

@SpectresWrath: I don't see any page move requests in your deleted contributions, either. Perhaps you intended to make the request, but never did? You may want to give it a try at WP:RMTR. Ə XPLICIT 00:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I did make make a request for three different pages. Even the RMCD bot mentioned it on their main and talk pages on July 3 at 22:49 but for whatever reason those contributions got removed from my account. SpectresWrath (talk) 01:32, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

SpectresWrath, you opened a move suggestion for discussion on three articles, which is the right thing to do. No other editors engaged with the discussion, which implies that the moves aren't controversial. The next step is to actually request that someone with the technical rights perform the move...that's the part that you haven't done yet, and which you can do at WP:RMTR. Schazjmd (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I used the WP:RM they still can't move Beyblade V-Force, Beyblade G-Revolution, and A Certain Magical Index II due to the RM still being in progress. SpectresWrath (talk) 23:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

SpectresWrath, ah, it looks like the move discussions have to be formally closed before it can take place. Sorry, I can't help you there. (By the way, would you start using edit summaries? It's hard to figure out what's going on in your contributions without them.) Schazjmd (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

How do I close them? SpectresWrath (talk) 00:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

SpectresWrath, a page mover or admin should close it. (If you click the "closing instructions" link in any of the discussions you opened, it takes you to the instructions.) I'd suggest that you ask the editor who closed your WP:RMT request, as I'm sure they have more expertise and can tell you how to request a formal close. Schazjmd (talk) 00:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Explicit, can you close the discussions on those pages? SpectresWrath (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

REMOVAL OF ARTICLE JOHN J FLOOD POLICE UNION LEADER

Explicit"

Please advise of the removal of the article as to John J Flood Police Union Leader

and please REPOST the article that you removed

Numerous newspaper references to this individual can be referenced — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJFCCPA (talk • contribs) 21:43, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

John J Flood — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJFCCPA (talk • contribs) 21:40, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

@JJFCCPA:

Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the article has been restored upon request. Ə XPLICIT 23:46, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Image Deletion

Hi there,

I see you have deleted my 2 wiki commons images which I have uploaded, I didn't realise they were going to be deleted so quickly. I need to use them on a Wikipedia page, could you please reinstate them so I can attach them. They are :https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Halberstam_House,_Campbell_Street,_Karori,_Wellington,_New_Zealand._Designed_by_Henry_Kulka_in_1948._View_of_front_of_house.jpg

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Halberstam_House,_Campbell_Street,_Karori,_Wellington,_New_Zealand._Designed_by_Henry_Kulka_in_1948._South_East_facing_interior_lounge_view.jpeg

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Halberstam_House,_Campbell_Street,_Karori,_Wellington,_New_Zealand._Designed_by_Henry_Kulka_in_1948._View_of_front_of_house.jpg

Thanks for your help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasuwatanabe (talk • contribs) 01:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Wasuwatanabe: Hi, although these files were deleted as orphaned, they were tagged as {{Non-free destroyed architecture}} and thus violated the "no free equivalent" criterion of the non-free content criteria policy. Oddly, they were also tagged with {{OTRS pending}}, indicating a free license... if that is the case, these can be restored once the permission has been verified by an OTRS agent. Ə XPLICIT 10:41, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Harjot Singh Bains

Above named page is deleted kindly undelete it . It is political vendetta against opposition parties in country . Kindly do needful and look into matter. Please do action Manns8447 (talk) 16:53, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

What steps are required to restore above page. Manns8447 (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Already done. Ə XPLICIT 02:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

User:FaisalMusicFan99 sock

Hi Explicit - Another User:FaisalMusicFan99 sock which you have helped with before.

Article created

Draft:Stories from Beau - previously deleted on 12 June as created by sock of User:FaisalMusicFan99 - compare current version with Flushed Away

also previously deleted as - Draft:Stories from Dr. Beau on 15 June as a blatant hoax, and on 30 June as as created by sock of User:FaisalMusicFan99

IP currently being used

94.59.38.176 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - El Ain - Abu Dhabi - 23 July

Could I ask you to deal with these please - Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 09:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Done, page deleted and IP blocked. Ə XPLICIT 02:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Max Hospital Saket

Hello why was Max Hospital Saket removed by you? This is preposterous and not very sanctimonious. I am appalled 😮 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA25:B400:F945:49A7:B4BE:28AF (talk) 03:49, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Max Saket superhospital - Yeeehawww — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA25:B400:F945:49A7:B4BE:28AF (talk) 03:53, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Jackson Wang Wiki Page

Hi, I noticed you’re the one who put Jackson Wang’s wiki page on vandalism protection, so I thought I could ask you to remove the 2nd paragraph under his subheading of “Personal Life.” You puy this page on vandalism during the peak of Hong Kong protests, so I hope you can realize why it shouldn’t be there. PLEASE remove it. I have asked kindly another person only for them to not but since you are the reason I physically can’t...I just thought you’d understand Wanggaeparkgae (talk) 01:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

I was going to request for the page to be unprotected so I could add even more details AND remove that paragraph, but it said to ask the person who put it into protection first and if you are unwilling...then do the form. So yeah. Wanggaeparkgae (talk) 01:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

