User:A Red Cherry/sandbox: Difference between revisions

Archives

no archives yet (create)

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

It is approximately 4:27 AM where this user lives (South Korea). [refresh]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Todd_Piro&action=history I see this page does not exist. A very frequent contributor / host for the biggest news network on earth passes WP:Notability better than John Sullivan Dwight. Wonder why a page for John Dwight Arm & Hammer does not exist https://www.harlemworldmagazine.com/harlem-resident-and-arm-hammer-mogul-john-dwight-1846-1903/ . Thanks! BezosFanYo (talk) 01:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@BezosFanYo: Todd Piro was deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Todd Piro. If Wikipedia should have an article about him, you will need to address the concerns raised at the deletion discussion and prove that the subject meets notability guidelines. You are free to work on a draft and submit your work through the articles for creation process. ✗plicit 10:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that a specific resource center / discussion area for the possibility of recreating the page exists in part because he has remained cohost 5 hours a week at the most watched live news network of all time. Could you restart and rehash the conversation from your POV? BezosFanYo (talk) 23:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@BezosFanYo: The discussion took place two years ago, so it can't be restarted. Can you provide your three best sources? I'm willing to move the content into draftspace to allow you to work on it. ✗plicit 02:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

If you could move the article that was in place into draftspace, that would be great. Thanks! BezosFanYo (talk) 03:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@BezosFanYo:  Done, now available at Draft:Todd Piro. ✗plicit 03:41, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Can I check why did you say that this is a free file? --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@Minorax: {{Wikipedia-screenshot}} is a Creative Commons license. If the license tag is wrong, you can nominate the file for deletion through a different process, like FFD. ✗plicit 10:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I can't see deleted revisions, but I see you deleted File:Shadowmage infiltrator.jpg. I received a talk page notice 2 months ago about the fair use claim being invalidly shaped or something, but I'm pretty sure I fixed the alleged problem (Which was a nothingburger of a problem). I didn't remove the "for deletion" tag because my understanding is that I wasn't allowed to do that, but I presumed whoever looked at the deletion tag would see the problem was resolved and not delete it. If there was some further discussion after I adjusted the fair use claim that contested it, I was not pinged about it. Can you re-examine the history of this file? Was your deletion in error from not realizing the problem had been fixed, or did you disagree with my updated fair use claim? Regardless, I'd have appreciated the ping, even if you thought the deletion was correct - as there was no immediate edit on the page and the image just redlink'd, there was no further notification I got until I noticed now.

cc @Pppery:, who originally contested the fair use rationale. SnowFire (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@SnowFire: This file was tagged for deletion for not satisfying WP:NFCC#8, the contextual significant criterion. As WP:NFC#CS explains, a non-free infobox image is generally allowed for identification of the article's subject. Additional non-free media files must adhere to one of the two points listed there. At the time of its deletion, File:Shadowmage infiltrator.jpg was not discussion in the article text and its caption did not critically discuss the image itself. ✗plicit 02:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I'm familiar with NFCC. The Magic: The Gathering article currently features zero example cards, though (I'd have preferred a card front in the infobox, but apparently there was some standard of using the card back instead in the infobox? At least in 2008 or so, lol.) when it used to have 2-3. And there is discussion of the image? It was the whole "reward for winning a special tournament" and that it used a real person's likeness. To be clear, I'm not wedded to any one particular card, but having zero cards is silly, and the presence of some sample cards would absolutely "significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." I picked a sample card with at least some discussion. Anyway, there's quite a lot of sourced coverage of MTG art (e.g. [1]), just deep-diving any one particular card would dilute the focus in an overview topic.

(Side note: This doesn't technically matter, I'm not basing my argument on it, but to mention it anyway... this is explicitly one of those cases where the copyright holder would explicitly want us to use their artwork, since it's basically free advertising for them. And this isn't hypothetical fanboy excuse-making, I actually corresponded with Wizards of the Coast over email originally. Yes, I know, there are other considerations that stop this, and please don't assume this is my argument, but... just a side issue that makes this a tad silly since the "respect for commercial opportunities" criteria is met in spades here, at least.)

Anyway, I stand by what I said before on the procedural count: Even if you don't buy the above argument and still think the deletion is justified, I'd have appreciated a ping regardless when you saw someone had at least attempted to address the issue (and/or just turned it into a full FFD, seeing the disagreement). I had no idea further action was required because the tag was presented as a "fix the rationale" issue, which I did. As a result, there was an ugly empty image in the article for awhile - even if the deletion is ultimately endorsed, the image remnant could have been removed quicker.

Are you willing to undo the deletion, or should I file a FFD? SnowFire (talk) 03:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@SnowFire: I have no issue restoring the file and having it listed at FFD for the community's input. I'll be undeleting the file shortly. ✗plicit 03:41, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've placed the image back in the article (with an additional reference to its notability). @Pppery: Happy to chat about alternative options, or to go to FFD if you still disagree. SnowFire (talk) 21:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not exactly convinced, but don't care enough to take it to Ffd, so will just let it be. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:14, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Explicit,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 14:51, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 14:51, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Dear @Explicit,

I trust this message finds you well. I am writing to seek your guidance and feedback regarding my recent submission, the Sandbox article, which was regrettably rejected due to concerns related to promotion and lack of clarity.

In response to your valuable feedback, I am in the process of re-creating the article. I would greatly appreciate it if you could take a moment to review the revised version and provide insight into whether the modifications made align with the criteria for acceptance or if further adjustments are necessary.

Your expertise and feedback are highly valued, and I believe your guidance will contribute significantly to enhancing the quality and relevance of the article. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best regards,

LampVimmW (talk) 09:38, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi! About this edit.

