Jump to content

User talk:Sphilbrick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Skatten69 (talk | contribs) at 18:45, 31 May 2017 (→deleted page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Thank you + invitation

Thank you for your contributions to articles related to women in sports!

We'd like to invite you to learn more about Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's sport, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in sports. If you would like to participate, join by visiting the Participants page or visit one of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women's sport/Task forces for specific sports. Thanks!

WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport WikiProject Women's Sport

Question about your user name

There's a character named Gunnery Sergeant Philbrick in a book series I'm currently reading the latest entry in (who was a buck sergeant until 2014 or so). Any relation to your user name? (I'm just curious). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:55, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MjolnirPants: Not that I know of. My father was an only son, and my grandfather was an only son, so outside of my brothers and nephew, anyone else name Philbrick is getting to be a distant relative. My family is all from New Hampshire. My brother is the genealogist in the family so I'll bring it up to him but my guess is that at most it's a distant relative. Thanks for asking, though.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:28, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh! I honestly meant to specify this, but I didn't: The Gunnery Sergeant is a fictional character I thought you might have picked your username after. In the book's timeline, he won't be born for another hundred years or so. Sorry for any confusion! (Though if you do have a gunnery sergeant for a relative, the author would probably be tickled pink.) ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 16:44, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, missed that. It briefly occurred to me that he might be fictional, but I didn't follow that thought through. No, my user name is based on my real name. What is the book series? Worth reading? I did read a book once which had a character named Philbrick, and it was honestly quite odd to read.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:56, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that the above is correct, you are related to more than half of all New England families <g>. I found a genealogy online, and it misses the Mayflower passengers, but has just about everyone else. Collect (talk) 12:54, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Collect: Can you point me to it? My brother is the genealogist in our family, but I can pass it on to him.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:12, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Try Full text of "A genealogy of the Philbrick and Philbrook families : descended from the emigrant, Thomas Philbrick, 1583-1667" which I hope helps. If he checks, he will find links to many of the old Boston families, and a slew from Connecticut as well. Collect (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion for Ali-Illahism

An article that you have been involved in editing—Ali-Illahism—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. MiguelMadeira (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--MiguelMadeira (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:43, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you open to being trouted?

Have you heard about trout slapping? If so, then are you open to being trouted or whaled? UpsandDowns1234 18:15, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If necessary. Can you elaborate?--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:21, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Institute of Management Rohtak Revert

There is no copyright for the added contents. Can you please elucidate copyright violation for adding details about my alma mater ? 120.56.253.58 (talk) 07:34, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Everything written in the last few decades automatically has copyright. In some rare cases it will automatically be public domain which does not apply here. In some other cases the copyright holder can affirmatively license it for free use but I didn't see any evidence of that here. Without evidence that the material is freely licensed or public domain cannot be used.
I explained in my edit summary that the material came from this link--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

rankings of academic publishers

dear all - ok i am a newcomer to wikipedia but as i was about to correct my work today i found that you - the editors march 27, 2017 - simply removed all traces of it to the dustbin, including my correct reference to the sense consortium under its standardized new wikipedia name.

i think - saying with without chagrin - that you treated my work simply unfairly, since the new hong kong ranking, published by one of china's important universities is just as a milestone in the ranking of publishers development as the shanghai ranking is for university ranking.

if you had taken the care to read their ranking analysis you would have discovered that it is based on that of the australian political science association and on similar other trustworthy previous work. simply to remove my references to the hong kong ranking is unjust. can you send me a copy at least to my talk page, so that i can start to work again on the article?

you inserted references like "self publication" etc. while in fact the hong-kong based university published it on their earlier website. it is simply important also to consider what universities actually do, and how they consider publishers. no ranking is perfect.

