Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Wikione9 (talk | contribs)
380 edits
→Sonu Kanwar: new section
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit New topic
Line 532: Line 532:


Hi @[[User:Onel5969|Onel5969]], with regard to [[Draft:Carlton Braganza]] and [[Draft:Walter Nandalike]], please could you let me know what are the UPE/COI issues remaining in these drafts, and what could be done to resolve the UPE/COI issues, in order that they can be moved back to the mainspace? Regards, [[User:The Discoverer|The Discoverer]] ([[User talk:The Discoverer|talk]]) 08:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi @[[User:Onel5969|Onel5969]], with regard to [[Draft:Carlton Braganza]] and [[Draft:Walter Nandalike]], please could you let me know what are the UPE/COI issues remaining in these drafts, and what could be done to resolve the UPE/COI issues, in order that they can be moved back to the mainspace? Regards, [[User:The Discoverer|The Discoverer]] ([[User talk:The Discoverer|talk]]) 08:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

== Sonu Kanwar ==

This article [[Sonu Kanwar]] is written about a famous rajasthani singer and you tagged notability tag. Kindly you must be remove this tag. if you want proove that you can search on internet. [[User:Wikione9|Wikione9]] ([[User talk:Wikione9|talk]]) 12:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:29, 15 March 2023

Edit Count

Hi! You might find these handy:

Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you're leaving a question regarding an article you're attempting to get onto Wikipedia, here are some links you might find helpful:

Fintech Association of Sri Lanka

Thanks for your tag ... I have done the necessary changes.Manjulaperera (talk) 01:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Black Christmas (Disambiguation) (disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Black Christmas (Disambiguation) (disambiguation) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 1 § Black Christmas (Disambiguation) (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Puyas

Hello Onel5969! There are many articles in Category:Puyas which have similar conditions like that of the one you drafted recently and later after our consensus, merged into Meitei literature. If you find any of those articles in that category ineligible for WP:GNG (especially too short that it's not suitable for being an independent article), please don't hesitate to merge them into Meitei literature, just like I did for one of them. I have added three sections, "ancient", "medieval" and "modern" in the article Meitei literature. If you are to merge them, please add in the section you found appropriate, for which I will later do copy edits. Thanks! --Haoreima (talk) 17:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, will do. Onel5969 TT me 18:48, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promo content

Hi! Can you take a look at this for me? That sounds like a lot of promo content. ABHammad (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. And they keep re-adding it. Suspect UPE editing, I've sent it to draft. Onel5969 TT me 03:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedway articles

Many thanks for reviewing my speedway articles, it is very much appreciated. Pyeongchang (talk) 09:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 01:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Star Awards 2023 articles

Hi! Where is the Star Awards 2023 main article? Star Awards had been an annual ceremony in Singapore and no one simply moved or delete the page before just because of notability. Please redo the page until it gets it's notability. Thanks (Unknown152438 (talk) 11:07, 2 March 2023 (UTC)) Star Awards is a notable event in Singapore, so the wikipedia page should be notable as well. (Unknown152438 (talk) 11:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC))[reply]

Cyprus military bases

Hello, may I ask why you revrted my change on the Cyprus military bases to a misleading redirect? For starters, Akrotiri and Dhekelia are villages theyre not bases. Secondly, saying "Cyprus military bases" and redirecting automatically "British bases in Cyprus", is misleading, the British bases located within both Akrotiri village and Dhekelia, are not the only bases on the island of Cyprus, there are Cypriot National Guard bases as well thus the re-direct makes no logical sense. Either keep my changes or move the page to "British Military Bases in Cyprus". SirBlueWhite (talk) 11:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is totally unsourced. Onel5969 TT me 11:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is not an argument its directing back to wikipedia pages and the redirect also isnt sourced so that makes no logical sense, but ok, ill go source. SirBlueWhite (talk) 11:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects are not articles, so they generally don't require sources. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 18:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I redirected the unsourced article. Onel5969 TT me 19:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And as I said, the redirect makes no sense as you are calling 2 Villages/Towns, military bases (Which they are not). Plus, the bases that its referring to in Akrotiri and Dhekelia arent the only 2 bases on the island of Cyprus hence why I had said, either move the article or keep the edits because otherwise it makes no sense. If you want to move the article to "British Military bases in Cyprus" or something to that effect, fine, keep the redirect. SirBlueWhite (talk) 08:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, uncited articles are not acceptable... why are you belaboring the point? Onel5969 TT me 12:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was redirecting to other wikipedia articles and beyond all that the original redirect is still wrong, youre still missing the point. SirBlueWhite (talk) 11:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No sir, you are. Now please stop. Onel5969 TT me 11:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, redirects dont need sources and I dont have a geography issue so I doubt im the one mising the point. This might help you. SirBlueWhite (talk) 12:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are completely missing the point. The article had no sources, hence the redirect. No one is saying redirects need sources. Articles need sources. Now, stop posting on my talk page. Onel5969 TT me 12:11, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok im throwing oranges at the wall here so whatever you say. SirBlueWhite (talk) 18:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. SirBlueWhite (talk) 11:42, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation project to improve PageTriage

