18 Mar

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

‎Admin power to delete without consultation, notification or request: c
← Older revision
Revision as of 14:19, 18 March 2013
Line 365:
Line 365:

:It doesn't. This was out of process deletion of a public domain photograph. Your custom derived work fell under the provisions of [[Commons:Blocking policy|Blocking policy]] with regard to harassment and under [[COM:Photographs of identifiable people|Photographs of identifiable people]] with regard to defamation. You may wish to consider how much and how often you want to be seen to be taking discussion on AN off-topic. Of course if you want to build a reputation for doing this, that's your call. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 13:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

:It doesn't. This was out of process deletion of a public domain photograph. Your custom derived work fell under the provisions of [[Commons:Blocking policy|Blocking policy]] with regard to harassment and under [[COM:Photographs of identifiable people|Photographs of identifiable people]] with regard to defamation. You may wish to consider how much and how often you want to be seen to be taking discussion on AN off-topic. Of course if you want to build a reputation for doing this, that's your call. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 13:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Fæ, I would agree with you here. While Admins can and do delete obvious copyvios, exact duplicates, etc. without notice, a deletion on the basis that the image is out-of-scope is one that absolutely ought to have gone to an RFD first. But I agree with the comments here that a note to the Admin in question would have been the appropriate first step when faced with what appears to be a questionable deletion. --[[User:Skeezix1000|Skeezix1000]] ([[User talk:Skeezix1000|talk]]) 13:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Fæ, I would agree with you here. While Admins can and do delete obvious copyvios, exact duplicates, etc. without notice, a deletion on the basis that the image is out-of-scope is one that absolutely ought to have gone to an RFD first. But I agree with the comments here that a note to the Admin in question would have been the appropriate first step when faced with what appears to be a questionable deletion. --[[User:Skeezix1000|Skeezix1000]] ([[User talk:Skeezix1000|talk]]) 13:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

+
:Yes, certainly a mellow approach of asking the acting admin is the way to go, and this thread was about the current norms for admins rather than this file (which I had lost track of anyway). I don't believe there is any pattern of behaviour here to worry about. Thanks --[[User:Fæ|Fæ]] ([[User talk:Fæ|talk]]) 14:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=92816877&oldid=92815727