User talk:Explicit

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CiaPan (talk | contribs) at 14:32, 19 May 2022 (→‎Non-free File:ASTAR IMCB Logo.jpg: thx). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

It is approximately 11:19 PM where this user lives (South Korea). [refresh]

Overwritten non-free file

Hi Explicit. Do you think File:Ellen ripley.jpg should be split? The two versions are completely different, but the older version is probably going to end up deleted per F5 in a few days. I’m just asking out of curiosity; I’ve got no preference either way. — Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding image

Hi Explicit, Hope you are doing well. Recently, I have uploaded and added a image of Josephine Alhanko at wikimedia commons. Would you please review that image? If any thing goes wrong then notify me. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 12:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fade258: Hi, it's almost good. While the source does show a Creative Commons License, it does not specify which version. At most we have c:Template:Cc, but that template redirects to a deletion template. Would you happen to know if there is clarification about the photo's copyright status somewhere else on that website? There's a language barrier on my end. ✗plicit 12:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Explicit, Yes, I also noticed that point which you have stated but when I click to Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License this message pops up LicenseWith a Creative Commons license, you retain your copyright but allow other people to copy and distribute your work provided they recognize you as the author. You allow others to copy, distribute, display and perform the work, as well as to create adaptations of it. So, on that basis I have tagged here a license of CC-BY-SA-3.0. Regarding this liscense, If you have any doubt then clarify your doubt to me. (As you mentioned in above that language barriers on my end, I have also this language problem but I am using Google translator to translate the language whereas the language present in this source is Swedish) Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 14:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Draft:Aeroeleib

The article is clearly spam, but the website they're trying to advertise doesn't exist. Should I still tag it for spam? 72.10.126.194 (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I searched for the website on the
WP:CSD#G11, I have deleted it at such. Thanks for pointing this out. ✗plicit 12:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Deleted draft a long time ago

Hi Explicit. I found that there was a draft with the name Draft:Løren (singer). I saw that you were the one who deleted this. I'm asking if there is a way to preview it or it just must be restored so it can been seen again? I hadn't written the draft but because I'm interested to the subject I'd like to read if it is possible. Thanks - Fisforfenia (talk) 12:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fisforfenia:  Done, I have restored Draft:Løren (singer) per your request. ✗plicit 00:28, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
oh, thank you so much!!! Fisforfenia (talk) 08:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lucile Randon

Hello Explicit,
I hope you are well. The reason why I came to your talk page is because I uploaded a file on Lucile Randon and

WP:FUC, that would be great. Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 15:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

(
WP:CONSENT to upload their photo; it does, however, seem to indicate that Randon is a relatively public person who's not totally adverse to being photographed or videoed. — Marchjuly (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
@Marchjuly: Thanks for your feedback. I’d be curious to know why other supercentenarians like Jeanne Calment, Kane Tanaka, and Jiroemon Kimura have photos under non free licenses compared to Randon. How could I convince someone to take a photo of Randon and publish it under a free license that Wikipedia accepts? Thanks, Interstellarity (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The main and most important difference between Randon and those other three persons are that they are no longer living. Generally, non-free images of deceased persons tend to be considered an acceptable type of non-free use per item 10 of
WP:RI or c:COM:RI to see if some other Wikipedian or a Commons user can provide or find a free image. Others still might try a WikiProject talk page or asking on another language Wikipedia to see if someone can help create or find a non-free image. Sometimes such things are successful and other times they're not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks @Marchjuly for your response. I have also added living people to the policy page to make clear of this. I would be willing to get a consensus for this if this gets reverted. I'll try to ask other editors to find a free image of Randon that can be used. Interstellarity (talk) 23:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You should seek a consensus first before making such a change since even a well-meaning change such as yours could impact how this policy is being applied. This is already covered in item 1 of
WP:NFC#UUI. It’s not necessarily the fact that a non-free image automatically can’t be used because someone is still alive any more than it’s the case that a non-free image automatically can be used because someone is dead. Things are more nuanced than that in some cases: a non-free image of a still living person may be allowed in some cases and a non-free image of a deceased person may not be allowed in other cases. — Marchjuly (talk) 00:29, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Why page was deleted

Rajender singh pahl page was deleted why ?? Kbv2024 (talk) 19:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can u revert ur decision Kbv2024 (talk) 19:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi explicit
recently u banned one id named Germankitty , who has reviewed Rajender Singh Pahl page , after ur ban the page was deleted. the page was notable and in wikipedia criteria , can u guide in getting that page back. Kbv2024 (talk) 18:23, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Black and Blue (Better Call Saul)