Hi, as an active New Page Patroller, I wanted to make sure you were aware of an upcoming Wikimedia Foundation project to improve the PageTriage extension. We recently published results of user interviews, and have some findings that we would value patrollers' opinions on. If you haven't yet, please consider adding the project page to your watchlist to stay up to date with our progress! Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:17, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to also thank you for taking the time to meet with us! We'd value your input on whether we've captured everything important or if there's anything still missing. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Anytime. Excellent summary I just finished reading. Onel5969 TT me 01:11, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Henry Ponsonby

Please explain why you have twice tagged this page for "notability". The Ponsonby brothers were the first of the Ponsonby family in Ireland which went on to affect Irish and British politics and society for the next two hundred years, for good and bad, and have entries in dozens of independent sources just like the Crosbies, the Dennys, the Cootes etc. Henry Ponsonby has his own biography in the DIB for goodness' sake. I've done plenty of pages about people who've had far less impact on history.Dm4244 (talk) 21:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because there is not enough in-depth coverage of this particular Ponsonby. Onel5969 TT me 22:25, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftifications

Hello, Onel5969,

I was looking at the nightly draftification list and it seemed like you went completely overboard draftifying articles over the past 24 hours. When I did a count, I found that you draftified 446 articles! This is excessive. Draftifying is ONE TOOL that can be used but it shouldn't be your go-to solution or only response for any article you see that has problems. How about tagging an article or starting a discussion with an editor about what problems keep coming up in their work?

In some cases, it looks like you just went and draftified every single article that a couple of editors had started. It's hard for me to believe that you came across more than 400 articles that warranted being draftified in just one day. Please do not overuse this tool, use your discretion and consider other options that are available to you as an experienced editor. Draftifying can be a solution to some problems that exist with newly created articles but it isn't the only one you should be making use of. Thank you for your contributions. Liz Read! Talk! 02:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As hard as it is to believe, that's exactly what happened. When I edit, I select a day a week or so prior to the current date. On Wednesday (3/1) I reviewed the articles created on 2/25. There was an editathon in Uzbekistan on the 23-25 of February. During that event, several editors mass produced stub articles without any valid sources. Most of the articles were made in draft, then moved to mainspace by the editathon organizers (all of which were very inexperienced editors themselves). They were spoken to on their talk pages, and were asked to correct the articles. They did not not. About half the articles had a single ref, which was an invalid link; the other half had the same invalid link with a second ref to a non-reliable source. And it wasn't the only tool I used. Mixed amongst those 400 or so Uzbek articles were over 100 other articles which were reviewed but not draftified. Onel5969 TT me 11:03, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my AfC reviw

Hi Onel5969. I must admit that you are a non-controversial and reputed Wikipedia editor. Can you check my recent AfC review? If I am eligible, can you promote me for WP:NPP, as I want to ease the page curation. Forgive me for my wrongdoings. Twinkle1990 (talk) 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Agua Fria, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Agua Fria, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agua Fria, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Iyanaga Prize

About the article Yukio Matsumoto. I think the confusion comes from the fact is that Iyanaga Prize is an old prize that is no longer awarded today. It however used to be (one of) the most prestigious awards given by the math society in Japan. It’s not me saying it’s prestigious but it is so. A simple Google search should convince you that. If you’re still not sure, I can find sources to back that too. —- Taku (talk) 12:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Until sourcing is provided which shows it is notable, it is just you saying so. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's not notable, just that there is nothing to show it is. And having said that, if that person's only claim to fame is winning this award, is the award notable enough to make the person notable? For example, in a different field, winning an Emmy award makes the person notable, but winning a regional Emmy, still a notable award, is not enough on it's own to show the person is notable. Onel5969 TT me 12:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have expanded the section Iyanaga Prize in the Japan math society article. I get not every award is prominent enough to make the receiver notable in the eyes of Wikipedia. Some awards do; e.g., Noble prizes. Iyanaga Prize is very selective; it was awarded to only one person per year. Its successor Spring Prize is "one of the most prestigious prizes awarded by the Society to its members."[1] Like I said, it's not just me saying it's prestigious. Also, as you can see, many of receivers of the prize already have Wikipedia articles and I would argue (and many other would agree, I think) that those without articles should have articles eventually. If there is still a doubt on notability, perhaps a good next step is an AfD. -- Taku (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Societies/Japanese/

