User talk:Explicit/Archive 34

CMANO has already been cleared through those processes, the only one in contention is

WP:GNG and was deleted, and thus what would've been it's own article has been combined into one article that contains detailed information on both entries in the series. As for your interpretation of my justification, that is a vast generalization that is wholly incorrect. As I stated in my second to last reply, citing NFCI#1, seeing as the main focus of the article in question is these two specific games (and not the series as a whole, with critical commentary on both to back that up, and the lack of any freely available images relevant to its topic), as per Wikipedia's stated guidelines the use of these images in this fashion seems appropriate. I feel like the confusion in this whole thing has been the belief that the Command (series) page's main focus is critical discussion on the series as whole (and considering the fact that most other articles with that naming scheme do such a thing it's not that wild of a confusion without the proper context) but in reality that title merely serves as an indicator to say that all entries in that series are detailed on that page (with all redirects on the topic leading to the specific sections on that page.) So for all intensive purposes there is detailed commentary on both pieces of software on that specific page, therefore warranting the use of the one piece of non-free imagery for each one of the specific games in the series detailed on that article as per NFCI#1 while also satisfying all parts of the NFCC.Tookatee (talk

) 04:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

WP:NFCI is a guideline that list some types of non-free use generally considered acceptable; it's not really a policy page per se. The relevant policy page is

WP:DRVPURPOSE. Is that what you're requesting? Another option might be for you to initiate a discussion about the file at FFD, but I'm not sure how that works for a file which has already been deleted.

You also seem to have uploaded File:Cmopromoart2.jpg for use in that article and it has also been tagged for speedy deletion by an administrator named JJMC89. Is this the same file as the one deleted by Explicit? While I can understand disagreeing with the tagging of the files, and even being frustrated that their non-free use is being challenged; repeatedly uploading the same deleted file or a similar file and trying to add it to a particular article where its non-free use is already considered contentious is not really the best way to try and resolve this. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 05:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

As I already stated in a previous reply on this page, File:Cmopromoart2.jpg is a separate image that I found that more appropriately fits the page. Therefore, like I also mentioned in a previous reply here, that makes this request a moot point as I no longer want File:CMOpromotionalart.jpg to be undeleted. However, I continued this discussion because of the general confusion regarding the article's focus and Explicit's subsequent challenge to File:Cmopromoart2.jpg (with my subsequent explanation also being able to inform JJMC89 about the image's proper context, thus making it no longer eligible for speedy deletion by satisfying NFCC #8.) Furthermore, that historical precedent is cited under the NFCI and I mentioned it in one of my previous replies, according to it as long as the image is the first and only item of non-free content pertaining to the topic the image covers it's (with the appropriate context of course) completely fine to include and there is no mention of any case in regard to this specific situation. Tookatee (talk) 08:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@

WP:FFD with this. ƏXPLICIT

13:13, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I'm with Masem on this one. NFCI#1 relates to the use of cover art within articles whose main subject is the work associated with the cover. The main subject is the series, not CMO. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Was pinged to look at this too, and no, this is not an appropriate use of a second image. If this is about the series, you get one image under NFCI#1 to cover the series in the infobox, and that's it. And the games themselves barely pass notability be appropriate to make as standout individually. --Masem (t) 06:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

OK, there is obviously some sort of disconnect between what me and you guys believe is the subject of the article in question (and therefore the appropriate rights it has in regards to image use.) There is seemingly a persistent view among you guys that the focus of the

Command (series) article is that of critical commentary on the series alone (which as far as I can tell is exclusively based on the article name), yet when you take a look at the actual content within said article you'll see that its focus is exclusively commentary on the two games in the series, with no significant attempts to give critical commentary on the Command series itself (as I've explained multiple times now within this message chain, in addition to the fact that said article is currently on Wikipedia and is therefore free to read at any time [after which I'd hope one would be able to see that the content of the article doesn't match the assumption you guys are putting forward].) So, Masem and JJMC89, in addition to reading the article I suggest you read my response chain above as they explain that very point about the subject of the article (which is also the reason why I linked you here in the first place JJMC89.) Sorry if this may seem a bit crass, but it's the simplest and most effective method I can think of at this point in the conversation to help you clearly understand what I'm saying with my line of reasoning (without simply retyping out everything that I've already said to Explicit and Marchjuly.)Tookatee (talk