@Wanggaeparkgae: Hi, as the response you received on the article's talk page already explained, including Jackson's political declaration over the Hong Kong protests is perfectly fine. It is properly sourced and written in a neutral manner. The fact that his view is controversial is not a valid reason to remove it. You will need to find consensus among editors to have it removed. Ə XPLICIT 02:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

First of all, your whole layout is weird and diff from the others so idek if this how to reply but anyway f ur consensus. It WILL be removed. You can keep the protection label. I will become an editor and then we can fight💋 Wanggaeparkgae (talk) 02:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. Jackyteamwang seems like it might be a case of WP:QUACK or at least WP:MEAT. Let me know if you think this needs to be resolved via WP:SPI. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:57, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Thanks, I've blocked the user. Ə XPLICIT 12:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Please restore this image - OTRS request

Hey Explicit, OTRS has received a valid permission (Ticket# 2020072810004376) for the following file: File:Bahrain National Space Science Agency Logo.jpg. Can you please restore it at your earliest convenience so I can move it to Commons and apply the permission/license? Thank you! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 11:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Coffee:

Done, file restored. Ə XPLICIT 12:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 13:16, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png

Hi Explicit. I saw you deleted File:Mars Global Remote Sensing Orbiter and Small Rover (2020).png for violating non-free content criterion #1. Since China is relatively secret with their mission development, this is the only image that they released of the spacecraft, and since it launched last week, there will not be any more opportunities for free images to be created. Does this not pass the criteria that "no free equivalent is available, or could be created"? Thanks. --Yarnalgo _talk 17:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Yarnalgo: Hi, is there any particular reason the freely licensed images on Commons do not suffice? Ə XPLICIT 12:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

There are a few good images there, some of which are currently being used on the Tianwen-1 article, however none of them show the actual spacecraft. There is an image of a mockup of the rover that China showed off at a conference, which is a great free alternative to an image of the real rover, but this is a complicated mission and the rover is just one small component. There is also a lander and orbiter that are much bigger, and I worry that showing only an image of the rover like that could mislead readers into thinking that the rover is the complete mission if they do not read the article carefully. The image you deleted is the only image that has been released of the complete spacecraft, showing all the components of the mission. I think that image clearly satisfies WP:NFCC#8 as its "presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding". That image makes it much easier for a reader to quickly understand the size and scope of the mission and see what the spacecraft actually looks like. A free alternative that shows what is in that image does not exist, and, since the spacecraft is now in space on its way to Mars, taking new images is impossible. --Yarnalgo _talk 17:24, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the FFD nom! --Yarnalgo _talk 17:47, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Latest FaisalMusicFan99 sock

Hi Explicit
Latest User:FaisalMusicFan99 hoax article:- Stories from Beau movie/sandbox - retitling of Flushed Away
Previously deleted as - Draft:Stories from Dr. Beau retitling of Flushed Away on 12 June and Draft:Stories from Dr. Beau retitling of The Casagrandes on 15 June
Account currently being used Eddexterxxx (talk · contribs) - first used 24-25 Jun 2020 to edit an already deleted draft
Could I please also ask you to delete User:Eddexterxxx/sandbox before that gets copy-pasted into article space by another sock - Many thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC) ‎

@Arjayay:

Done, blocked and sandbox deleted. A history merge occurred for Flushed Away and Stories from Beau movie/sandbox . Am I correct that the page histories should be re-split and edits from August be deleted? Ə XPLICIT 11:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Explicit, yes it should be the old Flushed Away article without the sock edits - many thanks - Arjayay (talk) 11:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for listing files for discussion

Hello. Thanks for listing Anna Marly and Leonard Cohen's samples for discussion; I'm pleased their inclusion/existence will be given a fair chance. I'm not very familiar with file procedures, licencing etc. (because frankly it all makes me quite anxious) and am wondering if I should restate my argument for keeping the files on the new discussion page, or wait and respond to any other commenters where appropriate? Was the ping a courtesy/heads-up or a starting pistol? I'm not asking for help in arguing the case, just help gauging how/when getting involved is normally considered appropriate. Cheers :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:34, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Fred Gandt: Hi, you may want argue your "keep" position on the discussion page, but as brief summary of your original comment as it is already linked the nomination statement. The pings were a courtesy to notify the interested parties that a fuller discussion had been initiated. Ə XPLICIT 01:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay thanks :) Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 02:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

2A02:C7F:CD3:300:976:7B32:B4E9:C13F

Could you please block user:2A02:C7F:CD3:300:976:7B32:B4E9:C13F ASAP. She clearly will not stop until blocked. CLCStudent (talk) 23:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

An appreciation ...

		WikiMedal for Janitorial Services
		You've personally closed out a lot of my expired prods, and I expect you do this generally! Thank you for the unsung cleanup work! *Ravenswing* 07:15, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Text from deleted page

Hi Explicit, You deleted my article on Peter Earl a while ago, as it had insufficient source material. I was wondering whether there was any way to see the original text. I wanted to update it with some new articles I have found, but I don’t have my original draft saved. I can’t find any old version of the page anymore. Sorry, I haven’t done much editing so I’m still learning. Many thanks! Rich6500 (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Rich6500Rich6500 (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit: never mind, a kind user opened it up in draft form, so I can see what I wrote. Thanks for your time! Rich6500 (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)Rich6500Rich6500 (talk) 17:35, 11 August 2020 (UTC)