About your recent edit. First for Matsumoto article. Is there any question as to whether he has received Iyanaga Prize? The sources seem adequate to me. If the question is as to whether Iyanaga Prize is prestigious or not, then that question should be addressed in the Japan Math society article, not in the Matsumoto article. —- Taku (talk) 12:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Women's Rugby League World Cup qualification Notability tag

I understand why the tag has been added, but I'm sure that as the page grows over the next year or two as the tournaments get underway. RLWC qualification pages are generally quite notable and my experience is that is is better to start pages a bit earlier before they are notable so sources can be found and added easier when they become available. Thankyou Mn1548 (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KCA Favorite Video Game Draft

Um, sorry to bring this discussion back from the dead but you said that I should transfer my KCA article to a draft. Only issue is that there was already a draft before that I undid. How should I solve this? Nostalgia Zone (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay, have been busy a bit. Will take a look shortly and get back to you. Onel5969 TT me 15:46, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Nostalgia Zone (talk) 15:50, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be impatient but are you going to respond? Nostalgia Zone (talk) 14:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're actually being very patient. The last 2 weeks have been incredibly hectic, so my apologies. The past week I've been involved in moving my 93 year-old mother across country to live near me, which is where I'm heading right now once again. But I promise you, when I get back, I'll look at this. Onel5969 TT me 14:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bosque, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bosque, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bosque, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Arrowhead Ranch, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arrowhead Ranch, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arrowhead Ranch, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Onel5659. Since you marked this article as reviewed (although perhaps it was due to Lithopsian's review?), would you mind commenting on the current discussion here please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:23, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Onel5659. Just a reminder about this article, if you could take a look sometime please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:48, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, fell through the cracks. Have now left a message there. Onel5969 TT me 22:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Numerology (wireless)

Please don't forget to search for sources on Google books before tagging something for notability. Thank you. Skyerise (talk) 13:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that's the article creator's responsibility. Onel5969 TT me 13:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really true. Nearly all the documentation for tagging says: First make sure the tag is necessary, then tag the article. Skyerise (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is actually correct for NPP reviewers. Onel5969 TT me 14:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

You were reported here at WP:AN3; however the editor did not notify you and I have closed the report as "No violation" anyway. Black Kite (talk) 14:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 14:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tracy Beaker Returns - Series 2

Hello There, I noticed you deleted the article that I created surrounding TBR S02, it did not need to be deleted as the article itself has merit, including a list of all characters within the series, and also contains details of the guest characters too. Production details and Episode Synopsis' will be added soon. MediDude4345 (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gladden, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gladden, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gladden, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Forepaugh, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Forepaugh, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forepaugh, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Freeman, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Freeman, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Freeman, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of Chongqing Rail Transit station articles

I'm curious why you reverted two Chongqing Rail Transit rail station articles (Shijingpo station and Weidianyuan station) citing WP:GNG. These were the only two stations of the 25 stations on the Line 1 that did not have their own article, so using the basic principle of WP:BOLD, I created the articles, replacing the indirect, putting the basic information about the station, with references, in each article. Simply put, these two stations are just as notable as all the other stations on Line 1, and appropriately referenced. They can easily be expanded to include some of the other details that appear in other Line 1 station articles. Would you please explain why you singled these two stations out. Thank you. Truthanado (talk) 04:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Each article needs to meet notability criteria, and neither of those articles did. And to do that you need in-depth coverage of the station itself. I didn't single them out, they were in the New Page queue, and so were reviewed. WP:OSE is not really a valid argument. Onel5969 TT me 10:24, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Richie Stringini

Can I suggest you start an AfD on this article if you think it should be deleted or redirected? Then if necessary we can use protection to enforce the result. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 PDC Qualifying Calendar

Hi,

I created the page I marked in the subject line, and you have since redirected me in a completely illogical manner. This page exists: 2023 PDC Calendar I have created the results of the qualifiers based on the same template. The sources are the same, so either none of them have any validity, or both do. In fact, the results on the 2023 PDC Calendar page can be found on other wikipedia pages, while mine can't, and the sources have always proven the real thing everywhere. So what is the problem then? Either delete the original Calendar page as well, or please explain why the same sources on my page are not good? By the way, where you have redirected it, the things I have bundled are not there, so I don't understand, it makes no sense. Szpity88 (talk) 12:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That would be none then. I've corrected that error. Please read WP:GNG, particularly the section on significant coverage, to better understand what makes something notable. Onel5969 TT me 12:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But think about it, since 2017, we've had these PDC Calendar pages, so so far so good? Is it possible that you are the one who is misinterpreting something...? Szpity88 (talk) 12:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. WP:OSE isn't a very good argument. Wikipedia is monitored by volunteers, so it's not unusual for an inappropriate article to slip through the cracks. Onel5969 TT me 13:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Willow project

