User talk:PhilKnight/Archive71

Limb salvage

Several sites I copy-pasted the information from. Please until we figure out what to do with it don't edit it or revert edits. User:BennyK95 16:21 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 16:21, 19 March 2010 (UTC). Sorry about the confusion, I feel like an idiot, but I don't really know what else to do. User:BennyK95 16:21 March 19 2010 —Preceding undated comment added 16:22, 19 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Benny based on the concerns you've raised, I've deleted the article. PhilKnight (talk) 16:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. I am sorry for the inconvenience. User:BennyK95 16:37 March 19 2010 (UTC)

List of Underworld characters

Why was this page speedy deleted as G6? -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Magioladitis, I've restored the article. I think it must have happened when I was deleting user space drafts of a retired user, and didn't notice there was a redirect from userspace to the article. Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) -- Magioladitis (talk) 02:26, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of PROD from Ayumi Shiina

Hello PhilKnight, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Ayumi Shiina has been removed. It was removed by 159.182.1.4 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with 159.182.1.4 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 14:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alabaster Constantine III

I wish to thank you for taking care of this problem. I had planned to report this user's abuse of editing. --Dan Dassow (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dan, glad I could be of assistance. PhilKnight (talk) 00:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of File:Silent Prey.jpg objected to

You deleted File:Silent Prey.jpg with the log entry "lack of explanation as to why a free replacement cannot be created to illustrate the biography", but it was stated on the talk page, that this was used to illustrate her role in the film, and a film short is not replaceable. The FUR itself said "This is the cover art for the video cassette Silent Prey and is used to illustrate the video cassette in the section discussing it in the article on its star, Carol Shaya." which sounds valid to me. Please consider restoring this. DES ^(talk) 22:56, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DES, I've restored and opened a discussion at WP:FFD. PhilKnight (talk) 23:07, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. DES ^(talk) 01:22, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get around here as often as I used to, and only now noticed you actually deleted another image from the same article at the same time with the same rationale. I'm going to take the liberty of restoring that one also, again, for the same reason. If you would like to nominate it at FFD as well, I will gladly defend it; though it seems the Silent Prey image is going to be cleanly kept. The basic point is that this cover image is the reason for Carol Shaya's notability, and as such, not replaceable. The rest, the international coverage, the lawsuit, the video, and so forth, all sprang from this appearance on the cover of Playboy in police uniform (more or less). --AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 20:46, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now commons backlog

Hy, as you may or may not know Category:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons and Category:Wikipedia files with the same name on Wikimedia Commons are massively backlogged if it is not too much to ask can you please help in emptying them? --IngerAlHaosului (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find some time. PhilKnight (talk) 15:06, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2010_March_14#File:CityChicagoMontage.jpg

Please reconsider this close. You closed the accompanying image as delete because it was FU. So the only keep comment is invalid because it is indeed a FU image, and the montage image in question now contains a deleted image. ÷seresin 20:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi seresin, I've undone the close. PhilKnight (talk) 22:55, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much. ÷seresin 23:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hotel5550 Message

Hey PhilKnight! It's me again! I am now doing something fun! I am doing ten headlines from Jay Leno per year. Choose the one you think is the funniest and I will cast the deciding vote. Whatever headline gets the most votes stays on the list and the rest will be taken off the list and replaced with a 9 new headlines. If you have a Jay Leno headline, send it to me. It's got to be an old one, not the new ones, or things can be spoiled. Hope to talk to you soon! Happy editing! Hotel5550 (talk) 02:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Professor Peter Sommer article

Please would you explain why this (ex-PROD) page was deleted yesterday? I was reading the London School of Economics website, and thought I would see what Wikipedia has on him, and found it deleted.

Thanks.

acahopkins (talk) 09:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Peter Sommer article I deleted as an expired PROD wasn't about the LSE professor. PhilKnight (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prod-nn not linking to Google Scholar

I have noticed that clicking on the 'scholar' link created by the template {{prod-nn}} does not return results but takes me to the Google Scholar main page. I noted this at Template talk:Prod-nn, but no one has followed up to say whether they've experienced a similar problem. This might be user error, but if there is a problem with the template, perhaps caused by a change in Google Scholar, can it be rectified? Cnilep (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cnilep, I've modified the template which seems to have fixed the problem. Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Advice

Sorry to appear out of nowhere. Saw you are a MedCab Coordinator and could use some objective advice. I'm looking for some direction on the next step in the DR process.

Delicious carbuncle ("Dc"), from our very first interaction, has been hostile and aggressive towards me. I've tried direct Wikilove, taking a WP:COOL, ignoring their edits, and opening a WQA. Dc has made it clear that they will not participate in any RfC/U against them...(even though Dc's actions related to me are being included by third user in their own RFC/U).

I'm not sure if MedCab is the correct next step, but this user continues to disparage my work, revert my perfectly fair edits, and edit in an otherwise disagreeable, aggressive, and hostile manner towards me. It is frustrating and goes against the spirit of Wikipedia and the 5P's.

