User talk:Graeme Bartlett/archive 7

Older talk is in 1 2 3 4 5 6 archives.

If I deleted your article, it is possible for me to restore it. Please post a message for reconsideration of the deletion. and you can read Why was my page deleted?

If you want to know why I declined your article at WP:AFC please see User:Graeme Bartlett/decline

please add your talk at the bottom of the page:

---

New Page Patroller

Dear Sir, I have recently volunteered to be the new page patroller. I am still learning. I saw your edits and was very much impressed. I need your guidance for the same. I hope you can give me some tips and your expert advise. Have a good day. Nefirious (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC).

Swine Flu

Dear Sir, can you update with the picture of Australia in the Swine Flu page? One dead. Wormow (talk) 14:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the advise

Dear sir, I would really like to thank you for guiding me. I will definitely adhere to the policies of Wikipedia and make concerted efforts to improve the quality of articles. Thanks for the assistance. I am aiming to be an administrator in future if and at all am able to maintain a good record. Nefirious (talk) 11:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again

I have started to use the edit summary. Maybe I was a bit absent minded and might have forgotten to use the edit summary sometimes. So if the picture does not qualify for a fair use image then what is it that I have to do. Do I delete the picture myself or is there any alternate  ? Nefirious (talk) 11:50, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

You can tag with the speedy delete, or you can ask me to delete it for you. I think the alternative is that you down load a map of Europe, of which you should be able to find plenty on commons, and draw on those invasions yourself, together with any labeling required. If the book is very old it may be public domain. When was it published and where? You may be able to find an old book with a map too, this history should not have changed much in the last 100 years. An administrator will need to have a good idea of copyright and how it applies to Wikipedia, so this is a chance to prove your skill! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Sir, I would really appreciate if you delete the picture for me. Secondly, I have decided to redraw the picture. Though the book was published way back in the year 1967, I still feel that it would be of appropriate for me to redraw the map. I would once again like to thank you for your help and support. I'll be a bit more careful the next time I upload a pic. I'll carefully go through the wiki policies. You are an administrator who is not only helpful but polite. Looking forward for more assistance. Nefirious (talk) 14:09, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Precious assistance

Thank you for having come to my rescue to help fix the blunder I had made by duplicating articles. I am still learning and thanks to Wikipedians like you... I am REALLY learning! McMarcoP (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:41, 22 June 2009 (UTC).

IFU

You may wish to readd US Virgin Island that was put in by Vrysxy, but uploaded anyway. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:12, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. It's at IFU, along with a new blank map to go along with it. (A different blank, since this new blank now includes the US VI, so people have the choice between having the VI or not)

70.29.212.226 (talk) 07:09, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok... bugfix. If you didn't already process this, the correct version is now up at the /svg/ pages. Sorry about that. Hopefully cluebot won't do a reversion on it, since it shrunk the info by 7kB. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 07:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Asmahan and Farid al-Atrash

Graeme: user Supreme Deliciousness is starting an edit war again on referenced articles. 3rd-party ruling has already been requested, and you have required certain evidence to be presented. You required evidence from the two opponents to show that those musicians immigrated to Egypt or to show that they were Syrian when adult, respectively. I have presented the evidence you required weeks ago, and SD has provided none. The google links that he provoded today do not constitute the evidence you required and I will rebutt them shortly. Could you please monitor those articles and not allow them to be changed before 3rd-party ruling or consensus? Regards, --98.195.180.144 (talk) 21:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Two pages protected for a week, please no more edit war. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Graeme Bartlett, this issue has to be settled. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 21:44, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Keep discussing on the talk page. Rather than here! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:01, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Article War Between Avery_player2011 and Person User talk:Michael herc

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Though this is my opinion, I believe the dispute on the Article Deford, Michigan has led false information to be posted on the page by Michael herc out of rage. I have viewed past edits by Avery_player2011 to be true with some mistakes (Notable Landmarks etc.). I believe the last edit posted by Avery_player2011 should remain as the page's final edit but it dose need to be fixed and edited in such away that it is true. If you do care, leave me a message and if I seem a tad offensive to you or those listed above i'm truly sorry but I believe that truthfulness is the most important thing to this site. Bernette

No. This is a My computer. It could be that we are using the same internet line or our IP address are very similar. Bernette 01:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC) I will provide sited information!

That citation should resolve the issue. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

No. This is a My computer. It could be that we are using the same internet line or our IP address are very similar. Bernette 01:12, 25 June 2009 (UTC) I will provide sited information!

Cited Sources:

• History of Tuscola and Bay Counties, Michigan: with illustrations and biographical sketches of some of their prominent men and pioneers. Ann Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan Library. 2005 [1883]. Retrieved 2009-03-08.

• Cass City Public Schools

• .

• WWW.Wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_City_High_School

• http://www.michigan.gov/cgi/0,1607,7-158-52927_53037_12540_13084---,00.html

and may more!

would it be ok if i redid the entire article? Bernette 01:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

You can rewrite if you wish, but it is a good idea to retain all the good features, otherwise someone else will revert it. Use those ref tags to attach your references to the relevent facts in the article. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

If I may chime in, since this is about me. I happened to verify much of my information and must protest that in fact Avery_player2011 is the user with false information throughout much of this article. Not only do I back my information up, but I happen to live 6 miles from Deford and the fact that anybody could possibly say these things is wrong to me. I have current data from the MHSAA website about the Cass City School District: [1] which shows that there are currently 465 students enrolled at the high school, making it a Class C district. Also from the Census Bureau, this shows that Deford's ZIP Code (48729) is home to 1,611 residents: [2] I do not have any pictures of the actual Deford, Michigan but I can promise you that the pictures on this site are of Cass City, Michigan mostly. Michael herc (talk) 04:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

If i may, I have reviewed most of the information on the page and have added new resources. Cass city played State quiz bowl this year and play on the Class A bracket due to its amount of students. I have checked these pictures and have proved them to be of Deford, Michigan. I have reviewed my sources and They are true! The Census dose not collect data for the area and the only way the population is counted is through the towns Library. Bernette 04:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Michigan High School Athletic Association claims the school is class C, you guys will have to explain that it is C, and you can mention other teams may be in their class A or B or whatever if there is a supporting ref. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:21, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Cass City High School has 1,943 students according to Michigan.gov and the schools website Ny Definition, this makes Cass City a Class A. In sports, Cass City is problem considered a Class B/C due to the lack or bigger schools in the area. Thanks for input and I hope we can solve this problem soon. Bernette 04:27, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