Hi, I see that you tagged a new article with an orphan tag, came back and did this minute edit of a comma and an apostrophe ( thats how you get so many edit counts!) but didnt check where on WP this term is already present, ie collaborating. I too "love" folks who drive by edit and dont improve an article as you state sarcastically on your user page. Wuerzele (talk) 13:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Try to make sense when you leave a message. It really helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reviews

Hi, just a note to say thanks for reviewing the new articles of mine over the past couple of weeks - I just hope you're not getting too bored of reading about tall buildings in Greater Manchester :) Mmberney (talk) 15:35, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Never bored (except when I have to go through dozens of poor sports articles). And don't know if you're a fan or not, but condolences on the Manchester United game last night. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 16:09, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notability templates in "<Year> in shooting" articles

Hi, I notice you have added a Multiple Issues template to several list articles - 2010-/2014-/2015-/2020 in shooting. I am a little confused as to what you mean by these.

  • Notability - Clearly the topic is itself notable - it covers an Olympic sport, one which has its own subsection on many major news site (e.g. BBC Sport - Shooting, Inside the Games, Times of India. I could dredge up some non English-language sites as well, but I think the point is made - the topic is reported at a topic level, not just occasional articles under the aegis of "Olympics" or something). Presumably your concern is with the contents of those lists - you feel that some events and entries within the list are not notable or the list selection criteria is inadequate. It would be immensely helpful if you could template those sections, or take it to Talk, instead of arbitrarily (and inconsistently) templating entire articles - you are presumably not debating the notability of the Olympics, Commonwealth Games or World Championships!?
  • Primary sources - Yes yes, it is generally quicker to go through a series of events (ICFRA World Champs, African Championships, etc) and add that event for every applicable year whilst you have the relevant pages open (both source & wikipedia articles), than to add the "<Year> in" articles one at a time, looping through all the different organisations and websites for 2013, then rinse-and-repeat for 2014. A fair tag that you could have added would be WP:Globalise, since the existing articles are all somewhat Eur-Asian centric. I would gently note that as a high-volume drive-by editor, apparently leaning heavily on (semi-)automated tools, you're missing much of this nuance. The criticism is noted, and is in some way fair, but I'm a little confused as to why you would pick on these articles, unless you are engaging on a broader campaign, and will shortly add these templates to many of the abandoned sports-based list articles of dubious notability such as 2014 in esports (no citations whatsoever!) and 2014 in table tennis (all primary sources). Again, tagging specific sections of concern or going to Talk would be immensely more helpful than drive-by article-level templating.

All the best, Hemmers (talk) 15:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how notability is derived. You must have in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show notability. Those templates, I agree, are inadequate. Over at NPP we're working on developing more specific templates, making the issues more clear. Onel5969 TT me 16:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Continued concerns

Hello, this is at least our 13th interaction since January 27, 2023 (https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=SC_Staaken&oldid=1135824626), after having no interactions prior in my 4 years on wikipedia. We have had interactions in SC Staaken, VfR Frankenthal, VfR Kaiserslautern, Hamburg-Eimsbütteler Ballspiel-Club, Harburger TB, Uwe Bengs, Fritz Sommer, Otto Oeldenberger, Lars Kindgen, Harry Sperl, Dr. Kong (brand), Christian Cavaletti, Skylark Holdings and I believe in other pages that have since been deleted within a span of about 5 weeks.

As I've previously stated (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Onel5969/Archive_111#Please_stop_contacting_me), your interest in my work has made me uncomfortable. I think that's a reasonable feeling to have.

I just want to make sure that this is understood and noted.

Thank youKatoKungLee (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no interest in your work. If it shows up on the NPP thread, it gets reviewed. As far as I know, the only messages I've sent you are the ones I'm required to. Just want to make sure you understand that. Onel5969 TT me 16:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UPE blocked

Hi Onel. Thank you for your diligent work. User:ScienceAdvisor was blocked recently as UPE. You have reviewed a few of their articles. It would be great if you can have a second look or best send them to AfC:

81.147.117.44 (talk) 19:18, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Чашка чая для вас!