if you invest just a little of time you will also discover that my proposals find a reflection in the literature to be found in google scholar on ranking of academic publishers. but please accept my kind regardsBibliometer 1492 (talk) 19:20, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You put the same comment on my user space, but I'll answer it here. Firstly, I didn't "simply remove all traces" of your edits. I carefully tagged various problematic statements introduced by your edits and the edits of John de Norrona (which I will have to re-tag as they are all still there). The problems were rampant peacockery (somebody used the term "exceptional excellence" at one point if I remember correctly), the complete lack of a lead section in the version you prepared (the article just launched straight into discussion of some ranking or other), and many self-published sources. Secondly, user Sphilbrick seems to have removed the edits from the history of the page as a result of a copyright violation which is why the intervening edits aren't visible. Take it up with Sphilbrick. Famousdog (c) 10:37, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Bibliometer 1492: Famousdog didn't remove all trace of it, I did. Take it up with me. We don't permit copyright infringement. That doesn't mean copy and paste material and then edit it until it no longer is an infringement; that leaves infringement in the edit history which we do not permit. We also do not permit close paraphrasing so light editing even if done off-line is not good enough. I didn't miss the fact that it was based upon some trustworthy source. It wasn't just based on it it was a copy of it so I removed it. Sorry, I cannot send you a copy of it. Sending a copy of deleted material is appropriate in many cases but not in the case of copyright issues. I do appreciate your interest in the subject and hope this won't dissuade you, but we are serious about respecting copyrights.

Comment and message from Bibliometer 1492

I hope that you now like my re-written version of the article. kind regards and please have wiki patience with me Bibliometer 1492 (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

Administrator changes

added TheDJ
removed Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring Deleted Page Draft:Olfactory Art

A few months ago, I was trying to create a new page for Olfactory Art, ran into some difficulties (my first attempt ever to create a Wikipedia page), and gave up on it for a while. It seems that on 25 June 2016 you deleted the draft page (it says, G 13 (TW)). I now have some additional help from another expert on the topic with which I'll collaborate, as well as a person who's well-versed with Wikipedia to help us with the process. I'd like to have Draft:Olfactory Art restored so we could use it as a starting point, but I'm not sure about the process. Could you please do that, or point me to the proper way to get it done? Many thanks! @ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archmemory (talk • contribs) 15:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Archmemory:  DoneDraft:Olfactory Art--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:10, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great; thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archmemory (talk • contribs) 13:00, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 21

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 21, January-March 2017
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)

  • #1lib1ref 2017
  • Wikipedia Library User Group
  • Wikipedia + Libraries at Wikimedia Conference 2017
  • Spotlight: Library Card Platform

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Compromised?

WP:N, WP:V? -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to check this too. Don't believe so - user is now restoring the pages. Looks like a batch-delete gone wrong. Sam Walton (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:38, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

{{trout}}{{whale}}

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.
Trout deserved. I was doing a mass delete of some G 13's but was on the wrong page. I believe I've restored all of the mistaken deletions. I did get one error message when restoring but my guess is that someone beat me to it.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:44, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Trout deserved, but hardly a whale. A dozen or so deletions, restored in less than 5 minutes. --S Philbrick(Talk) 13:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sphilbrick, i think a whake is deserved, you redlinked every twinkle CSD tagging and some templates used in thousands of articles, even if you restored them in 5 minutes (well that's IMO :P). --Lil Johnny (talk) 13:49, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd personally go with the trout, as it was only a small mistake quickly reversed (it could have been much worse). Don't mind me asking if you're compromised. These days it's the first thing we ask admins. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Asking if compromised is quite appropriate.--S Philbrick(Talk) 16:07, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
After second thouhgs, it's better with trout, since I saw really bigger mistakes Lil Johnny (talk) 17:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

another fair use img

Weren't you the one I interacted with about fair use images? I just uploaded another at File:Chittaprosad-Hungry-Bengal-sketch1.jpg. Thank you for helping.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 12:57, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Newsroom Live

The CSD template you left on this doesn't seem to make a lot of sense - there's no obvious similarity with [1] and spot-checking a couple of phrases on google doesn't turn anything up. Could you look again? GoldenRing (talk) 13:52, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@GoldenRing: I was looking at the initial diff, and missed that they cleaned it up. I'll revdel the first diff, but remove the csd.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:24, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@GoldenRing: Thanks for your attention to detail.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CSD Declined: La prepago

