User talk:Explicit/Archive 55

Archive 50

←

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:15, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Categories of the Rutul people

Hello! Please explain to me why categories: Category:Guernsey_men, Category:West German men, Category:Italian men, Category:Gibraltarian men (etc.) are allowed, but category Category:Rutulian men, Category:Rutulian martial artists is not allowed? DigitalSpace (talk) 15:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@DigitalSpace: Hi, the categories were tagged for deletion simply for being empty. Whatever page(s) populated these categories have seemingly been deleted. ✗plicit 00:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Dragostea din tei music video still.png

Hey there again. Is this file the same one as the other one deleted per FFD? George Ho (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@George Ho: Hi, it's similar enough to the previous screenshot to qualify for WP:CSD#G4, so I've deleted it as such. ✗plicit 00:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Doomguy427

Hi Explicit. Doomguy427 is a relatively new account that looks to be editing in good-faith; the problem is that they keep uploading images without any source information or any license. They haven't responded to any of the notifications about this on their user talk page and they don't seem to be slowing down. They're almost certainly getting the files from somewhere online and File:Picture of Captain Roohullah Mohmand.jpeg was cleaned up by another user. Any suggestions on how to proceed here? Would you mind posting something about this on their user talk? -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hi, I have left the user a warning. ✗plicit 00:25, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Greenwich SM City Masinag (2024-11-16).jpg

Hi Explicit. Could you take a look at File:Greenwich SM City Masinag (2024-11-16).jpg? It seems to have multiple problems, WP:F5, WP:F7 and maybe even WP:F9 or WP:F11. I'm not sure what tag to place on it. There could also be problems per c:COM:FOP Philippines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Old AFD question

Hello, you closed this AFD, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Governing Body Commission, as a delete in 2022 and deleted the article Pragosh Das as a part of that. I have found the duplicate article Pragosha Dasa still exists, as near as I can tell because Pragosh Das was moved there in 2009 but then someone turned that redirect back into an article. I was wondering if you wanted to delete Pragosha Dasa as a duplicate whose deletion was called for by the AFD, or if I should nominated it for a new AFD now. Obviously this was some time ago so I understand if you have no idea at this point. Here2rewrite (talk) 02:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

@Here2rewrite: Hi, the history is a bit jumbled up, but the page actually survived AFD in 2008. Basically, Pragosha Dasa was renamed from Pragosh Das in May 2009. Someone redirected it to Governing Body Commission in October 2009 in spite of the AFD, and a bot fixed the double redirect, so Pragosh Das also pointed to Governing Body Commission. Pragosha Dasa was written as an article in 2015, but Pragosh Das was never fixed to point back to it, so WP:XFDcloser deleted it along with Governing Body Commission. Pragosha Dasa would need to go through AFD again if someone is seeking to delete it. ✗plicit 05:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for untangling that, that was a very clear explanation. I will look into what to do with the article from here. Here2rewrite (talk) 15:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Why was this deleted?

Hello, I have noticed and a fair few others that I’ve spoken to in person that you deleted the page of “Aleksei Kulashko”? I was confused why as even to this day he has participating in events and even been invited to light the chess olympics torch in New Zealand. So my request is for this page to be undeleted as it’s still significant to this day and there has not been any issue with it up until now. 27.252.156.6 (talk) 07:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aleksei Kulashko. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Done – as a contested soft deletion, the article has been restored upon request. ✗plicit 13:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

File:Starship Moments After Liftoff.jpeg

Hi Explicit. Would you mind taking a look at File:Starship Moments After Liftoff.jpeg? All of this user's uploads so far have been screenshots from YouTube videos released under YT's standard licensing; so, I've tagged them for speedy deletion per F9. This particular file is also a screenshot but it's via this website, and unlike the others i'm wondering whether it might be possible to convert to a non-free license given the way it's being used in Starship flight test 6. I'm a bit hesitant though because Starship flight test 5 seems to indicate that a free image of these SpaceX launches might be possible. SpaceX, itself, could even provide some acceptably licensed images if it wants. Is it then in your opinion even worth converting this to non-free per WP:FREER? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:22, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: Hi, I've deleted all the video screenshots as copyright violations. Aside from the most recent flight test, Starship flight test 4 is the only other in the series that does not contain freely licensed media. It's unlikely that an image for either article would qualify by Wikipedia's fair use standards, unless a particular image itself (and not the flight test in general) is subject to sourced critical commentary in accordance with WP:NFC#CS or considered significant enough for {{Non-free historic image}}. As flight test 6 is incredibly fresh, free media may became available in the coming days or weeks. ✗plicit 06:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for checking on these. Do you suggest tagging the remaining file for speedy deletion per F9 or just letting it be deleted for not having a copyright license per F4? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: My rule of thumb is to just let these types of files meet their fate. Regardless of the process, the end result is usually the same. ✗plicit 13:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's probably the best thing to do in this case. Thanks again. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:38, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Explicit. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. qcne (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Explicit I emailed you hours ago explaining the situation, and have just had to go to Oversight again to request suppression of the ANI thread where you and @Liz disclosed the supressed username. Utterly stupid behaviour. qcne (talk) 13:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Qcne: I'm pretty sure I did not mention the username in my followup response. In fact, I did everything to avoid mentioning or linking it again. I couldn't do much about the initial mention, as your email came in after that. I don't think I could have done much for that. ✗plicit 13:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