At august 2023, Tashkent metro stations given new names^[1], and I move articles from old temporary names (Bekats) to the new ones. And for some reason there is a redirect from Qipchoq (Tashkent Metro) to -Bekat, but Qipchoq temporary name was 12-Bekat not 5-Bekat. 5-Bekat was temp name for another station (Chinor station). So 5-Bekat redirects to Cinor station (this redirect is ok), but redirect from Qipchoq station to 5-Bekat is incorrect. Can you please delete redirect from Qipchoq (Tashkent Metro) to -Bekat and then create redirect from 14-Bekat to Qipchoq article, or delete Qipchoq article (empty article)? Rtfroot (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rtfroot: Hi, I'm currently traveling, so I can't give this a proper look at the moment. Apologies. I'll try to get to it tonight in about 10–12 hours. ✗plicit 00:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Earlier I developed an article about film, named Rajkumar (2024 film), which was deleted after a discussion. The films almost done, Now I'll improve it again. Is it possible to restore it? নবাব (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@নবাব: Hi, I'm currently traveling, so I can't give this a proper look at the moment. Apologies. I'll try to get to it tonight in about 10–12 hours. ✗plicit 00:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Explicit thank you so much নবাব (talk) 01:30, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Explicit, Hi, Earlier I developed an article about film, named Rajkumar (2024 film), which was deleted after a discussion. The films almost done, Now I'll improve it again. Is it possible to restore it? নবাব (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@নবাব: I noticed that you created Draft:Rajkumar (2024 film) in the meantime, so I have merged the the page histories. All the previous revisions are viewable in the History tab. ✗plicit 23:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey there! Sorry to disturb you.

I saw that you deleted my user sandbox page a little while ago.

However, I did not mean to make a request to delete it. This was done in error—I was merely playing around with the template, and had no intention of requesting that my sandbox page be deleted.

Would it still be possible to restore it, especially with the edit history intact? I had a number of very substantial projects that I was using that page to work on. Unfortunately, I had taken most of them off the page before today, but I was still intending to go back in its archives and retrieve the content.

I would really appreciate if you could bring this page (User:A_Red_Cherry/sandbox) back, with its editing history intact.

Thank you very much, and once again, my apologies for any inconvenience I may have caused as a result!

A Red Cherry (talk) 00:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@A Red Cherry:  Done. ✗plicit 00:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much!!! Much appreciated :) A Red Cherry (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I have made thousands of edits to the sandbox on my user space (the same one as mentioned in my comment above) that appear to have been either cleared or hidden at some point.

As you can probably see, I do not seem to be able to access any archived revision history for this page from prior to 2 January anymore. Of course, I was prolific in updating it prior to that time, just as I have been over the past few days.

Could I kindly inquire as to why so many of these past edits seem to have been made private and invisible to myself? It would really mean a lot to me if you (or anyone else) are able to restore my access to these historical archives, as I do have loads of content still stashed in these past revisions to my sandbox page that I have bookmarked for possible future use or reference.

As I glancingly alluded to when I messaged you a few days ago, I have worked on drafts for numerous projects of substantial size using this sandbox page in the past. However, they are no longer available in the current edition of the page anymore, and many of them are buried deep within the archives. As a result, I would need to go deep into the page's history (before last week) in order to retrieve the most recent copies of those pages or templates that I have previously worked on. I plan to do this either on an ongoing basis, or sometime in the near future, at least when it comes to some of them.

Unfortunately, this is no longer possible due to the apparently lost history of many of my past revisions to the page. Thus, would it be possible for you to find those previous versions of the page at all? I would ideally prefer for them to be made publicly available as part of its revision history once more, so that I can freely access them at any point in time once again.

By the way, my apologies if this is the wrong place to be posing this question. Please let me know and feel free to direct me to a better option, if one exists.

Thank you very much in advance for any assistance or guidance you might be able to provide for my situation. Best regards!

A Red Cherry (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@A Red Cherry: Ah, I do remember running into an error page when I originally attempted to restore your sandbox. All revisions should be available now. ✗plicit 23:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so, so much! I really appreciate all your help :)

A Red Cherry (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, (@Explicit). First of all, Happy New Year to you!

I am writing this “talk thread” to you concerning the recent deletion decision on these articles. I had been participating in the deletion discussion until I went traveling over the New Year’s to meet family and friends. When I got back and reviewed the discussion, it was decided that the articles were to be deleted unilaterally. However, I am unsure as to what your exact rationale behind the unilateral deletion was. I ask this because given that some of them (the lists of MIT and Berkeley) had improved on its sources during the discussion process to the point that they were more or less on the same terms as Stanford’s list (in fact, some of the authors of the books and journals are identical for these sources on the Stanford and the others’ lists), the MIT and Berkeley lists have also been unilaterally deleted while Stanford’s list has not been given the same treatment.

If you read the discussion threads, I am not sure if there was a clear reason to unilaterally delete all the lists and exclusively leave out Stanford's. Is this because Stanford’s list has not been nominated in the said deletion discussion along with the rest, or, because the above-mentioned improved lists did not match up to the sources of the Stanford list? If the lists were deleted because the sources did not match up to the Stanford list, then would it be possible for you to restore them into draftspace so that I can try and update/improve the sources to the said standard and submit it for review?

Let me know what you think and thanks so much in advance! Adarwinismshellfire (talk) 07:53, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, any feedback (at your convenience) would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! Adarwinismshellfire (talk) 10:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I received a request from an user by email yesterday that they wanted this file to be undeleted so it could be transfered to Commons. Do you think it could be done? Abzeronow (talk) 23:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@Abzeronow: The screenshot of this character may be old enough to be in the public domain, but the source isn't specific enough for this particular image. Could the user who made the request vouch for its age? ✗plicit 23:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Undid revision 1194251377 by A Red Cherry (talk)