User talk:Fastily

Islamic Calendar

Thanks for semi protection, however it seems a perennial issue so I expect it to start up again after the 3 days (I can't remember how it ended up on my watchlist but it seems a magnet for odd edits). It occrurs to me that an edit filter may be more useful, are you able and willing to write one? If not, do you think it's a good idea? Cheers, Egg Centric 19:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. FYI I notified someone else, I hope you don't mind this being on your talk page, in hindsight it should probably be somewhere else but each step made sense at the time, if you see what I mean. Cheers, Egg Centric 19:51, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That seems reasonable. I'm not familiar with the edit filter interface, but I could ask someone with the appropriate technical knowledge. Before I do that though, what kinds of edits/keywords would such a filter disallow? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 06:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of two things but on further thought only one is reasonably practical, and that is to prevent removal of Muhammed images from specified articles. The best way to implement that is probably up to the filter writer - whether it ought to be a special comment tag with the image, or whether it ought to recognise that the image is one of a few listed of Muhammed I don't know. The second thing I had in mind, but now think is too ambitious, was stopping "reinterpretations" of Arabic; I doubt that would be practical. Maybe something based on cluebotNG could do it, but 'tis a pipe dream for the moment

Egg Centric 20:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Muhammad images from articles by new accounts is definitely possible. You're right about disallowing the refactoring of arabic text in articles; its scope is too broad for a humble edit filter. I'll put the request in and let you know how it goes. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:18, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Is that being done on or off wiki (and if the former pls could I have a link

) Egg Centric 15:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both actually. I was going to make a formal request and then ping some people I know. Haven't gotten around to it yet though. I'll do it asap. Sorry for the delay. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:28, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, it no problem, don't feel rushed by me - I just like to know what's going on

Egg Centric 21:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, here we are: Wikipedia:Edit_filter/Requested#Removal_of_Muhammad_images. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian vandal

Hi there FASTILY, VASCO here,

both you and User:JamesBWatson have blocked/warned this Brazilian anon "user" (has lots of anon IPs, but this one is regularly used), he continues (see here, removing of infobox captions http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_N%27Gog&diff=448846825&oldid=448587999). Can this IP be blocked indef? It would be a great help and call for the "user".

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 09:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He continues, another unexplained BOX removal (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Royston_Drenthe&diff=next&oldid=448611367). Sigh... --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has already been blocked. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated

I put in a request again due to this here: [1] and posted the previous reason with it. JamesAlan1986 *^talk 12:46, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thanks for letting me know. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:19, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Parys image

Hello. You deleted the Greg Parys.png file. As reason, you said that the file doesn't meet the #1 Non-free content criteria. That's probably not true, because there says that these files is used only where no free equivalent is available, what is the situation here. There needs to be an image to represents that person, but none is free licensed (for example look up on the Commons). Could you, please, restore that file? Alex^{discussion ★} 14:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I cannot do that. Doing so would be a textbook violation of Wikipedia's non-free content policy. See User:Fastily/E#F7. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

F8 question

So, I'm a bit confused on the upload history requirements for F8 deletions and thought I'd ask an expert. For example, this file has two previous versions that are not on Commons, but are non-trivial (I think) changes to the original image. The Commons page does have a record of those additional uploads though. Does this stay or go? --Danger (talk) 22:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it. As long as the full attribution history (in text form) is available on the file description page of the Commons version, the file may be deleted locally, regardless of how many times the file has been modified. Hope that helps. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:26, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you much. --Danger (talk) 22:31, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Archive concern

Er, User talk:Fastily/Archive 4 is massive and it froze up my browser. Would you mind dividing it into a few archives? Thanks. HurricaneFan 25 00:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I have time I suppose. If I'm going to split my archives, I'll have to do it with a script or a bot as, my computer has a limit to the amount of text it can copy and paste. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:22, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Namrights

Can you please restore Namrights? It does in fact assert notability. It is the leading human rights NGO in Namibia.--TM 00:09, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to me like the article was previously deleted for a similar reason. If I restore this page, are you going to expand it and address the concerns that were raised? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 00:25, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I was not the article's originator but I certainly see the value.--TM 01:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So...does this mean you plan to improve the article? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I said indeed. However, it would be helpful not to prod it so as to give myself and other editors more than a few days to get to it.--TM 11:47, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very well,

Restored -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:08, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Farrah Fawcett iconic pinup 1976.jpg

Hi Fastily. I'm here to request undulation of the above file. I did not know it was up for deletion since the IP who tagged it did not properly inform me of the tagging. This did not meet F7 and it's not close, as I would have explained if I had known. Since you deleted it, given what it is, I doubt you read the FUR, and I certainly understand why: only one out of a few hundred have tailored text as this one did, most displaying the boilerplate text the FUR template provides, but if you had you would have seen that the file is the definition of non-replaceable, being not only one of the most iconic images from the 1970s, but the best selling pinup poster of all time (yes, in history). The poster itself is prominently discussed in the article on Farah Fawcett, where it was displayed.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's reasonable.