Any advice you could offer would be most appreciated...and if you can't, pointing me towards someone who can would be good, too. Thanks so much! 38.109.88.180 (talk) 03:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest filing the WP:RFC/U anyway, and then after 2-3 weeks, if no progress has been made, applying for an ArbCom case. PhilKnight (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the follow-up. The RFC/U is not being prepared by me, but by another party (preparatory edit here) who is more familiar with that process. :o) Thanks again! 38.109.88.180 (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello

I would like to ask your opinion about the format that should be used for the localities from Romania where at least 20% of the population speaks Hungarian. Note: "In Romania, the official language is Romanian."[1] Also "Where over 20 of the population is of an ethnic minority, all documents of a legal character will be published in the ethnic minorities' mother tongue.".

Variant 1. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 2. Romanian_Name (Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 3. Romanian_Name or Hungarian_Name (Romanian: Romanian_Name; Hungarian: Hungarian_Name)
Variant 4. Romanian_Name(Romanian) or Hungarian_Name(Hungarian)

There are used different formats on different articles and I think it should exist a standard format used for all of them, in order not to create mess

Thanks in advance for your answer and sorry if you find this message on your personal page as inappropriate(Umumu (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Hi Umumu, I'd suggest asking for opinions at WT:WikiProject Hungary and WT:WikiProject Romania. If there isn't a consensus, then you could organize at Request for Comment. PhilKnight (talk) 17:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks (Umumu (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC))[reply]

re ip 99.232.68.21 blocked 48 hours by you

I would request that you review this block. While I am aware that the editor is pasting religious messages into various subjects, I would comment that they have only received two warnings - the first being an 4im which I feel is totally inappropriate, and which I replaced with a level2 warning. I was unable to comment at AIV because of edit conflicts before you acted. I do not feel that the editor has been given the correct range of warnings, and I am very wary that we should apparently indicate that declarations of faith are such egregious disruption that they should be countered with a block after the first and final warning (not Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims or any other belief system). Unless this is a block evasion for similar, I think we should continue to warn up to level 4 and then only institute a short block. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:18, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree - the level 4 warning was appropriate, and I stand by the block. I don't consider it relevant the posting of material across several articles is religious in nature; it's clearly disruptive and continued after a level 4 warning. PhilKnight (talk) 22:47, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 March 10

Hi. I see that you have closed some Files for deletion discussions. The discussion for the Three Little Old Maids image has been going on since March 10. Can you close it? -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ssilvers, it's a case of the keep 'voters' outnumber the delete 'voters', but the delete 'voters' arguments are possibly stronger. I'm not sure whether I'm right person to close this discussion. PhilKnight (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ooh. While I'm here, I see that you are a member of WikiProject Ireland. I'm visiting Ireland for my first time in July and have just one week there. Any recommendations for really essential places to visit? :-) Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:33, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Dublin obviously. And probably you should visit the West Coast. PhilKnight (talk) 11:30, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

your block of Ahmed w900i

I think your block of Ahmed w900i (talk · contribs) was a good block (he needed some encouragement to enter discussion), but I think indef is way too harsh. He didn't strike me as a vandal or a troll, just someone with a bit of an idee fixe who is completely clueless about wikipedia processes: one or two days would have been sufficient to get the message across, maybe. Unless you know something I don't know, that is...

if you do decide to shorten his block, let me know. I'll send him an email and try to make him aware of the need to communicate. --Ludwigs2 11:28, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ludwigs, I've reduced the block. The content he was posting wasn't original, and I've left a note on his talk page about this. PhilKnight (talk) 13:27, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elgin Lessley photos

How do I properly get the Elgin Lessley photos restored? I found them online and asked permission of the woman who had them on her web site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristinaDunigan (talk • contribs) 16:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Christina, I've restored the file, and left a note on your talk page about how to provide the necessary details. However, you need to be quick - the file will be deleted in 7 days time, unless the information is provided. PhilKnight (talk) 17:06, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, thanks for checking File:MayorWade.jpg. You declined the deletion because the license is supposedly on the site - however, I can only find the cc-by-nc-nd 3.0 permission listed at the bottom. Have I overlooked something? (Everything is linked on this website!) Hekerui (talk) 01:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I'll delete the file. PhilKnight (talk) 11:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Hekerui (talk) 11:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hard Kaur cropped licensing

Hi Phil,

I've added the necessary info for File:Hard Kaur cropped.jpg. It's a derivative work of a GFDL picture with a valid OTRS ticket. Please let me know whether it's now OK. --Slas,hme (talk) 06:43, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Slashme, I don't have access to OTRS, however it looks ok. PhilKnight (talk) 11:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks! I've also asked User:Colds7ream for an opinion.--Slashme (talk) 14:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UHMS permission for photo use

PhilKnight, I forgot to follow-up on the written permission after User:Hekerui pointed out that my verbal permission from UHMS was not enough. I did get it today after I noticed you deleted them last night (Permission here). Is there a way to bring these back from the dead and where should this type of permission be added in the future? Thanks --Gene Hobbs (talk) 18:15, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gene, I've replied on your talk page. PhilKnight (talk) 21:55, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Of course...