Hi,

Just to let you know that I declined the speedy deletion of La prepago, as it was not a copyright violation of this page. If you click on the "Continue Reading" and scroll down to the bottom of the text, it states that the content is from Wikipedia, licensed under CC-BY-SA, and links back to La prepago. Stephen! Coming... 17:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I still think there's a problem - it came to our attention as possibly a google translation of something else, but I don;t know how to do a reverse search for a translation, so when I found it copied some English, I went with that. --S Philbrick(Talk) 20:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) The plot at least looks to me like an unattributed translation of es:La prepago. Btw, Sphilbrick, I think we're pretty much safe in always discounting revolvy.com as a possible source – I think it just copies from us. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That fits with the claim. (I'm not familiar with revolvy.com, but will try to remember it.) What should we do, if anything, with La prepago. It's pretty bad.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:23, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It was pretty bad. I've removed the plot, which seems to have helped, see what you think. I think there's a pretty strong feeling at WP:PNT that machine-translation should be discouraged, and I have to say I agree with that. I used to blithely put {{expand language}} templates on pages, now I tend to remove them on sight as they almost invariably lead to trouble. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. --S Philbrick(Talk) 23:56, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When I am in Copyright review mode, I have a habit of seeing everything in copyright terms, and have to remember that there are other responses. :)--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Here is the updated page with new references added, do you think it is notable enough to go live yet? --Centipede92 (talk) 22:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Centipede92:I contribute in a number of areas but I'm not active in the article review so I don't feel comfortable commenting. I urge you to ask for advice at the tea house: Wikipedia:Teahouse

Sangdong mine

Thank you for interesting of our mine. I am working at Sangdong Mine, and I would like to introduce our mine to Wikibia. We received updates from the company and updated it on Wikipedia, but every time we update it, the content is deleted and I am deeply concerned.Younghyun.ju (talk) 02:30, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Younghyun.ju:Because of your connection, you have a conflict of interest.
Please take a look at our conflict of interest policy:
Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest
The best practices are that you should list corrections and suggestions for improvement on the article talk page. In the case of highly trafficked pages, this may be enough, and other editors of the article will evaluate and take action. In the vast majority of articles, there may be too few editors following this particular article and the request can be brought to a broader group of editors by adding {{request edit}} (Including the curly braces) to the post.--S Philbrick(Talk) 11:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cyndago

K, so I get the citation was bad, but could you re-add the posts by Matt, the Cyndago post, and Danny Sexbang?76.174.35.70 (talk) 16:54, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I need some context, what are you talking about?--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I finally figured out what you're talking about. While it may not seem all that long ago to you, I've made over 50 edits since then so since you didn't mention the subject I didn't quite know what you are talking about. It is permissible to include short excerpts of copyrighted information if it is properly in quotation marks over block quotes and referenced. While I believe you may have complied with the quotation and referencing, in my opinion it was far too long a passage to be acceptable. We are not permitted to restore removals at as a result of copyright issues (unless of course they were done in error).
N.B. I have to run out for a few hours, so will not be able to discuss this further for some time.--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:08, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Book cover of From the Wilderness and Lebanon.png

Hi. Please revert the hiding of previous uploads of this file, they were freed per OTRS ticket 2017022010004888.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 09:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.:  Done Just curious though, what value does this serve?--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:51, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
With your action and my reversion edit, we now have satisfied the customer. Thank you!   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Missing edit

Hi, although you reverted the edit on Symbols of Islam, I forgot I need that edit back reading "In some countries such as Angola and the People's Republic of China, Islamic symbols are banned..." as defined by this link here. 24.212.149.50 (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm not following.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was a typo

I did with people in the Hartford article. Those television radio people I removed, only worked in Hartford. Their articles aren't even categorized People from Hartford. WikiProject Cities guidelines[2] say born or lived. We don't categorize athletes as being from Foo just because they played for one of Foo's sports teams. Otherwise long time no see. Hope all is well with you....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 20:31, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all is well, albeit busy.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging of Senario Lagi

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Senario Lagi. I do not think that Senario Lagi fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because No source was listed, and earwig's detector found no plausible source. If this was a copyvio, of what?. I request that you consider not re-tagging Senario Lagi for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page, or at least indication what is being infringed in some way. DES (talk) 14:06, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DESiegel: When I initially tagged it, I tried listing the source but it was rejected because it's blacklisted. I explained that it was a blacklisted site. Please do a Google search for the opening sentence of the plot and you will find the site. Then please reinstate the CSD. Thanks.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, I thought the search done by earwig's tool (https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/) was the equivalent of a google search. Apparently not, and I will use a google search as well in future. FYI, one can enter a blacklisted URL by simply inserting spaces, say before the backslashes, so that it is not a working link anymore. Failing that, one could enter just the name of the site. I have seen cases where the title of an offline book was entered in the "url" field. But there does need to be some way for the person checking the CSD tag to verify the copyvio. Even a note on the talk page would help. Thanks for finding the copyvio, and my apologies for not doing the google search. DES (talk) 15:11, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I was a bit short but but I'm trying to do a lot of copyright work and is pretty damn annoying to identify a clear violation and then find out the system won't let me report it properly. That's not your fault and I shouldn't have taken it out on you. I get the concept of blacklisted sites but I think entry in CSD should be an exception. I don't have the energy to figure out where to request this exception. Even though I do a fair amount of copyright work and I've heard of earwig tool, I don't use it. I use the Copypatrol Tool which I believe is based on Turnitin. Although oddly, in this specific case, it didn't find the blacklisted site it found a translated version of it at some other location, so I ended up doing a Google search.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No Problem. Knowing that you are a reliable editor, I should have asked you more directly. Anyway, we got that copyvio deleted, with a proper log entry. I will post about the blacklisting issue. Who knows we might even get some action taken. Thanks. DES (talk) 16:14, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).