You mentioned the username in your first ANI post. qcne (talk) 13:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Qcne: ...Yes, that's why I just said. "I couldn't do much about the initial mention" because your email came afterwards. Like I stated at ANI, I was not aware of the distinction between account suppression and username suppression, given the original case I linked. ✗plicit 13:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I just would have thought you'd have immediately requested oversight once my email had gone through, instead of waiting hours and continuing the ANI thread. qcne (talk) 14:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Utterly stupid behaviour
That's a nasty way to talk to somebody. Please be kinder! ꧁Zanahary꧂ 06:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

You may want to go for ARB

Hi, another way for solve this, if needed, is trying for an Arbcom case instead of being so angered on AN/I. Please calm down or just take a break for a few hours, which might be better. -Lemonaka 13:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Lemonaka: (edit conflict) I honestly can not be bothered to tread through the politics of Wikipedia. I have enough work to do around here and mountains of page creations to do on Commons. I'd rather spend my time doing those things. ✗plicit 13:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Since the thread has now been suppressed, just to let you know (if you didn't see it) that I removed your two personal attacks on Liz (the second one was so egregious, especially to a female editor, that I seriously considered blocking you). Please don't do that again. Black Kite (talk) 13:23, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Black Kite: Noted. For the record, I didn't consider the second one being taken that way. It's a heteronormative train of thought, and hetero is something I am not. Viewing the world with a different lens and all, but thanks for the context reminder. ✗plicit 13:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Allow me to introduce you to the phrase, "get off my back." It means the same thing except no one has to think about your dick. Wins all around. Levivich (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand how "get off my dick" means something different in a non-hetronormative context and indeed when I looked into this phrase I found examples of it being used against gay men by straight men. I do understand how you wouldn't get the disgust lots of us have felt seeing it used against Liz. I seriously considered pressing the block button myself. I didn't become an admin to block people and since I respect Black Kite's assessmment that he would have done the same for any user with your editing/block history I didn't take him up on his permission for someone else to do it. But for what it's worth I actually think there is a better case to block an admin for it since there is a higher expectation in these regards. Barkeep49 (talk) 17:05, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I do understand how you wouldn't get the disgust lots of us have felt seeing it used against Liz. Why though? It's pretty obviously offensive and incredibly disrespectful. AusLondonder (talk) 18:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

As I said I felt disgust upon seeing it and I left my message because I find I didn't consider the second one being taken that way. It's a heteronormative train of thought, and hetero is something I am not in adequate. However, when looking into it there do seem to be certain communities (at least online ones) which use it rather than far more reasonable and acceptable "get off my back" and it appears explicit is a part of them. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Not just online communities. It's a common phrase men say to each other, at least in the US (or at least in the parts where I've been), stemming from "stepping on my dick" being a more emphatic version of "stepping on my toes", and thus "get off my dick" being a more emphatic version of "stop stepping on my toes" or "get off my back" or "get off my ass". But a man should never say "get off my dick" to a woman, because it obviously has a very different connotation in that context. Even where the phrase is common, a man saying it to a woman would be a major faux pas. It was a dumb and offensive thing for Explicit to say to Liz. Levivich (talk) 19:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

I concur. Saying something like "hop off [my dick]" is something commonly used as slang in the US to mean like "stop annoying me", but I will admit that there's times it shouldn't be used, especially in this context. Usually it's just a more innapropriate way of saying "leave me alone", but I can't speak on behalf of everyone. E_F⁵ 23:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Barkeep49: Fair enough. Not being heterosexual myself I found the "heteronormative train of thought" excuse pretty poor. AusLondonder (talk) 19:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

It unfortunately shows the (general, I have no personal issue with Barkeep49) pisspoor way editors who identify as female are treated here. The insult, the report, and the timing from Explicit are an extremely poor showing from a long term admin. (And to head off any questions, no it's not recall worthy and I don't believe in forced apologies) Star Mississippi 23:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

lol at much of this discussion. Several different universes here, but Explicit lived up to their name and should have thought a smidge more, especially during the next several minutes, and edited and spellchecked the thing. If I were an admin I'd give Explicit a justified 4 hours in the penalty box, although assume good faith seems to enter into all viewpoints of this. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Explicit, you're lucky other people got there first. If I had gotten there first, I can tell you with certainty that I would not have exhibited the hesitation that Black Kite and Barkeep49 showed with the block button. RoySmith (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Explicit, I agree with Roy Smith. I was asleep when this was reported. Had I been awake and watching ANI, you would be blocked and it would not have been for four hours. Keep your sexualized insults to yourself. Cullen328 (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Tzamplakon family

Hi User:Explicit, I think the article Tzamplakon family was deleted once, but is now renewed. May you explain this case to me. Thanks. Jingiby (talk) Jingiby (talk) 12:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jingiby: Hi, the article was draftified in early October and the resulting redirect was deleted in accordance with the speedy deletion criterion regarding cross-namespace redirects. The draft was submitted by the author and accepted by a reviewer a little over two weeks later, so it was moved back into mainspace. ✗plicit 13:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)