I ask you to return to the discussion of my article and change the status) Alterbulat (talk) 21:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you're talking about. Onel5969 TT me 01:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supharada Kisskalt

Hi, I added references to a few news articles to prove notability. There aren't that many, I admit. I actually thought she'd be relevant because of her winning a medal on international stage, or was I mistaken? Best, Nicole — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wanquanbiantai (talk • contribs) 12:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, what do you say, does the article meet the criteria now? Wanquanbiantai (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Cavaletti

Hello again, you marked this for notability concerns. What exactly is the concern? There's 10 sources listed, that are independent of each other. Some of the sources are national websites and some are from various states, so there's clearly national interest. The person is a world record holder. There's books and various websites listed.

Thanks KatoKungLee (talk) 15:23, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He's a record holder of a non-notable record. Outside of that, he has zero notability. Clearly a case of WP:BIO1E. Onel5969 TT me 15:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please link me to the page here that defines "non-notable" records? This is not "one event" as the record still stands. Perhaps if the record was broken, that may be the case.KatoKungLee (talk) 15:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. Onel5969 TT me 15:47, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, because I can't find any information on it otherwise. Could save everyone a lot of time if I'm publishing things that are not allowed here due to non-notable records.KatoKungLee (talk) 15:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:List of hillforts in Lithuania

Please the page back into the main space. This is a list taken from the book cited, as explained in the lede of the list. I fail o see why it needs some ither references. Lokys dar Vienas (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, because there is not enough information in the citation for it pass WP:VERIFY, please see WP:CIT as to what needs to be in a citation. You don't have to use the formatting there (although that would be nice), but the information is important. Stuff like isbn, page #'s, year of publication, etc. Onel5969 TT me 17:20, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again

I was particularly concerned about a comment you made today that said, "Too late, this same editor also has Christian Cavaletti, and Jackie Miley, and Harry Sperl, which I'm also probably going to nominate." in the thread - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Douglas_and_Mary_Beth_Meyer. I'm not sure that the comment was necessary or particularly added anything to the discussion. And with our history, it came across as a threat, a blackmail attempt and/or harassment.

I'm not personally offended if you want to nominate articles for deletion. In fact, I'd prefer you nominate them over just marking them as drafts as other users may have more sources and may not agree with the nomination. Nominate as many as you like. I'm still going to do the best I can to contribute here, no matter how many articles are nominated.

As you've been made aware here (https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=submit#Continued_concerns), I'm already uncomfortable with our interactions. I really don't think we should interact with each other in any manner as our interactions provide nothing positive and do little to better the site.

ThanksKatoKungLee (talk) 02:48, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to become more familiar with notability guidelines. No threat, simple statement of fact, and letting another valued editor know that their fear was too late, it was already happening. Rather than complaining that you are being asked to follow policies and guidelines, you should learn from what now many other editors are telling you, and that way you could focus on making better articles. Onel5969 TT me 11:16, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Political faction: delete, draftify?

I was keeping an eye on it for a couple months and trimmed it from big chnks on unref text. It looks like no one else cares. It looks like you are an experienced "deletionist" (in a good sense). Can you take a look at it?

Also it seems there is a "cross-contamination" in the interwikilinks of political terms "faction" and "fraction", the terms being "false friends", but this is a different story and I don't particularly care for this subject. Lokys dar Vienas (talk) 20:39, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, just took a look and removed almost all the uncited material. If there was a suitable target, redirect would be a possibility. The biggest issue with taking it to AfD (PROD, imho, would not be appropriate), is that, just again my own opinion, it's probably a very notable term. If this were a newer article, draftify would definitely have been the response, but it's not eligible for draftification, due to its age. I've put it on my watchlist, so let's give it some time and see if someone develops it. If I were interested in politics, I might have a go at it. Onel5969 TT me 22:30, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vineet Kumar Chaudhary

Hi Onel. Wiki97828 has been quite insistent on my talk page that he doesn't have any COI/paid relationship with regard to Vineet Kumar Chaudhary. I'm not entirely sure what I think about that, but since the article has been approved by AfC and seems to be more-or-less neutrally written, perhaps you'd consider either removing/replacing the tag or going to COIN for further discussion? I don't have a horse in this race, of course, so I'm happy to trust your judgment. Hope you're doing well! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There's a very significant and blatant piece of evidence showing that they are related somehow. I don't like to go into it on WP, as I don't like to give UPE/COI editors hints at how to avoid detection, but if you would like to know, email me and I'll hit you back. Onel5969 TT me 22:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Emailed. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 01:44, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Simalungun language

Hi Onel5969! Just FYI, this[1] was actually part of a cut-and-paste move[2]. Your revert resulted in a circular redirect.

I have restored the original page, which admittedly is an old blatantly undersourced stub which however can easily be expanded with multiple RS.

Btw, the editor who did the move is probably a sock of a blocked LTA with a long history of cut-and-paste moves (I'm already collecting diffs for an SPI). Austronesier (talk) 13:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Sorry I missed the C&P. Onel5969 TT me 13:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fourth_Way_enneagram

You re-deleted Fourth_Way_enneagram, why?

