User talk:Od Mishehu/Archive5

Ashes to Ashes

Please explain to me in full on the reason's why you have deleted the list of episodes page? The information is sourced on TV.com. If there is no reason, then why delete? Onshore

Because you copied the information from an other website, it's a copyright infringement. Please read WP:COPYRIGHT for more details. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:40, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Calton

I'm sorry to tell you that User:Calton continues to ignore your warnings to him. Most recently, he discussed me on another editor's talk page, under a section he titled User:Wyatt Ehrenfels and specifically referred to me as "Wyatt's meat puppet" Please, see this. Again, I am NOT Wyatt and I have NO affiliation, WHAT-SO-EVER with Ehrenfels. Trashing me to other editors and continuing to make this allegation against me, after multiple editors have asked him to stop, seems to be another violation of WP:CIVIL. MegaMom (talk) 07:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

A meat puppet is not a sockpuppet - it's a different person whose behavior is similar, who may seem to be a sockpuppet, but in fact isn't. Calton wasn't violating the instructions I gave him with that post. I haven't yet had a chance to look over his other recent edits, but that one clearly isn't a sockpuppetry accusation. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:32, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, I beg to differ on that. Wikipedia includes "meat puppets" as a subset of sock puppets under its guidelines WP:SOCK.

Meatpuppet is a Wikipedia term of art meaning one who edits on behalf of or as proxy for another editor. While Wikipedia assumes good faith especially for new users, the recruitment of new editors to Wikipedia for the purpose of influencing a survey, performing reverts, or otherwise attempting to give the appearance of consensus is strongly discouraged. A new user who engages in the same behavior as another user in the same context, and who appears to be editing Wikipedia solely for that purpose, shall be subject to the remedies applied to the user whose behavior they are joining.[1] The term meatpuppet is derogatory and should be used only with care.

Being compassionate for another editors' situation, or sharing a similar point of view regarding violations of Wikipedia's own published guidelines is a long haul from acting as a proxy for (in this case) an editor who isn't even banned. The concerns I have voiced regarding Calton's flagrant violation's of Wikipedia's own rules regarding defamation of character, right of privacy for non-public figures, wiki-stalking and harassment are valid, documentable points of fact. Certainly, his treatment of me in this situation falls outside the boundaries of WP:Civil. There is an ongoing issue with Calton regarding civility for which he has previously been blocked. In this particular situation, he has received several clear cut warnings, yet he appears to be snubbing his nose at those warnings and trying to push the envelope.

Please, handle this situation however you would like. You seem to be one of the fairer, more even handed, cool headed administrators I have researched on this site. In the interest of fairness, however, I do wish to advise you that in addition to my own recreational editing on Wikipedia, I am also doing research for an article for a major national newspaper on Wikipedia and Cyberstalking. Calton's actions and their impacts on his "victims" lives are to be a major focus of the piece I am writing. Although I have yet to make contact with Wyatt Erhenfel's, I certainly hope to. I am in the process of contacting and interviewing all of the people and businesses featured on his "attack" sub page. I have already been able to verify official stalking complaints against "Calton" having been filed with at least one police department, and there are several complaints regarding his actions with the National Center for Victims of Violent Crime, in accordance with the Federal Violence Against Women Act. Do as your training dictates, but be advised that whatever action you take - or fail to take in this matter - is likely to be published verbetim. Thanks, MegaMom (talk) 08:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Ulysses (disambiguation)

Thanks for moving it for me. Would you mind deleting the (disambiguation) page for me? It's no longer needed. Thanks. seresin | wasn't he just...? 06:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do mind. The page was at Ulysses (disambiguation) for 5 months, there may be some link to it from off site. Why not keep it? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Because it is unneeded, and there are no links to the page. But if it's that big of a deal, you don't need to speedy it. seresin | wasn't he just...? 07:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that deletion of the page is unneeded. I don't think it falls into anyt of the categories mentioned in WP:R#CRD. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you really think anyone would actually put Ulysses (disambiguation) into a search bar before just searching for Ulysses? seresin | wasn't he just...? 08:03, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know that there aren't links from off-site to there. Unless it falls into one of the criteria mentioned in WP:R#CRD, I'm not deleting it. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay then. I suppose I'll nominate for RfD eventually. Thanks for the other things though. seresin | wasn't he just...? 08:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