Restored -FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:38, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted page

Fastily, While the page Kichulchoia that you deleted did not link to an existing page, that is because I was in the process of creating the page that it linked to. That is generally how I create articles regarding monotypic animal genera since I feel that it is more efficient to simply redirect the genus page to the species page to avoid duplication of information. Thanks,Divingpetrel (talk) 03:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright. Thanks for letting me know. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:14, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deedub

You do should not be deleting this artist's page when other artists similar to him have a page. It makes no sense that you would allow Wiz Khalifa, Snoop Dogg and others a page and delete the Deedub page. They are not for advertisement. This is for fans to search and find background information about Deedub as an artist and as David Woods the person. You need to chill on your deletion it is inappropriate and bias at best. The page is both appropriate and non bias. Fact based knowledge about an artist people deeply care about.

Kelli Bindernagel (Deedubfan) 75.28.130.206 (talk) 04:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fastily/E#G11 -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No boomerang-ing this time (ANI)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 04:32, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Boomerang complete N419 BH 19:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed sir. Cheers, FASTILY ^(TALK) 20:02, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arjuna Harjai

Hi. You indicated on WP:RFPP that Arjuna Harjai has been protected, but there's no indication of that in the article's history. The Mark of the Beast (talk) 05:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Erledigt now. Sorry about that. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 07:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Sorry for continuously pestering you, as that's not my intention, but I've been a bit busy in the last couple of weeks. I should be editing in full capacity starting from tomorrow, is it possible that we resume coaching then, provided you aren't busy yourself, of course. Regards, —James ^{(Talk • Contribs)} • 8:29pm • 10:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, I'll add some new material right now. Thanks for reminding me. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

!?!

Please restore the article Climate of Barcelona. You deleted it, in spite of the discussion - two users reported error about speedy deletion in discussion of article. The article did not fall under the A10 (nor any other point), see Barcelona#Climate, article Climate of Barcelona is 5 times longer and has a lot of additional data. Usedom that you made a mistake. Please restore the article. Subtropical-man (talk) 12:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I have requested comment from the user who nominated the page for deletion. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When I marked the page for deletion there was nothing more than a word-for-word copy of the Barcelona climate section. If the consensus is that the climate section warrants its own page that is fine with me. Dac04 (talk) 06:34, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of J. Neil Schulman

Regarding photo of J. Neil Schulman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:J_Neil_Schulman_8X10_headshot.jpg) that is scheduled for deletion. It looks like he tagged it correctly as a self-made photo and granted permission. What else should he have done? Is there something specific missing?

Thanks,

William Alan Ritch (User:BillRitch) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BillRitch (talk • contribs) 12:53, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you link the file in question? It's unclear what you're referring to. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:01, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:J_Neil_Schulman_8X10_headshot.jpg)

William Alan Ritch (talk)

The uploader cites "Jesulu Productions", which appears to be a corporation (for the record, media produced/created by corporations is almost always copyrighted to the fullest extent), as the author/copyright holder of the file. This conflicts with the license tag {{cc-by-sa-3.0}}, which identifies the uploader, User:Jneil, as the copyright holder. As a result, I tagged the file as missing evidence of permission because it is now unclear who owns the copyright of the file and because it is unclear if the real copyright holder actually granted permission for the file to be released/published under a free Creative Commons license. -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:18, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I am pretty sure that the corporation is solely owned by J. Neil Schulman. But I shall try to work out how it is supposed to be granted.

William Alan Ritch (talk) 12:17, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My Talkpage!!!

Um, what gives???--S G Command 19:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Fastily was fixing a redlink, I believe. I have taken the liberty of editing the template so it shows the content I think you want. Maybe chill a bit? :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 19:50, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The deleted template/page was forcing the pages I edited to appear in the CSD category. I don't believe you want your userspace pages deleted no? -FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:00, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your FfD nominations

Were there any copyright issues to these images that I overlooked? In any case, I'm sending them to the commons as fast as I can. ----DanTD (talk) 02:56, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I noted otherwise in a nomination, no. And excellent, thanks for doing that. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 03:59, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Always alittle too helpful

Facepalmintelati^talk 04:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries :) Thanks for trying though. Cheers, FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:37, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File tagged by Fbot that is only linked

Fbot tagged File:Ernest_Hemingway_family_tree.svg as orphaned, but in fact it is linked from the "See also" section of Ernest Hemingway. Wouldn't it be better to have the bot not tag files that are linked from mainspace? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:53, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]