) 09:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

The article appears to have been originally about a single game, but you moved the page to its current title here after merging content from Draft:Command: Modern Operations into the article here because the draft you were working on was declined by AFC. So, you changed the focus of the article from one about a single game to one about a series, but say that it’s not really about the series but is actually kind of two separate mini articles about two different games combined into one article whose subject is just about the series in name only. Is that an accurate description of the situation? If that’s really the case, then it could be argued that there’s no justification for using a non-free image for either game since neither game would seem notable enough on its own to warrant its own stand-alone article, but instead need to be combined together into the same article. —- Marchjuly (talk) 11:33, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Just based on your initial wording Marchjuly (it utilizes incorrect reasoning that was already disproved and explained earlier in this thread) and the last sentence in that response that contradicts both yourself and other Wikipedia administrators (CMANO was determined to satisfy Wikipedia's general notability guidelines by the original administrator who approved the page in 2013, in addition to yourself referencing said fact about the original focus of said article [which I also explained earlier, in a response to you no less]) it's looking like you're not actually taking into consideration any of the points I've made above and have just been sticking to your initial viewpoint. So, if I'm not mistaken (and I profusely apologize if I am) then lets please not waste anymore time going in circles and just make your opinion clear so we can all avoid confusion. Based on the historical precedence, policies, and guidelines listed on Wikipedia (which I've, once again, already specified and explained in detail in my responses above), the use of this image is completely acceptable as it fulfills all tenants of the NFCC. If there is anything contrary to this that would put it in violation of Wikipedia's guidelines I would be glad to discuss it like I've just done, but at the moment it appears that File:Cmopromoart2.jpg satisfies NFCC #8 and therefore should not be eligible for deletion (as that is the only listed issue for said image.)Tookatee (talk) 03:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Not sure where or how my wording is incorrect. The diffs show you moved the page from one about a single game to one being about a (two-game) series. The diffs also show you incorporated/merged content into the article from a draft declined at AFC because the subject matter was considered by the AFC reviewer to be not notable. You then redirected the draft to the subsection in the series article. So, if article isn’t really about the series so to speak and it’s no longer only about the original (first game) in the series, then it’s about two separate but related games.

You’re correct that we (or maybe it’s just me) are going around in circles. I’m not an admin and I didn’t tag the file with {{

WP:FFD if you feel your getting nowhere in this discussion. Perhaps that’s what the admin reviewing the file will suggest. — Marchjuly (talk

) 06:02, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Aside from restating everything that's been said up until this point, if you don't understand what's been said (without indicating what you exactly don't understand) there is no way for me to further explain my point in a manner in which you'll understand as it would use premises which, you apparently do not accept and/or grasp. Irregardless, as you stated, your understanding is irrelevant in this case as you have no power to affect anything; when I was referencing the other Wikipedia admins I merely meant the fact that their statements were contradictory to yours (I was not attempting to insinuate that you were in fact an administrator, however in re-reading my wording I may have done a poor job at conveying that) as drafts are submitted for review by administrators to determine if they meet the guidelines to be suitable for Wikipedia (which

Command (series) did when it was first created.) Additionally, as the automatic deletion date for the following image is on the third, I would like to get a response by JJMC89(the admin who slated File:Cmopromoart2.jpg for deletion for not satisfying NFCC #8) based on the points I've specified here since, unless there is something else amiss, should show that the image does in fact satisfy NFCC #8 and is therefore no longer eligible for deletion.Tookatee (talk