If you read more carefully, you will notice that Cass City School District had 1,943 students for the entire district at that time. However, at this time in 2009, according to MHSAA, Cass City High School currently has 465 students. I must also say, as I have before and I cannot make this any more clearer without being rude, that I live next to Deford, Michigan. There is no downtown area at all. I'm not sure where you are getting this information but if this information is telling you it is Deford, it is incorrect. The pictures that are being posted on the site are in fact of Cass City, Michigan. This would be like somebody coming on here saying that my hometown of Caro somehow sprouted a mall, or any other makeup of somebody's mind. I really want to end this, but I'm afraid this will go on indefinitely as long as false information is being posted by Avery_player2011 as well as, apparently, Bernette. Just to verify my sources further, I also have this site: [3] which further proves my point about Cass City High School. I also have this source to further my case about the population of the entire ZIP code of Deford (which includes the hamlet itself) just in case the Census Bureau is not enough: [4] which still shows the population at being at 1,611. I understand the Census doesn't count the actual town of Deford and show the population itself, but it does to the ZIP code, which includes all of Deford proper. It is very strange that the population currently listed on the Deford, Michigan page is strikingly similar to the population of the village of Caro. Mrhercli89 (talk) 04:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have rewritten him and told him that these two links do provide information that are as listed true but some of the information provided that situation of Deford since it is spread about over 3 townships and part of the community is registered with a Cass City zip. For the area of Deford, the population of the community is 4,067l. Bernette 05:10, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

But as I said in the post on my talk page, you cannot include the population of another town in with another town because that does not make sense. For instance, the population of the village of Caro is about 4,068 (strangely close to what yours says), however, the 48723 ZIP code is 12,794 [5] which is straight from the Census Bureau just like I received the 48729 ZIP. Since the hamlet of Deford (which the article is about) lies entirely within the 48729 ZIP, I can only assume that the population of the hamlet of Deford is actually less than 1,611. When you go to the Census Bureau's FactFinder page, you can type in 48729 and look at a reference map of the area of which it encompasses.

Caro's Wikipedia page said that its population is 4,151 in 2006! Sorry for all the trouble (talk)and thank you for being kind and realistic about this issue. You do really care and I hope we can resolve this as soon as we can. Thank you for you consideration. Bernette 05:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do really care about these issues. This is what I do. I love it. I'm just trying to explain how we're actually probably arriving at different numbers and such. But I think we're looking at the ZIPs and such in different ways so it's creating a standstill. But as for the Caro page, that was back before the recession hit Michigan and it started losing people. You have to view the Census Bureau's website for more accurate information. Caro has decreased in population just like every other town.

But as you may know, Caro is a powerhouse of jobs that may people are taking. Deford's population has increased due to the fact that is is near Caro, Cass City, Kingston, Bad Axe, and Saginaw. All these place havebig populations and need a labor force in which their communities cannot provide so what happens? This town, which is in the center of all these places, becomes a hot stop to live and a population explosion happens. Thank you for considering my view Bernette 05:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand that you have posted back on my talk page, but this is just totally ridiculous. Just because you'd read something about Deford or believe something to be true does not make it true. You have to actually go there and see for yourself. I invite you to drive through Deford, down Deckerville Road and tell me what you see. I cannot believe this. As my friend and I have seen when we drove through Deford just yesterday, we saw nothing but a few trailers here and there and a dead "downtown" area with one gas station. I don't know what you see, but that's what I see, as well as my friends and family.

I have been through Deford many times and have even stopped in town. it is not just a couple of Trailers but neighborhoods and a vibrant downtown area that during much of the day dose seem to be dead. Bernette 05:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't even know what to say to you. I cannot believe this. Totally unbelievable. I think I'll have to take some pictures like tomorrow and post them on here. Wow.

And whats not to say that these are of an actually of a small populated area like Sonver? What if you do take photos that mislead this person in believing that you are true? I can make Caro seem like Deford with some misleading photos too! Sorry for all the trouble Bernette 06:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Well the last time I checked (yesterday), Deford was a small populated area. I'll make sure that I take pictures that are unmistakably Deford. If you choose to delete them again and instead put pictures of Cass City, we'll know who's the real liar here. I live next to Deford, you don't. I have firsthand experience with the hamlet. This lying is going to end. I cannot believe it is being allowed to continue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrhercli89 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 25 June 2009

I believe that would be considered WP:OR which is a big no-no here. (apologies to Graeme for this continuing on his talk page). Toddst1 (talk) 06:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have been through Deford many time as well. And asdly to say, those pictures are of Deford, Not Cass City, Not Caro, DEFORD! an too agree with you in saying that i cannot belive this is allowed to continued. Sorry for all the Trouble Bernette 06:17, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I am very sorry this is going on. But I don't know how Bernette is being allowed to openly give false information about something when somebody like me is trying to speak the truth. I'm not sure what else to do. It is very hard to see lies allowed on Wikipedia and administrators allow this to happen. Just as a last statement and also a source for backing me up, here's google maps. You can do the satellite view and zoom in on Deford there and tell me where anything that's considered a "downtown" is located or anything other than a gas station and a few homes. [6]Mrhercli89 (talk) 06:24, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I really tried to bring trustful and reliable information to the subject and just to add, the google maps haven't been updated for 3 years. I really give up and on this subject, i back down. if he wants to keep lying then there is little that I can do to stop him. Thank you for your time and for your view, you are truly dedicated to your work and I will leave you alone now. sorry for all the commotion. Bernette 06:28, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Strong suggestion: Move this discussion to Talk:Deford, Michigan so we can stop bothering Graeme. Toddst1 (talk) 06:56, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deford, MI Page Delete

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I was wondering if it was possible to delete the page Deford, Michigan? I believe that the amount of information on the page, including pictures, are so incredibly false that it warrants deletion. There are only a few things on the page that are even left that are true. Mrhercli89 (talk) 06:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

No. Not at this point.