Administrator changes

added Karanacs • Berean Hunter • GoldenRing • Dlohcierekim
removed Gdr • Tyrenius • JYolkowski • Longhair • Master Thief Garrett • Aaron Brenneman • Laser brain • JzG • Dragons flight

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Miscellaneous

  • Following an RfC, the editing restrictions page is now split into a list of active restrictions and an archive of those that are old or on inactive accounts. Make sure to check both pages if searching for a restriction.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jason J Smart (deleted draft)

Hello. You have deleted the draft of the Jason J Smart article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jason_J_Smart). I am the new editor who will create the similar page in Russian, so I'd like to restore the previous draft to have all the links it contains and to translate the page. Can you, please, check it? Thank you. Nickybond (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nickybond:  Done--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:30, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Sphilbrick: Thank you! Nickybond (talk) 15:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Question about a db

Hi, Sphilbrick - would you be so kind and take a look at Colorado Museum of Natural History, and let me know what you think. While using the curation tool, I tagged it for speedy using the closest thing that addressed the problem (db) since it was initially published as an article when it probably should have been a db, but the latter is questionable. An IP removed the tag, and created a TP. Another editor came along and added the db template to the article. The IP commented again on the TP. I'm of the mind that either way, article or db, the page is not needed since the names to db are not the same. I question the intent necessity of the page. Thanks in advance. Atsme📞📧 16:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Atsme: I understand the concept leading to the Denver Museum of nature and science in the dabebt page, but it wasn't even significant enough to mention in the article (unless I missed it).
My preference would be to convert "Colorado Museum of Natural History" into a redirect to the longer name "University of Colorado Museum of Natural History", and add a hat note, something along the lines of if you may be looking for the museum which used to have this name but is now called the Denver Museum ofs nature and science.
My impression is that we rarely use a full dab page when there are only two items. It may make sense if there are only two existing articles and we think it is highly likely that there will be more but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
I don't hold myself out as fully conversant with the best practices for dab pages and had notes but my general understanding was that had notes would be used one is to sometimes three and dabs when there are more.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:16, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My viewer account

Hi Sphil,

I sent you an email that touched on my viewer account. Please let me know what you might think about that sometime within the next week or two.

Thanks,

Scott P. (talk) 00:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:11, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You get name checked

Here. It's a helluva bizarre page. Just FYI. Take care! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 02:32, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Wow. Thanks, I guess :) --S Philbrick(Talk) 13:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmm. Apropos nothing, I assumed it was somehow connected to the section above :) all the best! — O Fortuna semper crescis, aut decrescis 13:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Time

My schedule now requires that I be off for 7 days (except for one more visit at 05:00 UTC tomorrow/ this evening.) Again I thank you for all of your considerations and quite helpful thoughts thus far in this. You continue to amaze me. Honestly!