I saw that when I logged on. I don't remember the reason I deleted it in the first place, but it's a good, solid and plausible redirect now. Thanks, Phil. Happy Easter! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Allah Rakha (sarangi) - Ustad Allah Rakha

Hi, his name is Alla Rakha, ustad is only an unofficial title, like maestro would be. Please move it back. Hekerui (talk) 16:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hekerui, thanks for explaining. PhilKnight (talk) 17:27, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying and fixing the article up. The sarangi is a wonderful instrument, you should check it out. I contributed to an article about a sarangi player with a video, if you're interested. Best Hekerui (talk) 17:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TheDarkLordSeth

This [2] looks like he's broken his restrictions already with an assumption of bad faith, or have I misinterpreted something? Dougweller (talk) 20:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Doug, possibly stage 2 of the Kübler-Ross model? PhilKnight (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Yes, maybe. Ok, I was tempted to block but will refrain, but if I see an edit like that one again... Dougweller (talk) 20:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Unreal engine 6

"Unreal engine 6" is asking for the lift of the autoblock. I think the user should be directly blocked as the autoblock confirms the use of socks. -Regancy42 (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Regancy42, I've blocked the account. Thanks for letting me know. PhilKnight (talk) 11:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just noting that we recently had a User:Unreal engine 7, which may or may not be the same person. —Soap— 13:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done

For not deleting this image. It makes an important contribution to the encyclopedia. —Zujine|talk 12:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Policy question

May I please ask you, if it is a proper thing to do to try to convince the editors, who had something good to say about me at my appeal to change their comments as it was done in those edits[3]; [4];[5];[6];[7];[8]? Thanks. --Mbz1 (talk) 18:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saying you shouldn't be topic banned from I-P articles because of your contributions to images is meaningless. In general, I think if a group of editors act in a manner that's inexplicable, it's often better to just ignore them. However, in reply to your question, I don't object to efforts to discuss their reasoning. PhilKnight (talk) 19:01, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request userfication of stuff you deleted from someone's page

You deleted a lot of pages on A Nobody's page he had wikified. I don't see any rational for that. (G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup) is what you said, this done before his block. He was actively moving information over to list.wikia.com, something I do at times also. I'd like to have these articles restored, all of them, so I can copy them over.

http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:A_Nobody/List_of_controversial_non-fiction_books
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:A_Nobody/List_of_problems_solved_by_MacGyver
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:A_Nobody/List of unsolved problems in Egyptology
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:A_Nobody/List of incidents famously considered great blunders
http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:A_Nobody/List_of_decisive_battles

And the other dozens of them. [9] Google search shows them, mixed in with other results. You should have the tools to see everything you deleted from his page, and restore them all at once for transwiking. Dream Focus 21:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted them after he announced his retirement, so I consider the deletions to be covered by 'G6: Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup'. PhilKnight (talk) 22:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:2-kristin20rt.jpg

I've extended the deadline for the above image, but if permission isn't forthcoming, then it's liable for deletion. PhilKnight (talk) 10:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What am I supposed to do about it? IIRC, OTRS has a backlog. Tisane (talk) 16:51, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phil, just some advice on a technical point

Don't want you to waste time and eyes on another futile area of conflict, but would appreciate a rule clarification. I think it was User:Tewfik who drummed into me at the outset that you can't, within the rules, reference a statement in one article by a wikilink to another article, in footnotes, as is recurring here. I thought that what is required therefore when the ref/ref template is used, was a book or article source, always of course WP:RS stuff. Perhaps I'm wrong. I dunno, because I never read the rulebook, as you know, and just use commonsense and whatever I recall reading from my betters here. Could you clarify offhand. Thanks, pal (no need to get involved in the larger question) Nishidani (talk) 17:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An admin approved of this, and now the editor I am in conflict with says I am technically right, but then has employed a note device to get round the objection. With that technique, the whole point becomes moot, since it just changes a format to retain the interwiki citational abuse, as far as I can see.Nishidani (talk) 17:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement: WP:BLP and talkpages

Phil, the kind of thing that I was trying to get at is that if you called, say, David Irving a holocaust denier on a talkpage, you're unlikely to run into problems because of the mass of opinion saying that he is one and because of his failed libel suit. It would be different, though, if the only sources you had on your side were a few fringe ones. My comment was supposed to consist of two separate parts. In retrospect, I should have started the second sentence with a phrase like whoever you were talking about, if it was Israel's equivalent ... to make very clear that I wasn't calling Lieberman Israel's equivalent of David Duke or Jean Marie Le Pen. This probably doesn't matter very much, but still ... ← ZScarpia 00:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]