Strong suggestion: Move this discussion to Talk:Deford, Michigan so we can stop bothering Graeme. Toddst1 (talk) 06:38, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lake BG FAR

I've done some more work on it, added stuff about Kingston, and accounted for all the statements. I guess strcture and polish are remaining. Please do comment/reply on the structure. Thanks YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!) paid editing=POV 08:32, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Maharmah

Thanks for bringing Maharmah back from the netherworld. I'm somewhat disturbed to see that the article was deleted on June 2nd claiming CSD:A7 when the log shows that there wasn't even a CSD on the article at the time. Can you confirm this?

Also, now that I see the content of Maharmah, I'd be tempted to CSD:A1: I can't figure out the context of what's written. I won't because I'd like to find a peacable way to get the article either fixed or get the original author to understand why it's being deleted in order to prevent further troubles. —  X  S  G  05:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

It is very hard to understand, but A1 is not right, as there is some idea of what the topic is. Userification until it is good could be the way to go. In fact I will userfy it for him. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:37, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I did not restore the speedy delete tag, otherwise it may have been scrapped again very fast. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:42, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

give it a subst:prod|reason tag if you think it is non controversial, otherwise AfD if it looks complex! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Does this mean that the history of the article is now incomplete due to a partial restoration? I'm not criticising, I'm honestly curious. —  X  S  G  05:50, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

A1 doesn't seem quite right to me either, but primarily based on the A1 caveat that it's for small articles which don't really reference the text. For my own edification, were I to run across this article in the mainspace, would the most appropriate manner of removing it from Wikipedia be via AfD?

Re: Moving to userspace: A wise move. I've never seen that done before, and I applaud it. Thanks for righting a wrong, in any case. I've added my thoughts to the discussion page in hopes of helping the editor move the article forward. —  X  S  G  05:45, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

give it a subst : prod tag with a reason if it is non controversial, or an AfD if it s complicated or controversial. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Asmahan

Hey. Just thought you might want to know that your involvement with the Asmahan article has been mentioned repeatedly on the talk page, and that some editors there have requested your input. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 00:08, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to bug you again, but I think we could use another hand here, or at least some advice. I came up with what I thought was a decent solution (which Supreme Deliciousness agreed to), but Arab Cowboy won't agree with it. Normally in this case I'd post on the appropriate Wikiproject, but there really isn't one. I suppose I could post on both the Syria and Egypt projects, but I wonder if this issue we're having now would just be magnified. But I think it's really just Arab Cowboy who's pushing some sort of POV (which has been echoed by another outsider). Given the fact that this has been going on for over two months now, I'm not entirely convinced that he's going to be agreeable. So what do you recommend? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 14:43, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

• Annyong, your post above shows your misunderstanding of the evidence, which you later acknowledged on the Talk page of Asmahan. The evidence submitted by SD was a misquotation from the source, to put it politely, and was in reference to a different musician, NOT Asmahan; you had not verified the evidence at the source before you agreed with it. So, as you later acknowledged, my position was not a POV. It was, and still is, the only position that is backed by reliable sources.
• Graeme, your input is indeed requested. SD is AGAIN reverting the Asmahan and Farid al-Atrash articles without consensus. All evidence presented so far has backed my position. He has made no argument at all on Farid's Talk page during the "protection" period and has presented no evidence to challenge the information that has been on the aricle. Please stop his reverts.

Regards, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 09:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Redirects

Just so you know, there was no previous Mfd for those 2 specific redirects, so closing the discussion early was out of line based on that fact and the fact that there is not a single policy anywhere on Wikipedia that says such redirects are banned/barred/dis-allowed. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 00:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

There was a previous MfD for some very similar ones! result was delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

File:Coat of arms of Western Sahara.png

On File:Coat of arms of Western Sahara.png, I have put back the date to one that will actually put it in a category that will get deleted. By backdating you put it in a category that will never be deleted. You may think that the image has no source, there must be one, even if it is a hoax. If it is a hoax it would have been much better to nominate it at WP:FFD, as even with no source it may be valid to keep. Speedy deletion only has a limited number of reasons for use that are subject to a policy. If they are outside that, it should be discussed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:59, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

It does have a source, of course, just not one that is allowed. Maybe when the time expires this time you guys will manage to keep it deleted? ¦ Reisio (talk) 09:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Archive speedys

Hi Graeme, thanks for speedying my archive requests, if you could help me a little more..I you look at my talk page and my archives you will see the pages are now in red and deleted just I want to rid myself of the red on my talk page. How can I get rid of them as well? (Off2riorob (talk) 22:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

It's ok now, thank you. (Off2riorob (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

That is good, because I had no idea apart from purge the cache. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:19, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Urgent Help Requested

Graeme, Arab Cowboy is asking that you please see his Talk page http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Arab_Cowboy and see if you can provide a critical and fair assessment of the block issued there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nefer Tweety (talk • contribs) 10:54, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Bad page deletions

Hello Graeme Barlett, you recently visted the Wirecast page that I created. It had been marked for deletion but you stopped it from that, and I thank you. I am fairly new to Wikipedia and am doing my best to make all information correct and referenced. The problem I currently have is that some of my other pages are up for deletion and I am fearful that they will be deleted before I can completely refrence them. One of them has already been deleted: ScreenFlow. And the others are on the chopping block by User:Tetromino. Please look at these pages and tell me what I can do to make them vaild. Telestream, Episode/Episode Pro, Episode Engine. You seemed to believe that the Wirecast page was valid enough, so if you can help me do this to the rest of the pages, I would be extremely grateful. Thank you, --Ballplyr86 (talk) 17:55, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

you will have to go to the Afd pages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telestream and explain why the articles should be kept. There seems to be a strong case for Telestream to be kept. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The matter over the pages Telestream, Episode/Episode Pro, Episode Engine has been resolved, refer to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Telestream for any details you would like to know. All parties in this matter agree that these pages should be kept, so I request that you delete the warning on these pages or allow me to do it, thank you. --Ballplyr86 (talk) 17:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

This is a speedy close, You can follow the instructions on the AfD, which involves removing the banner and putting an oldafd notice on the talk page to link to the debate. An administrator does not have to do this as it is keep and uncontroversial. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:06, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

---

Unable to upload an image

Hi. Still I'm unable to upload an image. Though I've done more than 10 edits, I'm not coming in the list of AutoConfirmed User. How can I apply for administratorship?