I will be back next Thursday. I welcome all actual consideration of these concepts, that I have put forward here. Please don't focus on the messenger, as is the time honored but oh so counterproductive habit of mind currently in place at WP. How many messengers has WP buried thus far in similar cases, allowing the real work of any real consideration of their actual proposals, to be lazily buried along with their now lifeless sadly EFT'ed wiki-bodies, I can only imagine? Sorry about that. I just had to get in the last jab, I guess. I will certainly look forward to seeing whether or not my wiki-body yet survives next week? Scott P. (talk) 19:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see you in a week or so.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:04, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sphil, things seem to be moving more quickly than either of us had probably expected. The people who think they are our opposition have made their first open move now. I will be back here on your talk page at 7 pm eastern. They think they are a rule unto themselves, and I have good reason to believe that they may be the root cause of much around here. If they are the ones I have a history with, then I have beaten them before, so to speak, and that was when I still believed in actually fighting fire with fire. Now I believe in using a far better remedy, I know that while they may think I am their enemy, they are not mine. Please review this link and see what you think for yourself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rex_Iudaeorum

Request for review of apparent disappearance of message

Hi Sphil,

I apologize for not being here at 7 ET. Unfortunately a small unexpected thing came up with my business, which required immediate attention. I've spent probably 50 hours on this little project over the last week, and unlike some here who appear to have unlimited resources, I must pay my bills just like everyone else. So, after a bit of time just now to try to figure out the specifics of how exactly my message to Rex disappeared, here is something I have noted. This is all technical stuff. You see, I know nearly zilch about the guts of WM software. All I know is that I've installed it and operated it a bit once or twice, but the code of it, which I believe was PHP, I have never deeply explored. At any rate, to simplify here: All I can say for certain is that my message to Rex disappeared from his page, and while reviewing the page history, I can no longer find it. The edit sequence I first pointed to may have been my own doing, but still, I know for certain that my message was erased there. Could someone please go through this complaint of mine with me in a serious fashion? Hoping someone over on the admin side will come through for this.

Thanks kindly,

Scott P. (talk) 02:54, 13 May 2017 (UTC) (8 PM Pac Time, 11 PM Eastern Time)[reply]

PS: On Saturday (tomorrow) I should be pretty free all day, and will monitor WP on at least an hourly basis.

PPS: I'm going to bed a little early just now. Thanks, Scott P. (talk) 02:38, 14 May 2017 (UTC) ( 7:30 PM Pacific time, 10:30 PM Eastern time)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean about a disappearance. I can see the message.--S Philbrick(Talk) 02:44, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting Previous Poster Revisions

I recently tried my hand in uploading posters to movies. However after I uploaded 3 posters, I realised that policy dictates that posters should be <100K px. I have subsequently updated newer revisions of posters which meets the said criteria. Please have the earlier revisions deleted, according to WP:F5 or WP:F3. Images include - File:Anarkali of Arrah poster.jpg, File:Lakshyam 2017 poster.jpg and File:Godha 2017 poster.jpg. Jupitus Smart 13:47, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That typically get handled by one of our bots, I believe.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Undelete Request-- Mirus Academy (U.S.)

Hello, I am the administrator at Mirus Academy high school, and I just realized our wiki page was deleted over a year ago. When I look at the messages, it implies that the page had never been approved, but I know that on August 26, 2015 I was able to see it on Wikipedia, so I am feeling confused. Is there anyway to restore it? Here is the message I see when I try to access it:

This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference. 13:33, 1 September 2015 Sphilbrick (talk | contribs) deleted page Mirus Academy (U.S) (Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Orangemoody) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slhogan94 (talk • contribs)

@Slhogan94: Oh dear. In most cases, I can simply say yes and happily provide a copy the contents but this is a special situation. In addition, while I know a bit about the situation I have not been involved and it is best if this is handled by someone who has full knowledge of the situation. If you go to this link Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Orangemoody you will learn probably more than you want to know about the situation but glance to the bottom of that page and you will see that one of the key participants has username Risker, with a link to her talk page. Sorry to transfer you but I'd prefer that she respond. I hope I'm simply being overly cautious and she finds no difficulty providing you with the information but I do know this is a significant issue and I should not make the unilateral decision.--S Philbrick(Talk) 23:09, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh goodness. Okay, I will follow the link and hope to learn what happened. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slhogan94 (talk • contribs) 21:27, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

Hi Sphilbrick. Do you happen to have a few minutes to take a look here regarding some BLP/promo issues on Harold S. Koplewicz? I've been poking around for a couple months looking for someone. CorporateM (Talk) 16:39, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CorporateM:  Done--S Philbrick(Talk) 17:56, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please revert this image