INSPEC

Thanks for quickly using your admin superpowers to fix the capitalization redirect! Jmath666 (talk) 09:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Unconfirmed Edits

Hi, Od Mishehu. Here you have added a taxobox to a invalid species, but you probably did not read the Talk:Indian Wolf#Distinct species?. The publication given as reference in the text says: Their genetic differentiation relative to worldwide variation of wolves supports the suggestion to treat them as separate wolf species, C. himalayensis and C. indica. Were do you read, they are distinct species. Actually that must be verified by the ICZN or at least by another publication, which confirms this suggestion.--Altaileopard (talk) 16:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Muhammad protection

I really disagree with your re-protecting it. There is no edit warring. There are new users vandalizing the page against consensus which is being reverted and being explained to them and if done again blocked. We have enough users looking at this that it will be rather quickly reverted. There is no need for full protection as there is more vandalism on pages like G. W. Bush. gren グレン 14:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

There were 3 users who removed the image, and they all must be autoconfirmed. This happened the day the protection was reduced. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Then block them. Also, please take a look at Wikipedia:ANI#Intolerable intolerance (at Muhammad). -- tariqabjotu 17:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Spicebird

Thank you for removing the speedy deletion template from the Spicebird article!--Kozuch (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

About the deletion of the article about Benedicte Kurzen

Hi, I think the deletion is OK, but I think the reason "Real person; doesn't indicate importance/significance" it's wrong. It's probably my inexperience in wikipedia the reason that article sounds pretty simple and bad related to the facts. I change my intention, and will do the Wikipedia:Requested articles about that topic,... and I try to work in my wikipedian skills. By the way, the significance of this war photographer it's related to her work in Africa in recent years. Her last assignement like a freelance for The New York Times covering the N'Djamena crisis, and past works in Palestina and Iraq are a good sample of the new wave of war photographers, generally freelance away of that old times with a lot of staff reporters around the world.

Thanks a lot for your work Od Mishehu. Have a nice day —Preceding MenorcaOSINT comment added by MenorcaOSINT (talk • contribs) 09:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Trans-Fascism Deletion

I stated in the discussion page that I would fix it. Why did you delete it?? Trans-Fascism Toolazy21 (talk) 18:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It was an upcoming episode, so there wasn't much spin I could put on it. I didn't copy it anyway I fixed it. Toolazy21 (talk) 18:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

You toopk what seems to be a direct copy, and modified it in a way that makes it a modified version of the original - which is still subject to the copyright of the original. Feel free to write your own work about this episode - summarize, don't copy and the rephrase. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:54, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:AGK PLEDGE.jpg

After taking a closer look at Image:AGK PLEDGE.jpg, I notice that there is a watermark for the company Lapel Pins R Us http://www.lapelpinsrus.com (On my laptop monitor, it required me to change the angle of the screen to see it). This user has uploaded several images taken from other sites that are also copyright violations [1], all claimed as "self-made", but I do not have much experience on how to deal with this on Wikipedia/Wikimedia. Could you help me? Thanks, (EhJJ)^TALK 12:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Mark any such images with {{db-imgcopyvio|source}}. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:34, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Champion Training Academy

Looks like a business to me.--JD554 (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a school to me. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Seattle Sockeye

Hi Od, Per Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_February_12#Vancouver_Furious_George, it seems that Seattle Sockeye wasn't eligible for prod because of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vancouver Furious George. You may want to undelete it and its talk page and/or stop by at the DRV. --Tikiwont (talk) 14:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

War Edit

Earlier today I asked for third opinion and am discussing in the discussion page of that article. What can I do in this case, when the other person is changing the article towards his point of view before the discussion if finished. I am trying to mantain the article as it was when the discussion started. Isn't this the right course of action? Thank you --NitenBr (talk) 18:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Try following the instructions at dispute resolution. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Seattle Sockeye

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Seattle Sockeye. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawr (talk • contribs) 03:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Boozeball

Sounds OK to me. It looks as if they're trying to contest it on the talk page, but I don't think it'll help the cause. Thanks for the update.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

User:MegaMom

You may wish to have a look at the recent contributions of User:MegaMom, especially here & here. The former user's story ("Wikipedia Idiots: The Edit Wars of San Francisco"") can be seen here.