Sukhoi30mki (talk) 12:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

What about License?

How can I prevent other users and administrators or any other website of Wiki to use any image which I upload and if anyone wants to use the image uploaded by me he/she can't use it without my permission. So is there any specific license which suits my wants?

Thank you, Sukhoi30mki (talk) 13:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

A few mild points

Hi there. Although I obviously respect you, I have a few concerns with your participation at Arab Cowboy's talk page. While I have absolutely no issue with you disagreeing with the block, I do have an issue with you making statements of dubious truthfulness and in a somewhat behing-the-back manner. Here, you state that I "overreact in a COI situation". First, I don't think I had any interest in this editor at all - my only comment in the thread prior to my warning to Arab Cowboy was this - "While the US Congress may not make a law abridging your freedom of speech, Wikipedia can - a policy, that is. That said, I looked through the threads you linked to, and I can see no admin action necessary or even remotely warranted." This was not directed at Arab Cowboy, and in fact, he was not even in the thread prior to my comment - a comment that was intended to discount the original editor's "right to freedom of expression" claim and to state that no admin action was necessary. In the ensuing disruption, I did not participate, or even hold any opinion at all except for "this needs to stop". ANI is dramatic and crowded enough without rapid-fire statements such as "Roux, obviously, it's a good thing that you are not [an admin].", "The 'logic' of some of the users here is pathetic", and ""but from the way the answers have been coming here, it's more like a madhouse than a place to have an intelligent discourse." Again, I respect you highly as an editor and as an admin, but if you are going to disagree with me, I prefer you do it directly on my talk page, or at least directed to me on the talk page thread. As it is, you are in effect encouraging AC to continue on his revenge quest, despite two admins having agreed with me by declining the unblock requests. While he has every right to due process and can file all the RfCs he desires after his block lifts, I would appreciate it if you didn't stoke the fire in a manner that, in my (conflict of?) opinion, wasn't researched very well. Thanks for your time. Tan | 39 00:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tan, I am not joining in the with the AN/I discussion, and I can understand why AC was blocked. I an not supporting that he be unblocked or even ask for it, and I advised him not to go to AN/I for this purpose. The links were for AC to read, essays on how he should be responding in his circumstance, but you are right in saying that no admin action was talked about in those essays, and I agree with what you said: "no admin action necessary or even remotely warranted". I think that you were too involved to issue the block yourself though. But I was not sufficiently disturbed by that to annoy you about it. Especially since the unblock request had already been declined by others. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for upholding the truth, Graeme. Other admins on AN/I were not of such caliber. Regards, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 15:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Rodolfo Valentin, article

Rodolfo Valentin article has been in Wikipedia from several years. Last July 15-2009 somebody from IP # 147.70.118.96 was vandalizing several times the article, into a few minutes interval. In the same moment I reverted to its rigth version, a minute later somebody named "el estremenu", vandalized again. ( probably it was the same from IP # 147.70.118.96)--I requested protection to the article. An hour after you protected the article, another user of name "bjweeks", nominated the article for deletion!! this is unbelievable since this article has been long time there, everybody liked and has also been rated as star-class by wikiproject. I assume that the person that is nominating the article for deletion is probably the same that was vandalizing it before. And also I assume this is a competitor of Rodolfo Valentin just trying to hurt his profile. Please help to keep this good article and remove the deletion request. thank youjormarie 20:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Rodolfo Valentin, article

Rodolfo Valentin article has been in Wikipedia from several years. Last July 15-2009 somebody from IP # 147.70.118.96 was vandalizing several times the article, into a few minutes interval. In the same moment I reverted to its rigth version, a minute later somebody named "el estremenu", vandalized again. ( probably it was the same from IP # 147.70.118.96)--I requested protection to the article. An hour after you protected the article, another user of name "bjweeks", nominated the article for deletion!! this is unbelievable since this article has been long time there, everybody liked and has also been rated as star-class by wikiproject. I assume that the person that is nominating the article for deletion is probably the same that was vandalizing it before. And also I assume this is a competitor of Rodolfo Valentin just trying to hurt his profile. Please help to keep this good article and remove the deletion request. thank youjormarie 20:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodoval (talk • contribs)

Once a deletion request is in, it has to stay there for a week. If it is done in bad faith, it should be revealed in the debate, and if almost every one wants to keep it, it can have a speedy close. I will take a look and see if this is warranted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

No bad faith nomination here, the nominator is different. You will have to argue why the article should be kept, as the current consensus is to delete. No claims of notability are made. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. The article has been in wikipedia for many years. why is now the reason to nominate it for deletion?jormarie 16:17, 17 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodoval (talk • contribs)

Go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodolfo Valentin and make your claim here. Just because it has been around for many years is not a reason to keep it. There has to be some claims as to why he is notable, perhaps appearing in many newspapers, perhaps being namedroped on many movies. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you again for your response. It is very easy to see Rodolfo Valentin notability. He is one of the top 10 hairstylist and one of the top 10 salons in New York. He is constantly appearing in newspapers, magazines and television. Please see attached some of the links to newspapers and magazines: [7] New York Times (newspaper) [8]Guest of a guest [9] New York Daily News ( newspaper) [10] Leukemia society [11] the queens courier ( Newspaper) [12] Prestigious, ROBB REPORT MAGAZINE [13] Amarillo, website

[14]New York Magazine, rated 10 out of 10

and like these, are hundreds of them to see just typing Rodolfo Valentin in any search engine. Please help to keep this article. thank you again.jormarie 16:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rodoval (talk • contribs)

I was trying very hard to correct the links ( some of them have been moved to other files or archives, but for some reason I am not able to do it. I will fix them, when the system let me. the user [[15]] Bjweeks, is making an statement that Rodolfo Valentin is only showing "in a couple of local newspapers"...when in reality Rodolfo is named by the press as the "celebrity hairstylist" of New York as it is showing in the last article written about him last month.[16]Guest of a guest---It is very offensive. I think Bjweeks has some kind of interest in hurting Rodolfo Valentin name. Anyone can just type RODOLFO VALENTIN in google, yahoo, msn or any other search engine, to find almost 1 million search results, thousands of them related to television, magazines and newspapers articles.68.161.91.72 (talk) 18:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

You have to log back in to use the Rodoval account. Anonymous IP users cannot edit due to anti-vandalism protection. But if you can't log in and want to edit as an IP I can deprotect it for you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:25, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

RODOLFO VALENTIN ARTICLE

I am very happy, there are more users voting to keep the article than people asking to delete it.( when the request for deletion will be removed?)-- Also, I know the article needs to have the links and references fixed. What happens is that 3 of the links have been moved to other location ( archives). I am ready to fix them but as I said before, wikipedia does not let me do it, even if I am signing as Rodoval. How can I do it?--You have offered to deprotect it for me. thanksjormarie 19:31, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Radio Broadgreen page

Hi,

I made the Radio Broadgreen page last night so we could advertise the station as much as we can, however, a lot of the information has been deleted and it is up for speedy deletion.