) 23:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, no offense, but at this point your participation in this message thread is no longer required. I don't mean to come off as rude, it's just that I'm awaiting the response of JJMC89 (the standard written procedure is to contact the admin who posted the) on this topic or another admin, and your are flooding my alerts with information that's not relevant to me.Tookatee (talk) 01:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

You've already posted about this at

Talk:Command (series)#Page move (also my first post) and both times that was just done as a courtesy; so, I'm not sure how that's flooding you with alerts. I will, however, refrain from pinging you in the future. -- Marchjuly (talk

) 03:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Could you please delete this page? Thank you. NASCARfan0548 (alt) ↗ 20:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

the word gives me the beegees, thanks. JarrahTree 12:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Explicit,

I know this is a couple months late, but would you undelete this file? It was improperly removed by an anonymous user and editors watching the page (including myself) did not initially notice they removed the non-free file. I will add it back into the article as soon as it is undeleted. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 23:41, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Etzedek24:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 00:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Explicit. Would you mind taking a look at File:Lagoanflag (low res).jpg? It was just moved from File:Lagoanflag.jpg to stop some shadowing, but there’s probably no need for a low-res non-free version of the file if the Commons one is OK. On the other hand, if the Commons one is not OK, then it may need to go depending upon whether the crown imagery is PD since the crown seems to be the only possible copyrightable element. I’m asking you since you’re an admin on both Commons and Wikipedia. — Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

When you use {{

Hi. Could you please undelete File:Tucc2.PNG? It became an orphan, as a user inserted a false image into the article. --Soman (talk) 00:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@Soman:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 00:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

You deleted this as unused. However, I suspect that it was meant to be used in

@

Stefan2: I've restored the local file and added it back to the article. ƏXPLICIT

11:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

File:Sul Ross Statue.JPG was recently deleted. I did not see a notice on it, but I believe it would be useful still at the Sul Ross State University page. I don't know why it was orphaned, but appears to be still useful. Please restore. If I cannot find an appropriate use for it, I will personally nominate for speedy deletion. Buffs (talk) 21:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

@Buffs: Done – as a contested proposed deletion, the file has been restored upon request. ƏXPLICIT 00:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Added to the subject's page in lieu of a darker/less clear version of the statue. I would submit that this is probably a clear example of an image that should be moved to Commons. Buffs (talk) 14:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Dear all participants and organizers,

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, all the postcards are postponed due to the shut down of the postal system all over the world. Hope all the postcards can arrive as soon as the postal system return and please take good care.

Best regards,

Wikipedia Asian Month International Team 2020.03 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MediaWiki message delivery (talk • contribs) 17:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

You (Explicit)shut down the page amBX after I requested you NOT do so. Unlike you, I'm not on here regularly. Your reason for deletion was spurious when every major product, business etc are on Wikipedia for information (See Apple https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.) Please reinstate the amBX page. If you are unwilling to do so (it was due edits which is how I found out about the PROD), then as an administrator, explain how & who I can appeal this incorrect & arbitrary decision to. Steve. Stevenxlead (talk) 12:54, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

@

civil manner. Perhaps you can give it a look when you log in next month. You are correct that, unlike me, you are not on here regularly. Sort of in the same sense that, unlike you, I'm capable of writing a decent article. ƏXPLICIT

13:34, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

"unlike you, I'm capable of writing a decent article" Wow. So sorry I'm not as brilliant as you - I will try harder.Stevenxlead (talk) 13:44, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, an expired prod, would it be possible to restore it (eg. to my user space)? I found several multiple-page reviews in Macworld and Mac User magazines of the 80s, I think I may be able to rewrite this poor article. I did not check date of the prod yesterday and thought I have plenty of time... sorry for inconvenience. Pavlor (talk) 06:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@