I don't think it's correct as various pages have links to Fourth_Way_Enneagram (upcase "E") that redirects to Fourth_Way_enneagram (downcase "e") that used to have the content you re-deleted, substituting it with another redirect not to the thing on page name (this enneagram), but to a book.

I understand that this isn't a scientific matter, unproved, etc.; but why deleting?

I hope to have an explaination or re-get the correct page.

Thanks and regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.247.64.177 (talk) 19:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia rules are that sourcing needs to be of high-quality to be included. See WP:RS and WP:V. As it was, there was exactly one source for that page which could be verified and that was the book to which the page now redirects. If there are other sources which are reliable to use to source such an article, you can let us know, but I have to say I'm skeptical that these exist. Wikipedia is not indiscriminate collection of information. We need to source and cite our sources. Sorry. jps (talk) 20:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand "there was exactly one source for that page which could be verified", as I see various notes pointing at books or URLs, are they all false references???
If they are all false and this page deserves to be be deleted, why it existed for so many years and seemed perfectly legit?
If you think it should have more references, you could have added a note for a lacking of references, asking for more, just like I usually read in wikipedia articles.
Just removing the content of an article here for >10 years, completely breaks articles referencing to it, causing confusion.
I myself had to look through redirect revisions to get the content that disappeared just recently, and simply reverted the 2 edits breaking things (the bot and yours) as a service for other users like me, but not knowing how or not having time to search in old revisions.
I hope in a more sensible outcome: like old article + note asking for more refs.
Thanks and regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.247.64.177 (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because I agree with jps. Onel5969 TT me 22:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Articles at AfD

Hey Onel5969. I noticed that a couple of your articles were up at AfD but you weren't notified, so I thought I'd let you know. See Montezuma, Arizona and Piedra, Arizona. The nominator has nominated some of your articles before and notified you, but they seemed to have stop doing so for some reason. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 01:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CAWU LC article Draftspace move.

Hello,

An Article I recently created, Draft:CAWU Learning Center ( CAWU Learning Center ) was sent to draftspace on the basis of (quote) "a WP:UPE or WP:COI conflict." which I responded to with this on my talk page.

Wikipedia:UPE and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest do not apply to me, as I am not getting paid for this by any means and do not have an external relationship with the organization in question nor am I employed by the organization. I've provided references throughout the article to both primary and secondary sources, and still do not understand what the issue is. I'll review the article to see if there's anything wrong but would appreciate if you could elaborate on the reasoning behind the move to draftspace. Ballads2110 (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above, I am not being paid or asked by the organization to edit or write this Wikipedia article. Nor am I part of this organization or employed by it for any other reason. I have been trying to improve the article to include more independent sources after it's been moved to the draftspace just in case that was a factor that led to the move. I apologize for any inconvenience or misunderstanding that may have arisen from this and would like to know what the issue is in detail, and whether there's any improvements I can make and when the article may be ready to move to the mainspace. Ballads2110 (talk) 16:47, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Piedra, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Piedra, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piedra, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Montezuma, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Montezuma, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Montezuma, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Troon, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Troon, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Troon, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding undisclosed payment tag on Vineet Kumar Chaudhary page

Sir, this tag doesn't seem appropriate on this page, in fact, before coming to the mainspace of this page, it has been discussed on the helpdesk that there is no direct relation with Chowdhary. I made this page on a fan basis, I have seen his TV shows so I know a lot about his life. Please consider removing this tag. Thank you Wiki97828 (talk) 01:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no. There is a clear indication of some type of relationship between you and the article's subject. Onel5969 TT me 01:32, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you are feeling that due to the use of Chaudhary's photo, there is some kind of contact with him. So I would like to tell that this has been taken from his Instagram and I do not have the necessary information that how the free image is used, so I had to use it. Wiki97828 (talk) 01:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Once again