I really do not understand why as I am a member of the station and put a lot of the information on the website as well.

If you could just explain the situation with this as I am a bit lost at the moment, that would be a great help.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeeDay84 (talk • contribs) 08:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem here is two fold, first much was copied off the web site. Although you may have permission to duplicate it, it is more complicated. You have to send an email from the radio station email address to the appropriate permissions address at Wikipedia to prove that permission is given. It is usually easier to rewrite the material. Secondly there has to be some claim of importance to avoid a speedy delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:40, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Radio Broadgreen page

Hi Graeme,

I have taken your advice and re-written the Radio Broadgreen page.

We really need this little wiki site so we can generate as much publicity as we can for the radio station so if you wouldnt mind having a look over it and letting me know your thoughts that would be great.

Please let me know if there is anything else you want changing on it.

Thanks

DeeDay84 (talk) 15:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Image Question

You recently deleted an image I uploaded. I am confused as to why, as the image is MINE. I took the photograph when I saw the band live. Help me out here. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:27, 22 July 2009 (UTC).

I'm fine with it being public domain. A little confused as to why Wiki let me choose the license if it's not allowed. But it doesn't matter. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC).

Messages waiting

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at GrooveDog's talk page.
Message added 22:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks

Thank you for this notice. While I sort of expected to have my CSD request declined, I certainly didn't expect the declining admin to leave a courtesy note on my page with an explanation. Thank you for going above and beyond, and for adding that "special touch" to Wikipedia.

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For going above and beyond. -shirulashem(talk) 00:26, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Calif-IOU

Exactly which part of wikipedia is a for-profit commercial entity? And exactly how might a pixel for pixel copy of an image be a derivative work of the original image?--TheBigZzz (talk) 13:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Burma

Ah, shoot, I hadn't even noticed that it was used in infoboxes, I had just made the sketchy thing for a graphics lab request. Thanks for withdrawing it. :) Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 13:45, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The 404 podcast

I see you declined to speedily delete The 404 podcast because of concerns you have about the previous discussion. I've opened a new discussion on the topic, please share your thoughts there.--RadioFan (talk) 14:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

• I think we're at loggerheads over this article. I speedy deleted it yesterday but userfied it for a user to improve upon. The same version I deleted is now back up (and nominated for AfD). Can you explain why you unilaterally reversed the first AfD without going through deletion review? I'm debating whether to opine on the AfD or whether to open a DRV thread. —C.Fred (talk) 16:20, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I don't think we are jammed up on this as you think. I did not reverse the previous AfD, just expressing my opinion that it was really a no consensus, keeps and deletes were equally numbered and about balanced on their arguments. The main reason for not speedy deleting was the copyright infringement speedy notice which was clearly not checked with the original. If there was a strong case presented by the tagger - eg article with the same name with an AfD, or I did not have to do a dig through possible names, (ie the tagger had linked the previous discussion), or a solid delete vote then I would have speedy deleted it yesterday. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Hrm. I think the better outcome is to take a fresh pulse of opinion about the article with a second AfD. That said, my current !vote in the AfD, if it goes to conclusion, is strong delete with salting of the title. —C.Fred (talk) 20:54, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
      • In effect, you did reverse the previous AfD. An article existed, it went through a long AfD process, Julian Colten closed it as 'delete'. Someone recreated it, and you decline to delete it, saying, "the last one should have been no consensus". By declining this speedy, you were de facto causing another deletion review process to occur, as now it could not be speedy deleted. And now it's at it's second AfD, when DRV would have been the clear venue if you did not like JC's closure of the initial AfD. Not, not impressed. Tan | 39 22:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I see that you've blocked my sockpuppet account, User:Pac-Man765...

...so could you please do me a favour, and block my main one (the one I have written this message with) as well? If you had looked at my talk page in the last few hours, you'd have seen that I had requested this, and I'm surprised that you haven't done it already! Gingerfield rocks (talk) 14:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Pembrokeshire Tea Co

Hello I wanted to add an {{hangon} tag but you did not allow time.

I added that as the first as a round up of Pembrokeshire Produce companies which export to all the UK. Within Pembrokeshire (and Wales) that is a major tea brand, with a very loyal following. I was in the middle of writing additional items for the piece, including references when you deleted it.

Maybe give people more time in future and not be so gun-ho with your deletions? There are a lot of similar comments on these pages supporting this view. This is why there is a {{hangon} tag, clearly some people ignore this in the deletion guidelines.

I joined this site to help support information accuracy and completeness. I gather I am mistaken in my view Wikipedia stands for free and accurate information when it is clearly ignored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bessieofwales (talk • contribs) 17:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hi, I have been working on an article for a while in my sandbox and was wondering if you would have a look at it. I don't know how to make the logo in the infobox smaller and I've spent a lot of time referencing the article. I had tried to post this article before, but, some editors deleted it. I did a lot of research trying to make my article the same as other articles I've found on wikipedia on the same subjects before I posted it the first time. When the other articles deleted my sandbox article, they also deleted another article I wrote called K-box which had been on wikipedia already a few weeks and I didn't understand why either articles were deleted because I had been really very careful to make sure my articles fell within the guidelines and I had researched articles of similar subjects. they were also articles about two subject that I had found that were in red on the original subject I had made some contributions to. Anyway, it would be really kind of you if you could have a look and let me know how you think the article is (and also if you know how to change the logo size). http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Cheaperbydozen/Sandbox Thanks very much in advanceCheaperbydozen (talk) 22:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for helping me with the logo and giving feedback. I changed the first paragraph and got rid of the quote from that article. but, I'm still afraid to move the article over because I'm worried that it will just be deleted again without any explanation. Do you think it's ok to be moved?Cheaperbydozen (talk) 11:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi. thanks for getting back to me. I think it may be a big product because it won an MVP award for music therapy (i put the reference in). I will look for more magazines before moving it. thanksCheaperbydozen (talk) 13:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I have found magazine references from Billboard magazine and Music Week about Kerchoonz having licensed The Beggars Catalogue (Adele, The prodigy, etc.) circa 20,000 songs. I found some more references and added them to the article. There seems to be a lot of information from various news sources like USA today and several other major news sources about that deal. Do I need to cite everything? I think the two most prominent music magazines would be Music Week and Billboard. I assume that most of the other press have simply re-iterated these two stories? here is my sandbox article link: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Cheaperbydozen/Sandbox If you think it's ok, I will move the article to 'kerchoonz' as an article title or should it be kerchoonz.com ? thanksCheaperbydozen (talk) 13:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Don't use .com on the name as it makes it look like a spam right from the start. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Request for feedback: -graphy