User:Pavlor/Red Ryder (software). ƏXPLICIT

12:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Pavlor (talk) 17:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Relatively new to Wikipedia apologies in advance. Saw that you deleted the Benjamin Florsheim page a month ago, I recreated it with much more information than it had before, thought the original was not my making. Wikipedia said to contact whoever the person who deleted a page last, so here I am. Should be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Benjamin_Florsheim. I believe it should be submitted for review, again not too sure (new). Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fau4u09 (talk • contribs) 08:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@

AFC submission}} template atop of the page. Another user will come around and determine if the page is suitable to be moved to Benjamin Florsheim; if not, they can provide advice on how to proceed. I've become a bit busy these past few days upon returning to work, so apologies for not being able give it a look immediately. ƏXPLICIT

13:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fau4u09 (talk • contribs) 22:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

There is a 2 year old ongoing on and it talks about a controversial subject known as ethnicity in fiction. I had fears that this CFD will become more of a drama than a discussion. Do you close them immediately?

Can you restore

@Tbhotch:  Done, file restored. ƏXPLICIT 22:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am trying to re-create the page Mr. Pakistan World, which was deleted by you. There have been new findings with credible news articles about it. I have seen that you had deleted the page. Please advise how I can re-create the page with proper references and citations. --Salut65 (talk) 06:31, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

@

general notability guideline, you are free to re-create the article. ƏXPLICIT

00:16, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok I will do so. Thanks --Salut65 (talk) 05:04, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there! Just wondering if I can assist w/ userfy for this recently deleted page?

There are over 15 credible articles and sources that speak to the veracity and noteworthiness of the individual.

thank you!

2605:E000:1702:A8F:8405:CF65:E474:9095 (talk) 18:07, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Rguaguanco

@Rguaguanco:  Done, the content is now available at User:Rguaguanco/Meridith Valiando Rojas. ƏXPLICIT 00:05, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt action - how can I be of service in restoring this content?

2605:E000:1702:A8F:E9D1:E4:FECB:4D5D (talk) 16:03, 19 April 2020 (UTC)Rguaguanco

A good place to start is the

WP:AFC process. ƏXPLICIT

00:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting Kasnia, the time I invested really paid off, why not merge it?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JosephWC (talk • contribs) 18:38, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@JosephWC: I assume that the original user who nominated the article for deletion found it difficult to find a merge target, as the article mentions at least four different works where Kasnia is mentioned. In such cases where there is no single best target, deletion of an article is sometimes preferred. If you have a suggestion for a merge target, please feel free to propose it. ƏXPLICIT 00:54, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey again. I decided to take File:Friends Characters.png to Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 April 20 to review your deletion on it. --George Ho (talk) 09:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Good morning, a page was deleted "Samantha Cook". I was hoping you could restore it as a draft so I can update with credible sources and fix incorrect information. Is this possible? Thank you so much in advance.

Good morning, a page was deleted "Samantha Cook". I was hoping you could restore it as a draft so I can update with credible sources and fix incorrect information. Is this possible? Thank you so much in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NotTinaFey (talk • contribs) 18:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

@NotTinaFey:  Done, the content is now available at User:NotTinaFey/Samantha Cook. ƏXPLICIT 00:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, a page was deleted "2016–17 Ayr United F.C. season". I was hoping you could restore it as a draft so that I can update it with credible sources and fix any incorrect information. Is this possible? Thank you so much in advance. Aidan Lynn 1998 (talk) 16:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

@Aidan Lynn 1998:  Done, the content is now available at User:Aidan Lynn 1998/2016–17 Ayr United F.C. season. ƏXPLICIT 23:34, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi, could you please explain why the 2012–13 Scottish Junior Football Central Division Two article proposed for deletion was declined? It is an orphaned, incomplete, non-notable, unsourced article from 8 years ago. You said it was "ineligible again" - what makes it ineligible? Thanks Boothy m (talk) 12:11, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

(

WP:AFD instead. —- Marchjuly (talk

) 13:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh right, didn't realise that - thanks for letting me know Boothy m (talk) 13:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)