You are once again unilaterally blanking articles rather than seeing if anything can be salvaged, and without any discussion or consensus. I have found additional coverage for both Kid Miracleman and Young Miracleman but as I am currently away I have not had chance to add them in in response to your initial absurd notability tagging. You might tell yourself you are improving Wikipedia but you are being dogmatic, petty and rude. That you flagged Kid Miracleman when it's a rewrite of a poor, uncited article that's sat in such a state for years only shows that your principles and reviewing system are flawed. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 10:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to develop articles, the place to do that is draftspace, not mainspace. Sorry that you feel that WP policies and guidelines are rude. Would you like me to move them to draft for you? Onel5969 TT me 10:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article was developed in draftspace but once again, and you continue to sidestep this, you yourself are violating Wikipedia policies yourself by your unilateral blanking of articles without discussion, consensus or any serious suggestions as to how any material can be saved or salvaged. But then you avoided that when it was put to you before, even pretending the question hadn't been asked, so I don't expect any sort of explanation as to why you pick and choose which Wikipedia policies you follow this time. I am on the road until Sunday and am unable to undo your vandalism until then. But undo it I will. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 11:20, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you really need to understand WP policies better. Every newly created article goes through a review process. Until you understand policies and procedures better it is pretty pointless to have an ongoing redirecting articles which fail notability, as ATD, is a very well-used policy. Throw the word vandalism around and you could get blocked. Onel5969 TT me 11:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Kid Miracleman was a preexisting page, one you had no problem with until it was expanded, or plain just didn't care about due to inconsistent application. Your inability to give any constructive criticism, explain why the current references in the articles don't meet muster and provide any sort of guidance or discussion about how it may be improved while also not even making any attempt to incorporate the material in the page you have redirected the articles to is also against Wikipedia policy. If there is a better word for that than vandalism I apologise, but given your refusal to explain the perceived inconsistencies, discuss anything before blanking huge sections of referenced text or offer any sort of constructive feedback it is hard to extend good faith to your pattern if behaviour. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's the second time you've used the term vandalism. Once more and I'll have no choice but report you to ANI. The only inconsistency is in your mind. You have been given constructive feedback, you just simply refuse to take it. Onel5969 TT me 13:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So even mentioning The Word is report-worthy? Crikey, that sounds fair and balanced. Again, show me one place you have tried to engage constructively. Did you attempt to discuss on the articles' talk pages? Or my talk pages? Or give any suggestions as to sources that might pass notability (I have some, I just haven't had chance to incorporate them in the articles as I have yet to have chance between you flagging the articles for notability and unilaterally blanking them)?
And again you appear to be sidestepping questions - how was Kid Marvelman as it stood until two days ago fine as a standalone article but suddenly after I expand it it's now not noteworthy?
Why do you consider it acceptable to blank pages and turn them into redirects but put no work into merging the information into the article they redirect for? BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Implying that someone is a vandal is an attack, which is what you did, despite you trying to weasel out of it. All of my edit summaries are constructive. You may not like them, they may be brief, but they explain the action succinctly. And again, saying "I just haven't had chance to incorporate them in the articles" is an excellent argument for working in draftspace. The KM article was not fine, it simply did not pop up on the NPP queue. It wasn't good then, and still isn't, which is why it was redirected. Onel5969 TT me 13:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I said I find it difficult to find a different explanation, and I stand by that, I'm just not letting you weasel (this is fun, we can throw around insults in certain ways!) out of this on a technicality if saying The Word a third time allows you to report me. I thought the articles passed notability based on comparisons with numerous other articles you are happy to leave spreading misinformation due to them not being in the NPP queue. I developed them in user space and made attempts to engage other users in discussion as to suitability on both the extant Miracleman talk page and then after submitting the articles their own talk pages.
You flagged them as not. I have done some research as a counter and have not had chance to incorporate them in the articles for personal reasons over something like 48 hours. You have taken it upon yourself to blank the articles, making no attempt to incorporate the information in the list articles, in the meantime, and have once again done so without any attempt to gain consensus for doing so such as via discussion on the article's talk pages or an AfD discussion.
I do not see how your part in the process is either constructive or improves Wikipedia because it seems on what you've said so far it goes no deeper than you thinking your actions are fine and need no further explanation than dismissive referrals to cherry-picked policies while ignoring both other policies and anything approaching common courtesy. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 14:14, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are other articles you have written which are fine (I think I've marked at least 2 of them reviewed in recent days), but in this instance, since you seem to have difficulty understanding policies and procedures on WP, this is fruitless. Don't post on my talk page again. Onel5969 TT me 14:18, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing an Article

Hello dear sir

I am parwiz ahmadi, one of the Wikipedia users.

I hope you will be find , I have write an article (Din Mohammad jurat )

Can you please review it and inform me is it Complete or need further Information to put"

Thnak you for your cooperation with me

Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 13:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969 Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 13:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nice job. Although be careful of excessive citations. I know you want to show their notability, but it's best to only have 2-3 citations for any given fact in an article. Onel5969 TT me 20:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joaquim Portugal Stadium notability

Hello.


The Joaquim Portugal Stadium is one of the venues for the 2023 Campeonato Mineiro, a major football championship in Brazil, in the state of Minas Gerais. Tomorrow (March 12) the stadium will host the first match of the semifinal, between Athletic Club and Atlético Mineiro.


Also, the stadium will be one of the venues for the 2023 Campeonato Brasileiro 2023 Série D, the fourth tier of the national championship.