You are a participant in this article's AfD. I need your input on how to fix the article...

I noticed this article is actually a list (in fact, a glossary), so I've been doing some work on it.

I've renamed it to Glossary of graphies, have cleaned it up a bit, and have added it to Portal:Contents/List of glossaries.

I've posted my rationale to its AfD.

Please let me know at the AfD if anything else needs to be done to the article in order for it to serve justifiable purposes of the encyclopedia.

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 23:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Andriy Khomin

Please redirect Andriy Homin to Andriy Khomin. In Ukrainian Premier Liha is 2 players: Andriy Khomin and Andriy Khomyn. Bogic (talk) 15:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

The problem here is that there are two different people Andriy Homin and Andriy Khomyn, if I redirect as you say, one article will be lost and we will have a double redirect, you can make this redirect yourself anyway, you don't need me to do that. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

File:Advanced technology vessel.JPG

Why did you delete this image? Contrary to the speedy delete tag's message, there was a clear fair use rationale given. I would undelete, but I don't want to wheel war. Nyttend (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

It was not that there was not FUR, it was that the rationale was invalid. Just because it is the only picture does not mean that it should be copied as a fair use. Someone could redraw this to make a free one! It could have the text cropped off too to reduce the amount that was duplicated. I will not be upset if you undelete it as I don't want a wheel war myself.

Thanks for helping me understand; I was simply saying that the image didn't fall under F9, and my reading of the CSD doesn't admit a speedy without a several-day-old tag. Of course it will be deleteable in a few days without a source, but I'm going to tag it for nonfree-reduce in case someone is able to supply the source. Curious, though — if someone redrew this image, wouldn't it be a derivative work? Nyttend (talk) 22:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I am imagining looking at it from a different angle, the cut away could be done in a different style, the missiles could look different. The text annotation could be quite different. The propellor would probably not be gold. However it would be a couple of hours work for an enthusiast! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Ruthless vandal

Hi, its me again, vandal 173.57.187.153 is back, adding nonsense to wikipedia, wasting everyon's time. please check if you can figure it out. thank you. Cliché Online (talk) 05:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Yes I made the images originally and uploaded them on here last year. I just moved them over to Commons yesterday (my Commons user ID isn't the same as my Wikipedia one). - Yorkshirian (talk) 11:36, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

The style of user page looked similar so I suspected you may the one and the same person! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

July 30, 2009

Hello, Graeme Bartlett. You have new messages at Curtis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Blocks of IPs

Please unblock 124.189.197.9 (talk · contribs) and 124.189.193.15 (talk · contribs). I am in the middle of trying to resolve this apparent non-vandalism (appears to be a dispute about the validity of the external links); see User talk:124.189.193.15 and User talk:timsdad. Let me know if you disagree. Thank you. -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 09:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

OK unblocked. See if you can sort it out. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt action. This is all part of a misguided anti-BITEing campaign; the surest way for me to become disillusioned with the Wikipedia model :-D -RunningOnBrains^(talk) 09:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Shopping cart

Hi -- Can you please provide further help with this? Similar vandalism here by new user Papupi. High probability of sockpuppet (compare to 76.88.183.195). Thanks! Typewritten (talk) 17:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again -- I just requested intervention re 76.88.183.195 following persistent edits after your last warning. Typewritten (talk) 09:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

You reported at the right place, while I was away from the computer Nja247 blocked for a week. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Graeme, the user started again with a registered account (Papupi) after the anonymous IP (76.88.183.195) was blocked (probably samme user). Is more warning necessary? See also comments in the article's talk page. Thanks for your help. Typewritten (talk) 07:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Nathan King photo

Hi Graeme Bartlett, I saw the speedy tag was removed from File:Nk 17.jpg. I think it's most likely this image is copyvio, we can see it's in the sequence with this photo on the artists own website, and there's a colour version in this newspaper article. I don't think the uploader is the copyright holder, and therefore it ought to deleted. Perhaps I could have used a better reason on the speedy tag, I can take it to WP:PUI if you'd prefer. XLerate (talk) 13:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• XLerate: Best to use {{di-no source}} first rather then add {{db-filecopyvio}}. Also tineye.com shows nothing but thats not to say it's not a copyvio. Bidgee (talk) 13:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
  • The newspaper picture also has compression artifacts and is smaller, and is not credited, the gallery image is getting close, but it also is a different size to the Nk 17 shot. It is looking to be some sort of publicity image. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for {{di-no source}}. That's right, looks like a promotional photo, fair use doesn't apply because it's replaceable. XLerate (talk) 00:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Jason1960

Thanks for blocking this user. I was in the midst of making out an WP:AN/I report about the issues of this user and the earlier blocking of IP 70.127.200.220 by Garion96 for 72 hours [17] for attacks by the IP on my talk page here, here, here, and here, which used the identical language as User:Jason1960 here. I was going to note in the AN/I report that User:Jason1960 was the same person and thus was avoiding the block of the IP by using a registered name. Is it possible that the block on User:Jason1960 be extended to match the IP, since it's obvious it is the same person or perhaps longer for editing while evading a block as a sock? Thanks, in any case. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Block extended to 72hrs. I hope you have recovered from the harassment! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks much. Yes, I've been around here long enough that it's not the first time! Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:15, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Onegai