Not here for the editing, is he/she? --Calton | Talk 12:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be here for policing, not editing. In the past 24 hours, you did around 50 contribs (some of which have since been deleted), and not one of them is "editing" - all are either reverting bad edits, or requests for other wikipedians, etc. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It's called "editing" -- both in the common-sense and Wikipedia versions of the term. Engaging in legalistic rephrasing to make some kind of point, on the other hand, is called "wikilawyering". I have 30,000+ edits over the last three years, so spare me the word games, please, regarding only the last 24 hours. --Calton | Talk 02:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

This may prove a useful counterclaim to your defensive response, above. --Calton | Talk 02:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Confused

I've seen a few of your contribs were adding {{uncat}} to several [[Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of...]]. Not complaining, guess I don't get the rationale?--Hu12 (talk) 16:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

All catgories, including those, should be categorized. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 16:12, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I'll fix them then.--Hu12 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Typo redirect (passaging)

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on (passaging), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because (passaging) is a redirect page resulting from an implausible typo (CSD R3).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting (passaging), please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 20:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

surprise surprise a Japanese person deleted the whaling image

No prize for guessing why you deleted this. Images are supposed to be given 7 days to have a fair use justification added. Not just be arbitrarily deleted because you find it hard to accept the content of the image. Go Sea Shepherd - get some!!!Krait (talk) 07:16, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I found it in the deletion log. The image in question is Image:AustralianCustoms-WhalingInTheSouthernOcean 5.jpg. It was deleted an an unfree image, since the tagging was of a fre eimage. Please note that:

1. A free image, under the Wikipedia definition, is one which users have the freedom to modify, and distribute commercially.
2. This image was deleted under CSD I3, which doesn't require the image to be tagged for a week. The only criteria for speedy deletion of images which have that requirement are ones which have the claim of fair use, which this one didn't.
3. I'm not Japanese.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 08:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Image:Its its k.jpg

Well, what is the purpose of that image on Wikipedia? I see absolutely no purpose whatsoever for that image to be placed on Wikipedia. Weirdy (talk) 19:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Serves no use on Wikipedia isn't for a single admin to determine - that's why deletions are usually done using a discussion. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 05:52, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Waterdog Surf Deletion

I posted the article (http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Waterdog_Surf) and am president of Waterdog Engineering, Inc. I wrote the original text on Waterdog Surf's website and copied and changed the context for Wikipedia. I would like the article un-deleted if that is possible. Or if you have specific instructions please advise. Respectfully - aplumley

If you're the president of the company, than you shouldn't be wirting about it for Wikipedia, since it's a conflict of interests. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Good work

Good work on Ovalle! Unfortunately there seems to be similar pages with the unnecessary , Chile suffix, such as Melinka, Chile; Puerto Aisén, Chile; Punta Arenas, Chile; Renaico, Chile; Río Claro, Chile; San Fabián, Chile; San José de la Mariquina, Chile and Tongoy, Chile. If you can fix them I'd be very greatful. Thanks! ☆ CieloEstrellado 20:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Please note however, that per Wikipedia_talk:Chile-related_regional_notice_board#Settlement_article_naming_poll all these moves are not really uncontroversial, have been listed by the requester in parallel at WP:RM, with the redirects being edited afterwards by the requester to create an edit history. I've warned them accordingly.[2]--Tikiwont (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you undelete the article I wrote?

Hello, You deleted a page that I created yesterday:

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Pan_africa_christian_university

You said, correctly, that it copied from the university's website. I have permission to copy from their website. Is it possible to undelete the page and then do I need to add some verbiage saying that I have permission to copy from their website? Also some of the words of the title need to be changed to uppercase. when I created the page, its title was "Pan africa christian university" but it should be "Pan Africa Christian University".

Thank you, John Gilmer Johngilmer (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

1. I see the phrase "All rights reserved" on the original website. This means that they don't agree to release in under the GNU Free Documentation License, which is intended to prevent the rights from being reserved.
2. The content from their website is probably not neutral content - it's likely to be an advertisement.

עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:13, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article

Hi Od Mishehu, I saw that you deleted the article The Superfuzz under WP:CSD#A7. I respectfully disagree with this decision; I feel a claim of notability was certainly made, and even backed up by articles from the Mumbai Mirror and The Hindu. Now, whether or not they actually are notable is up for debate, but I think AfD is the place for that, though I'd like to hear your opinion. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 10:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

According to which of the criteria at WP:MUSIC? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:20, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Number one: ...has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable. Regardless, even if they weren't notable, the article asserts notability and is therefore, I believe, ineligible for speedy deletion. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 10:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary

It should read "request removal". I didn't catch it right away. Thank you for asking. The Transhumanist    10:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

benish mininberg

יש לי הרגשה שאתה קורא עברית. רציתי לדעת למה מחקת את הערך שהוספתי? הרי המטרה של הוויקיפדיה היא להעביר ידע לכל העולם. אני חושב שביניש היה צייר חשוב בהיסטוריה של ישראל אך הוא אינו מוכר כל כך כי לא פנה לחיים פוליטיים. אני חושב שזהו ערך חשוב. מצפה לתגובתך תודה עידו. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belezza (talk • contribs) 17:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

מה החשיבות שלו? בבקשה להתיחס לעניין, בהתחשב בדף הזה. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

תודה על התגובה המהירה,בכל אופן כפי שהופיע במאמר ב

YNET

"העלייה השנייה (1904) הביאה את הגל הראשון של ציירי ומעטרי הקיר היהודים ממזרח אירופה. ביניהם היו יהודה מיניברג ובנו בייניש, מנחם מנדל קרול ובניו חיים ויעקב, ושלום זאב רשלבך, שעם בואם התיישבו בנווה צדק, ואחר כך עם הקמת שכונת מרכז בעלי המלאכה בתל אביב, עברו לאזור רחוב שינקין. שלושת הציירים הללו הם חלק מרשימה של כ-60 ציירים שאותם גילה פרקש עד כה. "

http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/1,7340,L-2027715,00.html

אז נכון זה לא משהו כל כך ידוע אבל לאחר שיחה עם שי פרקש מהכתבה הנ"ל מסתבר שישנם עשרות ציורי קיר בתוך דירות בתל אביב. לפי דעתי ולדעת תכלת-המרכז הישראלי לציורי קיר ביניש הינו פיסה חשובה בהיסטוריה של עיטורי הקיר אני הגעתי לנושא הזה לאחר שגיליתי ציור שלו (לא ציור קיר) בבית הורי והחלטתי לחקור על הצייר הלא ידוע אני חושב שזהו ערך שכן חשוב שיהיה נגיש לכולם לפי הבנתי ישנם מאות ציורים שלו בביתם של אנשים בישראל ןאולי אף בעולם. אז לפי בקשתך הוספתי קישור למקור משני נוסף. תודה עידו. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.63.148 (talk) 08:46, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

List of The New Gidget episodes

Wrt to this: I had tagged the article with {{db|Episode list merged back into The New Gidget. Even that main article is currently little more than an unreferenced stub, no need to split off this table into its own article.}} when DGG reverted. Just for the record, I would appreciate your opinion if the rationale I provided makes sense to you or if you agree with DGG that the article should not be deleted. User:Dorftrottel 21:21, February 19, 2008

wait a few weeks and then clean it up along with all the rest of the backlog, is what i'd suggest. why look for problems now. There will be enough when arbcom finishes that we'll have to figure out some unifrom way of dealing with these. (I admit i dont see the point of using plain db, when there is no rationale that fits.)22:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I look for problems at WP:EAR, where someone brought this up. And I see no point in waiting with something as uncontroversial as this. But ok DGG, you want two articles, you have them. And you support the work of what imho is an obvious sockpuppet. User:Dorftrottel 23:06, February 19, 2008

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casseva

I notice that you speedy deleted the Casseva article, citing CSD A7. However, it looks like there was an AfD in place which didn't get closed when the article was deleted. I went ahead and closed it for you - no concerns about the deletion, it looks like a clear case. All an AfD would do is let us delete as Reposted Content instead of A7. So, just an FYI on that debate close, since you took action on the article itself. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 15:07, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Moths to Flames

Just thought I would point out it's a web comic therefore covered under CSD A7 web content. Ridernyc (talk) 11:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Next time, please be more explicit - there is a {{db-web}} template. If there had been that, instead of a general {{db-bio}}, it would have made things easier for me. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll lok into into I use Twinkle not sure if they have added that template yet. Ahh there it is got it. They need to reword the first check box so people will use the proper one. Thanks. Ridernyc (talk) 11:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Tokugawa Chikauji

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tokugawa Chikauji. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Taku (talk) 12:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)