User talk:Explicit

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55

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

It is approximately 8:07 AM where this user lives (South Korea). [refresh]

Happy new year! I saw you deleted the article for YouTuber Akidearest last month and wanted to ask if there is any way to gain access to the article, since I would like to re-write it and reference the old article. I would of course revamp the sources so it doesn't get taken down again. Maehii (talk) 10:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Maehii: Hi, I can restore it as a draft where you can work on it. Then, you can submit it as an Articles for creation submission. Would you happen to have any new sources available now? ✗plicit 00:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, that would be wonderful. Yes, I collected some new sources so the article will align with Wik.ipedia.Pro guidelines. Here are some examples:

https://metropolisjapan.com/beyond-the-view-counter/

https://www.tokyocreative.jp/en/influencer-47-akidearest

https://youtube.fandom.com/wiki/Akidearest

https://www.podbean.com/podcast-detail/h9y57-4dc32/The-Anime-Show-with-Joey--AkiDearest-Podcast (podcast with The Anime Man)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW-y5RjZOLw (collaboration video with Netflix and CDawgVA) Maehii (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Maehii: The content is now available at Draft:Akidearest. ✗plicit 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Maehii (talk) 09:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tafajjal Hossain was a G4 which you originally deleted, and I did again today. I'm inclined to salt something like this, but wonder what a more experienced hand has to say. I'm deleting several dozen at once this afternoon (by the same sock) so while I might make some of my own choices, I'd like your opinion: what's the sweet spot on salting? Twice G4'ed seems slam dunk to me. I've also been experimenting with some short term salting, to discourage multiple attempts for now. BusterD (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BusterD: When I became an admin, the general practice seemed to be that salting was done when a page was deleted three times. That's what I continue to do, kind of like a "three strikes and you're out" rule. It does differ from person to person, though. I think it's ultimately a personal decision. ✗plicit 00:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the sage advice, such as it is. I noticed the policy suggests shorter term salting (as I have been trying) in some cases. Three strikes makes perfect sense to me. I've been spending some time every morning on the speedy list. (I'm now #35 among current admin deleters; a dubious distinction but surprising to me.) For clarification, technically any EC editor could potentially (and under policy) recreate a salted title, right? It's not a form of full protection. I'm not sure this is fully understood by the trolling community... BusterD (talk) 00:23, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BusterD: I usually use short-term protection if a page is recreated three times in quick succession, like in a month, as I suspect the person loses interest if they are unable to create a page three to six months down the line. You're correct that EC editors can recreate a page if protection is set that way. ✗plicit 00:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am currently working on Fatily's task, to remove ffdc templates which reference files that are no longer being discussed at FfD (BRFA). I came across some cases where your input would be appreciated. eg, Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005 film) where the template is incomplete: {{ffdc|log=2019 May 3|date=September 2019}} (no file name), and The Computer Programme {{FFDC|file_name.ext|log=2024 December 28 |date=December 2024}} (incorrect file name). Currently, I have programmed the bot to skip such instances (sample edits). What should be done? skip it (no action), or to remove these templates? Courtesy ping to @CX Zoom and Marchjuly:, as they were involved in the original bot request/BRFA. —usernamekiran (talk) 04:18, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the ffdc templates and associated captions from Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2005 film)#Music. I don't think it was a case of the template being incomplete or otherwise used incorrectly; it's just that everybody forgot to remove it and its associated caption from the article after the FFD related to the relevant file was closed as "Delete". It seems like something a bot should be able to do, but removing the templates is actually something mentioned in point 7.2 of WP:FFDAI#Standard closure guidelines as post of the post close cleanup; there are, however, so few admins working at FFD these days that it's probably something that slips through the cracks every now and then. FWIW, I try to go back and check for these templates when I notice the file they're related to has been deleted and will remove them myself, but I probably miss some too. I'm not sure whether there are enough of these cases to warrant tasking the job to a bot, but I'm also not sure how to otherwise find them, except perhpaps digging through the results of a "What links here" search for the template. The problem with the template used in The Computer Programme#Book seems to be a combination of two user errors, and I've fixed that as well: the person who nominated the file for discussion just forgot to add the template, and the person who subsequently added the template just forgot to add the file's name. I don't know whether those types of errors can be resolved entirely by a bot, and probably some type of human review is also necessary for such cases. However, even when there's no file name provided, the malformed template should still link to the correct date of the FFD discussion; so, its use still sort of works as intended. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:29, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernamekiran: Why did KiranBOt remove this ffdc template? The relevant FFD discussion is still ongoing. Is a syntax issue? A false positive? Are you going around checking on KiranBot's removal of these template to make sure it hasn't prematurely removed any of them? -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: I had checked some of them, by actually going through the deletion page, and rest of the edits only by viewing the diff. I have added some new code/eligibility criteria for removal of the template, so such instances would not happen. But I would check every edit manually for a few runs. For the low-confidence occurrences, similar to examples provided above, would it be a good idea to create a list somewhere? similar to User:KiranBOT/List of mismatched QID? It is transcluded on Category talk:Infobox person Wikidata using qid to be handled by humans. —usernamekiran (talk) 10:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't much about how bots work from a coding standpoint; so, I'm not really a good person to ask about that. Perhaps JJMC89 might be a good person to ask since they run various bots for checking on images, and they also have some corresponding userspace pages for "reports" for checking up on their bots. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can code the bot any way that you'd like. I mean, dont think about technicalities, I want opinion from you guys about what the bot should remove/update/keep as it is. —usernamekiran (talk) 03:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies usernamekiran for not responding sooner. I personally don't use bots or scripts when editing, but I think the most important thing for any bot tasked to remove ffdc templates is going to be to minimize mistakes as much as possible. This means the bot is going to somehow need to know when an FFD about a particular file has been closed. The bot is then going to somehow need to figure out which articles the file that was discussed was/is being used and check those articles for ffdc templates. I'm not sure how a bot can do this, particularly when a file ends being deleted, but if it can create a page like JJMC89 has done with User:JJMC89 bot/report/NFCC violations, then perhaps a human editor could review the page and check on the bot. According to the "What links here" for Template:ffdc, there are currently 83 pages where the template is being transcluded, and I don't know whether that's a little or a lot. Some these pages seem to be articles in which the file in question is being discussed at FFD, but others like Talk:German language/Archive 1#Image removal are archived pages where the relevant file has long been deleted but template wasn't removed. In these other cases, perhaps the template was left for reference purposes (even though it probably should've been removed), but I don't know how a bot can determine that. So, perhaps the bot should only remove ffdc template for files kept per FFD because these might have little value to readers since there is going to be at least a link to the FFD found on the file's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: no need to apologise I have added function so that bot would know if an FFD about a particular file has been closed, or ongoing (thats what I was referring to by "eligibility criteria" in previous comment). The bot goes through the list of transclusions, similar to this]. Out of 80, only 20 are in article space. That answers your second doubt. I ran the bot a few minutes ago, it removed template from two articles: special:diff/1267934090, and special:diff/1267934114 (there were 22 before the run). The bot created User:KiranBOT/reports/List of malformed FFDC template with fourteen entries (three templates on single page), I guess rest of the discussions are ongoing. Kindly let me know if this is okay. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:15, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you please userify this at User:Skyerise/sandbox/Liber Pennae Praenumbra? I've been intending to write an article on the book from which this word was sourced. Kinda weird there was an article on the word but not the book, since there are way more sources on the latter than the former. As I am likely to include some portion of the content of the deleted article, I'd like to make sure the edit history is preserved for that content, unless you think it would be better to restore the article and make it a redirect for that purpose... Skyerise (talk) 14:49, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyerise: Hi, I've userfied the page as requested. ✗plicit 00:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks muchly! Skyerise (talk) 00:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The file does not show for me. When I click on the file image or thumbnail image, I get File not found: /v1/AUTH_mw/Wik.ipedia.Pro-en-local-public.a8/a/a8/Sankranthiki_Vasthunnam_Release_Date%282%29.jpg. Do yuou know what would cause this? -- Whpq (talk) 15:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Whpq: The image displays normally for me when I click on the file and thumbnail image. Does the error message persist even now? ✗plicit 00:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am still getting this error. I have tried it on my desktop and tablet which are both on my home network. I tried it from my phone after disconnecting from my home network and it still shows as an error. All of these are from some form of Chrome browser with me logged in. I tried from my desktop while logged out and it still has the error. I tried using an online web-based emulator emulating Opera under Win10. It still does not show. -- Whpq (talk) 01:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update - Datbot also gagged on the file when trying to resize it. The image now shows for me. Some weird backend glitch I guess has resolved itself. -- Whpq (talk) 21:15, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you deleted File:Russian Paralympic Committee special emblem (Tokyo 2020, Beijing 2022).jpg as "F8: Media file available on Commons" but the version on commons was deleted hours later as "CSD G4 (recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus)". Can the file be undeleted as it is causing errors on a large number fo pages ( more than 100, closer to 700+). Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 18:48, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@KylieTastic:  Done, file restored. The relevant discussion is c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Russian Paralympic Committee flag (2021).svg. Based on the admin's closing rationale, the licensing of the image may still have unresolved issues. ✗plicit 00:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks KylieTastic (talk) 10:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Wik.ipedia.Pro Asian Month 2024 contest
	Explicit Thank you for your additions in Wik.ipedia.Pro Asian Month 2024.5 of your articles have been accepted. Warm Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 18:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please can I see the deleted article List of missing people from Nepal. Davidgoodheart (talk) 20:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidgoodheart: Here it is. ✗plicit 13:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I please see the deleted article Domonique Ramirez. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wik.ipedia.Pro:Categories for discussion/Log/2025 January 6 § States and territories (dis)established in YYYY on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. harrz ^talk 21:02, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Totally unhelpful. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:32, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You closed the prior AfD as delete. Please will you take a look at the deleted article to make a determination about CSD eligibility? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:23, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please also consider whether the editor pushing the new version (FrancisMathew2255) is ArifVlog782 evading a block 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:27, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Explict. I recently uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons a new logo of Moe's Southwest Grill (File:Moes Southwest Grill logo.png). On 21 November 2023, an IP user made an edit[1] that removed that logo from the article. The edit summary, in part, stated, "Removed outdated logo." After I had uploaded the new logo, I noticed that you had deleted the Wik.ipedia.Pro-stored image of File:Moes logo.png on 10 February 2024, with the rationale "F5: Unused non-free media file". Although I am unable to view it due to its deletion, the evidence above suggests that this was the previous logo of Moe's Southwest Grill. To me, the new logo does not qualify for copyright protection as it does not appear to meet the originality threshold required for copyright. The new logo appears to merely consist of text and geometric symbols (a box, three triangles, and a generic pepper symbol), although it appears certainly eligible for trademark protection. There seems to be some level of consensus that the pepper symbol (see the commons entry to File:Chili's Logo.svg) is not copyrightable. I could understand an argument the elements are combined in a way that would make it copyrightable, but for the reasons mentioned above, I don't find it particularly persuasive. Since you are the deleting administrator on the original logo and are an admin on Commons, I will defer to your judgment over whether the current logo is copyrightable or not. If you feel it does meet copyright protection and delete it from commons, I would like to upload the new logo to Wik.ipedia.Pro under fair use rational, unless you have any objections. Thanks! Wik.ipedia.Proluva (talk) 12:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]