Or, I should be saying, Arigatou. Thanks for catching this mass tagging. Also great catch with Kadowaki! Thanks for keeping an eye for quality. Tyciol (talk) 13:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Email

Hi Graeme,

I've sent you an email to see if you can help me with a non-wiki issue. Bidgee (talk) 15:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Email

hello graeme, if you could help more on the following, thank you: If File:Thahles 06 christine corday 72x216in.jpg, in one place it says GFDL and in other place "only for Wikipedia" was a misfiling/id somehow on my part--the artist emailed wikipedia that i had full usage permission and GFDL licensing of the titled jpg image of the painting. the image of the painting yes is also online on her artist website--how do i link it if that would be easier? "File:CORDAY UNE NYCHighline.jpg needs proof that Tim WIllis and Christine Corday relaese this work under CC-BY-SA license, it seems that you have managed this for the earlier picture with OTRS! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)" Tim Willis and Christine Corday both emailed wikipedia earlier on this and im confused. do i have them re-email a license email? thank you. Brieanne821 (talk----

reply

graeme, i linked image to image on artists website. please advise if that was done correctly. i may delete/omit the option of showing the painting on the wikipage unless i can copy and paste what artist said in her last email giving free licensing with that image. thank you for recovering info. Brieanne821 (talk---- —Preceding undated comment added 18:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC).

second reply

i found the earlier emails sent from tim willis(photographer) and the artist to wikipedia about free licensing (im not sure of all these terms/acronyms) but the email states free usage of willis's images of corday's work and cordays agreement. where do i forward their emails? once forwarded, is there anything else i need to do? thank you very much for your help, graeme. Brieanne821 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 15:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC).

Re: apology

Hi Graeme, I'm not buying this [18]. It comes from a disruptive IP who is allied with or editing under numerous sockpuppet accounts. 99.149.84.135 (talk) 01:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

have you spotted a new source of disruption? If the vandalism stops, then I leave the editor unblocked, unless there is a good reason otherwise. It is rare to see a disruptor say sorry. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Ping; e-mail. 99.149.84.135 (talk) 01:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Are you available?

Graeme:

I am requesting your help on a couple of articles. Can you afford some time?

Regards, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

What sort of help do you need? I may be able to put in some time in about 10 hours from now. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Basically, all the help that I need can be summarized in Admin. Sancho's statement: "Even the leap from "Sharif's parents were Lebanese", to "Sharif is of Lebanese descent" is going too far in an article about a living person." The help needed is with Omar Sharif and Youssef Chahine. They're both Egyptian citizens whose parents may have had Lebanese origins of some sort or may have been immigrants to Egypt. Sancho had laboriously and very methodically mediated Omar Sharif's article and he found no support for any Lebanese reference to be made about Omar Sharif... He made the statement above, that his parents origins could NOT be extended to him. This is the version that Sancho had ended with. Now, this seemingly new user, Lebanese bebe, with the help of SD, is stirring up this whole pot again and has been reverting both Omar Sharif and Youssef Chahine without reliable evidence that either of them is Lebanese. Their parents origins do NOT extend to them, as per Sancho, with which I agree. If you agree too, I need your help establishing that and making it stay. Thanks again, --Arab Cowboy (talk) 00:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I would say it was an invalid assumption that would need to be proved by yet another reference. There would be plenty of references on these people, to get a more definite statement. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. And, there cannot be any reference that they are Labanese, because they are not. The issue here is, can we extend the origins of their parents (who may have been immigrants or descendants of immigrants) to them? Sancho thinks not, and neither do I. Please make your opinion on those articles' Talk pages and make it stay. Thanks. --Arab Cowboy (talk) 00:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

What looks to be in the articles looks OK, and matches the reference supplied. At least the Sharif is now stable! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Schulberg-portrait.jpg

Hello - can you tell me how you made this determination that the image is in the public domain? --WatchingWhales (talk) 18:09, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking the copyright renewals in the USA, has nothing called "Budd Schulberg Papers". His name does appear as an author in "what makes Sammy Run" from renewals in 1968, "The Harder They Fall" in 1974, "The Disenchanted" in 1977, and "Waterfront" in 1983 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:51, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You're assuming that the uploader calling it "Budd Schulberg Papers" is correct - in reality, the uploader shows no evidence they understand how our copyright scheme works at, they have failed to provide a source that we can check, and it is incumbent upon us not to assume a work is free, particularly in a case where we have a free image of the subject. We can't assume the uploader used any sort of official title for the image that we can rely upon to search for it, and until the provide where they got it from--another failing with the image--it's legally and ethically problematic for us just to take away a copyright of a work that someone else created. --WatchingWhales (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

We have the same issue with this user and this image of Spalding Gray, where they took it off a blog, and then simply relicensed it public domain because it was taken before 1978. If just assuming every photo taken before that date is Public Domain without our researching it is a problem that can get us into legal hot water. Copyright, particularly in photography, is the livelihood of some individuals. --WatchingWhales (talk) 14:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

If the picture is new then it would be copyright, although that statue probably is not. It could be photographed again, so you could be correct that there is a copy vio, if the photo is not old. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Troutman photo

Hi Graeme, Can you tell me how to upload the Kathryn Troutman photo so it sticks? I have the photographer's permission.

Thanks!

Burkeguy 13:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)

File:Church Army Chapel pews 1965.jpg

Hi Graeme - thank you for your prompt response. As I was under a misunderstanding about this (and thus have misled the copyright holder, Church Army) please could you kindly clarify this matter.

1. I had been sure I had seen on Wikipedia a licence on various image files with permission to use on a particular page only, and a notice by an administrator saying that Wiki had received a permission letter by email. Did I imagine this? I saw these about a month ago, and did not record where I saw them.
2. Is my rationale as written on the image filepage not sufficient when used with the permission letter (assuming I can send it to an administrator for checking)?

Please note I'm not trying to dispute your judgement/comment in any way - I respect your opinion - but before contacting the Church Army for yet another letter (I already had to ask for a second letter that mentioned Wikipedia specifically) I need to be sure of what I'm talking about. Are you saying that the only thing I can ask of the copyright holder is a letter allowing anyone and everyone to use their photo in any way they please?