Please restore the older revision of File:Windows NT 3.5.png that you deleted. I know we're supposed to use minimal resolution for fair use images, but not to the point that the text becomes virtually unreadable and makes the image all but useless in the first place. Modernponderer (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Modernponderer I understand your concern but I wasn't the editor who identified the need for reduction nor the editor who reduced it. The original editor doesn't seem to be very active; one option is that someone agrees to do a better cropping so that the image is readable when properly reduced. If this is something you can do or you can track down an editor who can do that I can temporarily make it available for that purpose.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very confused: is the editor who reduced it not a bot? And the editor who identified the need for reduction seems to be quite active recently... should I ask them about it in that case? Modernponderer (talk) 19:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the editor who reduced it is a bot. You are perfectly free to ask the editor who requested the reduction, but I predict they will simply note that it needed reduction. I don't want to read too much into your original statement but it sounds like you are suggesting that on readability of an image is an exception to the fair use size guidelines. I don't think that's the case. Unless you can find evidence that there is such an exception to the fair use rules, the real solution is to find someone willing to make a properly cropped image that will be readable at an acceptable resolution. Presumably, you could do so, but if not you'll have to track down someone who will volunteer to do it.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher)If it's just a matter of cropping the image, I could probably do that, if that helps. I'm not sure how readable the text will be. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:36, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Justlettersandnumbers I've temporarily restored the image to see if cropping would retain the readability while allowing the size to meet our guidelines. Thanks in advance, JLS.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:29, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I tried cropping away the teal background and then scaling down to exactly 75%, which gave a file size of just under 120k, which might perhaps just escape the notice of the bot. The text isn't really readable at that resolution, and I don't think it's worth uploading the result. Sorry about that. However, for what it's worth, the history of this file, for example, does suggest that this is trodden ground, so it might be worth starting a discussion at WT:NFC if it's really important. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English people copyvio

Hi Sphilbrick. I see that you supressed some edits to English people as copyright violations of http://collegestudentforlife.blogspot.com/2015/02/england.html. That site looks like it's a copy of our England article though, so I think the copying was the other way around in this instance. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:09, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cordless Larry Very possible. I reverted.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for leaving me messages at the teahouse

Many thanks for leaving messages addressed to me at the teahouse. Although I have been using Wikipedia for years now, I am still not au fait with Wikipedia: Teahouse, so I shall appreciate any advice about how I can find your comments addressed to me, or comments from other Wikipedians addressed to me.Vorbee (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Joy Fielding's novels

@Sphilbrick: Hello. These articles should not be deleted because it's part of the bibliography of the New York Times bestselling and award-winning author Joy Fielding. You can delete the synopses of books if you think it's a direct copy from a website and consider it as WP:G12, but removing the articles from Wikipedia would be destructive for the encyclopedia. CerberaOdollam (talk) 13:16, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing left if you remove the synopsis. Please start over and write a synopsis in your own words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:27, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wadi Degla Protectorates

Greetings , the article extracted from governomental website http://www.eeaa.gov.eg/en-us/topics/nature/protectorates/protectoratesdescription.aspx , The word press site is not official site for Wadi Degla , Omda4wady (talk) 06:32, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Omda4wady Thanks for letting me know the source of the material. However, there are still one or two remaining problems. The first is that the government site has a clear copyright notice at the bottom of the page. It is the case that certain material created by the US federal government and some other governments are automatically in the public domain, but this one does not appear to be in the public domain. A second issue is that even if you can provide evidence that the copyright notice is an error and the document is in the public domain, it is never acceptable to use public domain material without identifying the source (which is not done in this case) and it is often not the case that such material is encyclopedic, so it is very often the case that it should be rewritten. In this particular case, my casual review of the words suggest that it is neutral in tone so may not need to be rewritten, but someone has to provide evidence that it is in the public domain and properly cite it. If that is accomplished we can address issues of notability.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:51, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

deleted page

hello. i was just curious why you deleted the P.J. Pacifico page in January of this year? he is an established touring singer/songwriter with success in the US and Europe, his music has been placed in multiple major TV shows, is a signed artist on Viper Records and a writer for Razor & Tie Music Publishing. Can you please explain why you deleted this page? Thank you.

Skatten69 (talk) 11:29, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Skatten69 The article was deleted because it was created by a blocked editor. It is unfortunate that we sometimes have to remove otherwise acceptable content, but when an editor is blocked or banned they are expected to address the reasons for the block or ban not ignore them and go ahead and create content. Our policy is to remove material created by such users until they address the issues for the block or ban. Any other editor is free to create an article about the subject.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:11, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how does one address the block or ban?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sphilbrick&oldid=783196975"