I added the info above to the article. Please consider reviewing it. Gondolabúrguer (talk) 22:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job. I've removed the tag. Onel5969 TT me 20:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Paraguayan Women's Football Championship season notability

Hey.. is the 2023 Paraguayan Women's Football Championship season article not notable because it is a NATIONAL competition but from a small country or because it's a women's competion (because I don't see you complaining about the men's article). Which one of them is it? Marcetw (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Simply because it has zero in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources. Onel5969 TT me 14:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Campaign

@Onel5969 I am requesting you to put your valuable neutral opinion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Articles for deletion/Indian National Congress campaign for the next Indian general election as you review articles in Wikipedia. XYZ 250706 (talk) 14:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Since you canvassed me, I cannot in good faith !vote at the AfD. Besides, looking at it, I'm on the fence as I see both sides of the argument. Onel5969 TT me 20:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of drafts

I am unsure if you are the individual to ask of this, but if you could delete Draft:List of UMass Dartmouth Corsairs head football coaches, Draft:Jaedin Prudent, and Draft:Julian Hammond (American football) as none of them are either needed or notable that'd be wonderful. Thanks. Thetreesarespeakingtome (talk) 20:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. No, I'm not an admin, so I can't delete anything. If they are drafts you created, I can ask to have them deleted for you, or you could do that yourself by adding a {{Db-author}} tag to the drafts. Onel5969 TT me 20:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fortuna Sittard in European football

Hello, Why did you think that the sources are not reliable of the page "Fortuna Sittard in European football"? All of the sources are from uefa.com. Is UEFA not accepted as a reliable source? Am I missing something here? Regards... User:Magawla61 mgwlMagawla61 (talk) 21:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Never said they were unreliable. But they are primary, and primary sources do not go towards notability. Onel5969 TT me 21:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sundad, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sundad, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sundad, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shawmut, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shawmut, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawmut, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Arched Harp

Hello,

I was somewhat surprised to see the refimprove tag added to Arched Harp, since most sentences have a citation. Is there any particular place that struck you as being weak? I don't mind working further, but I'm somewhat at a loss as to where you're pointing. Best wishes, Jacqke (talk) 11:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. While the article is very well done, and is well-cited for the most part, there are several uncited assertions. In "Structure", "Variations", "History" (more than one), "Early image", "Mesopotamia" "India, Indonesia", "Nuristan", "Southeast Asia, Burma" (more than one), "Southeast Asia", "Egypt" (more than one), and "Sub-Saharan Africa". I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:04, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I'll look againJacqke (talk) 03:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguating the Archbishopric of Cologne

You sent a huge number of links that were supposed to go to the country Electorate of Cologne to the religious Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Cologne instead. I think most of your edits in this batch (search for "Cologne") need to go to Electorate of Cologne, as they are about temporal power, not religious organisation. (It is complicated because the Archbishop of Cologne was both the archbishop of the diocese and the head of state of the Electorate). Could you check and undo your edits? It is always better to link to a disambiguation page than to link to the wrong page. —Kusma (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. My apologies, my interpretation of those articles was that it should be redirected to the target I selected. I'll be more than happy to simply reverse those edits, however, I can't seem to figure out how to get the batch of edits you reference to load correctly. I clicked on the link you provided, and it simply brings up all my contributions. I went to the search area, and the only place I found where I could enter a search term was in the "tag filter", and it produced zero results. Where do I go to search for the term "Cologne"? Onel5969 TT me 22:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, the history of the Holy Roman Empire is insanely complicated and easy to misunderstand. The link I gave should bring up (too many) of your contributions from a few weeks ago. You can then use your browser's search function to find your relevant edits in that page (ctrl-F on my computer). Your edits are between 12:04 and 13:25 on 13 February 2023. (Unfortunately I am not aware of a good way to search for edit summaries within Wikipedia). —Kusma (talk) 23:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll work on it tomorrow. Onel5969 TT me 00:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think I got all of them. It looks like a couple of editors had corrected quite a few of them already. I reverted most of what remained. Onel5969 TT me 10:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Carlton Braganza and Draft:Walter Nandalike

Hi @Onel5969, with regard to Draft:Carlton Braganza and Draft:Walter Nandalike, please could you let me know what are the UPE/COI issues remaining in these drafts, and what could be done to resolve the UPE/COI issues, in order that they can be moved back to the mainspace? Regards, The Discoverer (talk) 08:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sonu Kanwar

This article Sonu Kanwar is written about a famous rajasthani singer and you tagged notability tag. Kindly you must be remove this tag. if you want proove that you can search on internet. Wikione9 (talk) 12:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=1144761397"