Thanks for your kind help so far--Storye book (talk) 14:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for your reply. I have now emailed a scan of the permission letter to the above address, and have expanded the rationale on the image filepage as per the template instructions - thanks for adding that template. In my email I asked them to check the filepage and give an opinion, as it still strikes me that if I have both (a) a copyright permissions letter and (b) a rationale which implies no copyright permissions, those two things will contradict each other. Thanks again for your kind help, and I'll let you know if they email any extra information.--Storye book (talk) 23:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Troutman photo advice

Many thanks! I am working with the license holder to have the email sent. Appreciate your assistance. Burkeguy 12:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)

Mark Lloyd deletion

Why was the article Mark Lloyd(who is a pretty notable person) deleted? Can I have the content of the page to rework and repost? It is kinda suspect not to have a page on someone that was just placed in charge of a major section of the FCC(especially having it deleted right before his being appointed)... Subverted (talk • contribs) 03:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, guess I will have to write the article myself anyways. Thanks for the time you took to userfy that for me. =) Subverted (talk • contribs) 04:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Actors Movement Studio

Hi Graeme, just wanted to ask you about this submission that you accepted. I'm a little concerned that the sourcing does not meet our standards, and it probably wouldn't survive an AfD. I discussed it with chzz (talk · contribs) over IRC at #wikipedia-en-afc ^connect, and both of us agreed that you probably shouldn't have accepted it. So what was your reasoning here, exactly? Thanks, The Earwig (Talk | Contribs) 23:07, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion removal

Per: this edit. Actually there is no fair-use rationale as it stated on the template. See an example at File:Remember Me 2010.jpg#Fair use rationale for Remember Me (2010 film) Also, there is an improper source. I will try to improve these flaws for the image. • S • C • A • R • C • E • 01:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Switching request

Sorry, I just noticed that my request here was formulated in a kind that could easily be misinterpreted. It should have been the other lemma is hardly used, but I got a little confused with all the different templates and possiblities. What I wanted was that the two lemmatas switch places, meaning that 'Zacharias Topelius' is the article and 'Zachris Topelius' is the redirect, as it was until a few days ago. The renaming to Zachris is a recent development by a few Finnish scientists. The name Zacharias is the established one. Zachris is a nickname, he used for letters and private stuff. Zacharias is his real name, which he used for his publications (meaning, you can find the name printed on the books, the thing he is relevant for). -- Cecil (talk) 03:09, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Reporting of Vandalism

Hi Graeme, there is vandalism on the page St Josephs Boys AFC. Can you revert/rollbackas you did before? Thanks. 194.46.253.236 (talk) 14:25, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

It looks like C.Fred got there first and fixed it. You too can do this, go to the history, compare the good version with the bad and click undo! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Middelsee.png

Hi Graeme, You asked if I could upload the picture on the Middelsee on commons, with appropriate lisence. This will be no problem of course. You would like the identical picture, with the city names and Eastergoa/Westergoa in Frisian? Or should I upload a picture without these texts but only the dates of gaining the land on the sea, don't know how I would refer to this in English :). As I learned later there's a bit of an error in this picture. The lightblue area between boalsert and snits, hasn't really been a part of the Middelsee. There where dikes made/polders constructed to protect these lands from the water of the Middelsee, and not to regain it. I could probably correct these error too. Theun (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Bel Air logo_lowres.jpg

Hi Graeme, You declined this logo, as I had yet to complete and save the article Bel Air Aviation I was working on. This has been done now. Please review my request for this upload again. Best regards, Jacob —Preceding unsigned comment added by GroundhogDK (talk • contribs) 23:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

SpaceFlight89 has beaten me to the upload! Thankyou for your request. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Troutman article again

Dear Graeme,

Many thanks for your help with the image, it's up.

So from what you've seen of the draft, do you think it's ready to go live on Wikipedia after we insert the last two missing references (in red)?

Thanks again,

--Burkeguy 12:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Burkeguy (talk • contribs)

Removal of PROD from Indore hostels

Hello Graeme Bartlett, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Indore hostels has been removed. It was removed by Ibrahim.hm with the following edit summary '(i have added various necessary details about indore hostels including major regions for searching hostels.I think this will help students who come to indore for studies.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Ibrahim.hm before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to take part in the article's current AfD. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 01:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Ring I/II/III

Hello. I noticed your recent move of the Greater Helsinki-area orbital roads from their common-use English names (Ring I/II/III) to Finnish-specific names (Kehä I/II/III). The associated summaries state that this was done "on request". I've been unable to find any preceding recent discussion on the Talk pages—could you please provide some more background, or a pointer to the appropriate request and who it was made by? Many thanks, —Sladen (talk) 02:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Multixfer was the requester saying: Housekeeping. Make way for move from Swedish "Ring I" back to the common name in Finnish "Kehä I". If this is controversial the change can be undone as this sort of action is only supposed to happen if it is uncontroversial. The reason you cannot see it is because the request was on the deleted redirect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:49, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that "Ring One/Two/Three" (in English) are written equivalently to "Ring En/Två/Tre" (in Swedish) does not mean that they are Swedish! The common name is indeed Kehä I (in Finnish) and Ring I (in Swedish) but those have little bearing on en.wikipedia where the relevant common name would be Ring I (in English) per WP:UE and WP:COMMONNAME.

The equivalent difference is perhaps more obvious with Kehärata/Ringbanan/Ring Rail Line, where the postfix is a word, rather than a numeral. —Sladen (talk) 04:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Do they even have an "English" name? Actually it is probably best to talk this out on the article talk page so that others who care can join in. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:54, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

For want of any better answer; "Yes". I'd be quite happy to respond on whatever Talk page this was raised upon—that'd be easier to do if it were undeleted... —Sladen (talk) 05:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

---

talk copied to Talk:Kehä I. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Ta. (I've tweaked your introductory comment to reference Ring II and Ring III as Ring 2 is something else—a horror movie, IIRC). —Sladen (talk) 05:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Verbal

Hello Graeme, How is it possible to seek dispute resolution when the user refuses to use the talk page or edit summaries?! Thanks. Imad marie (talk) 13:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Sara Koehnke

Can I have the article about me that you deleted back as my user page? Thanks! User:Arethriel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.19.14.23 (talk) 02:25, 22 August 2009 (UTC)