Hello. FishandChipper already moved his contributions from

talk) 13:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

@
attribution is required, it is best redirected to the mainspace article. ✗plicit 13:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

File:Book Cover , Economist's' Thought and Economics Khmer Book.jpeg

Hi Explicit. File:Book Cover , Economist's' Thought and Economics Khmer Book.jpeg has been reuploaded by its uploader. It's currently lacking any source or licensing information; so, it's likely going to end up being tagged for speedy deletion per F4. You actually deleted this file a few days ago on May 5 because I had prodded it for deletion. I don't know how the uploader is going to try and license the file this time around, but trying to treat it as anything other than non-free is likely going to be a copyvio per F9. So, if you want to delete this one and restore the one you deleted as a contested prod, then that's OK. I don't think a consensus for keep will be established at FFD, but I'm not opposed to discussing things at FFD. Similarly, if you want to add a non-free license to this one and start a discussion about it at FFD, then that's cool too. The only problem with that is that the file's currently not being used in any articles which means it will be eligible for speedy per F5 and it also doesn't have a rationale which means it would be eligible for speedy per F6. In principle, I'm not going to add a rationale to a file's page for a use that I don't think is NFCC compliant; some editors don't seem to mind doing that and see it as housekeeping, but that makes no sense to me unless you truly believe the rationale to be valid. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: Hi, I don't think any action needs to be taken at the moment. The onus to keep the content falls on the author, so we don't need to put any work in it if it's not worthwhile. A bot has tagged it for, as expected, not having a license. Unless the uploader adds one, then it will just get deleted per usual. ✗plicit 14:40, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Thanks for taking a look at this. — Marchjuly (talk) 19:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

COI editor possibly trying to evade scrutiny

I know, it's probably the first time ever anywhere that has happened. But you deleted:

after it was declined multiple times and tagged as paid-editing because the editor tagged it G7. Now the same editor has re-created it. Mind if I un-delete the old so that this history can be seen and save the AFC folks some time? DMacks (talk) 03:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DMacks: Hi, I have gone ahead and restored the history of the draft and its talk page. ✗plicit 10:34, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. DMacks (talk) 11:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about a deleted article.

Hi,

I just learned that you have deleted an article Rajender Singh Pahl. Just wanted to know if you have kept the deleted draft. Please also help me with any instructions before recreating this article. Prasun020 (talk) 06:20, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Subjective Propaganda in the "Baptists" Article

Hello,

There is extreme subjective religious propaganda (upholding Baptist Christian denominations) present in the Baptists article; and as I can see from the Edit History, people have tried to change that several times, to no avail. Is there any way this may be permanently changed? I am not knowldegeable enough on the issue, so I have not attempted to edit the article.

Thank you, have a nice day. Don Pepparkakor (talk) 12:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Template:Moondance

I notice that you recently deleted Template:Moondance based on a Tfd rationale for a mass nomination of "These were all listed as individual listings. Merged together because the rational is the same. In all cases, a template for the artist or work already exists and therefore these templates are duplication. the additional navigation template is not required and is duplication. The guidance says 'Track listings should not be added to infoboxes if there is a navigation template or navbox at the bottom of the article which already lists the songs.'" However, neither the Van Morrison nor the Van Morrison singles templates list all the songs and thus this template at least did not conform to the nomination rationale and should not have been deleted. Rlendog (talk) 13:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlendog: Hi, I think you mean to link Template:Moondance tracks. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, I have restored this template and re-added it to the song articles. @Lil-unique1: Please take note of this. ✗plicit 14:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 15:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking

It is okay to have the lead image caption and list members linked? If not, does that violate any guidelines? Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 00:34, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@
MOS:DL guideline as the article body, so the members should only be linked once in the infobox on the list and not the caption. ✗plicit 07:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Thank you! Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 08:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

About Draft:Gay and Draft:Xenogender

Draft:Gay is a pointless article with no content, and Draft:Xenogender appears to be made up. I just don't know if I can speedy them though. 72.10.126.197 (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(
talk) - just another roadgeek 23:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Non-free File:ASTAR IMCB Logo.jpg

I'm not sure if the deleted file can be restored, or rather has to be re-uploaded. If restoring is possible, please consider restoring

Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (Singapore). (I have found it in the Category:Articles with missing files.) --CiaPan (talk) 08:09, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

@CiaPan:  Done, file restored. ✗plicit 11:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! CiaPan (talk) 14:31, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Explicit&oldid=1088677380"