User talk:Liz: Difference between revisions
Bobby Cohn (talk | contribs) →Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Tatz: new section |
→Why?: new section |
||
Line 2,647: | Line 2,647: | ||
Hey Liz, I wanted to seek some further guidance before making any more moves on the articles bundled at the [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Tatz|Carl Tatz deletion discussion]]. Am I correct in reading {{slink|Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people|Background}} that {{xt|All improperly sourced articles about living people may be subject to deletion per the standard deletion processes, but in addition, biographies that do not contain at least one source directly supporting the material may also be proposed for deletion under this process}} means that I could simultaneously tag the BLPs with {{tl|BLPPROD}} even as the... umm, ''messy'' AfD discussion continues above? Would that have been a better way to handle the process than my ''comment for closing admin'' on the AfD page? Further, is there any other suggestions or comments you have in regard to that process? I ask here so as to not further derail the discussion but feel free to point me back to the AfD page if you think that anyone reviewing the whole process would benefit from seeing your response. Kindly, [[User:MicrobiologyMarcus|<span style="font-size:70%; font-family:serif">microbiology</span>Marcus]] <sup>(''[[User talk:MicrobiologyMarcus|petri dish]]·[[Special:Contributions/MicrobiologyMarcus|growths]]'')</sup> 15:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC) |
Hey Liz, I wanted to seek some further guidance before making any more moves on the articles bundled at the [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Tatz|Carl Tatz deletion discussion]]. Am I correct in reading {{slink|Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people|Background}} that {{xt|All improperly sourced articles about living people may be subject to deletion per the standard deletion processes, but in addition, biographies that do not contain at least one source directly supporting the material may also be proposed for deletion under this process}} means that I could simultaneously tag the BLPs with {{tl|BLPPROD}} even as the... umm, ''messy'' AfD discussion continues above? Would that have been a better way to handle the process than my ''comment for closing admin'' on the AfD page? Further, is there any other suggestions or comments you have in regard to that process? I ask here so as to not further derail the discussion but feel free to point me back to the AfD page if you think that anyone reviewing the whole process would benefit from seeing your response. Kindly, [[User:MicrobiologyMarcus|<span style="font-size:70%; font-family:serif">microbiology</span>Marcus]] <sup>(''[[User talk:MicrobiologyMarcus|petri dish]]·[[Special:Contributions/MicrobiologyMarcus|growths]]'')</sup> 15:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC) |
||
== Why? == |
|||
I just wanna know why you have been deleting so much articles? [[User:AQuebecBoy|AQuebecBoy]] ([[User talk:AQuebecBoy|talk]]) 23:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 23:49, 11 December 2023
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions:
1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users. 2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom. 3. Sign your comments to facilitate contact tracing. |
It's Autumn!
I check my Wikipedia email account infrequently.
and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position.
Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 4 August 2013
Well said!Liz Read! Talk!
12 December 2024 |
|
While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused.
Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies.
If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them.
Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.
Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)
Recommended reading for editors who are upset RIGHT NOW!:
Tips for the angry new user - Gamaliel
Staying cool when the editing gets hot!
If you came here just to insult me, I will delete your comments without a reply.
And if I wasn't involved, personal attacks clearly warrant a block.
Melki Sedek Huang
Hi, Liz, esteemed colleague! I'm afraid I've declined your WP:A7 at that page, as there is some vestigial claim of significance there and I don't think it quite qualifies as G11. I agree it shouldn't be part of the encyclopaedia, leaving it to you to choose how best to bring that about. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 08:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Justlettersandnumbers,
- Well, I thought it might be borderline. I'll admit to being skeptical of bios where an individual's notability primarily rests on being a student leader. I'll consider whether to send it to AFD. Thanks for letting me know your opinion on it. Liz Read! Talk! 14:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).
|
|
- Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
- A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that
[s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment
.
- Special:Contributions now shows the user's local edit count and the account's creation date. (T324166)
- The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming
local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus
. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged tonote when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful
.
- Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
Hi Liz, and thanks for all the good work you do at AFD. I mean that sincerely, I appreciate the care you exhibit and your willingness to close more difficult odiscussions.
I was surprised to see you close the discussion after your involvement here and here. I recognise that the numbers are clearly on the same side as your comments on my talk page, but I think myself and one other provided a robust and careful policy-based argument against deletion.
I hope you will support this request to re-open and let someone else uninvolved close it, please? CT55555(talk) 23:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, CT55555,
- I don't think my comment in the AFD itself showed INVOLVE but I completely forgot about that talk page comment! I should not have closed this AFD. I'll revert myself. I appreciate you calling this to my attention rather than heading towards Deletion review. My bad. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I took very seriously an earlier comment you made about how taking an admin to deletion review feels like ANI, so I'm keen to not make anyone's life more stressful than it should be.
- You're comment on my talk page kinda hurt my feelings back then, so sadly it remains in my memory. Thanks for the agreeable reply and wishing you all the best. CT55555(talk) 00:07, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, CT55555,
- I certainly didn't mean to hurt your feelings. I think at the time, I thought that you are a gifted editor and this article subject didn't deserve your talent and attention. But I apologize if saying this sounded like a slight, I think highly of you and would never intentionally want to hurt your feelings. Liz Read! Talk! 03:30, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for this comment. And for everything in this thread. CT55555(talk) 13:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
Time to close AFD
Hi, this article Jazz (Transformers) AFD has been relisted for 8 days now, so I think it's time to close it now. Davidgoodheart (talk) 00:10, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Davidgoodheart,
- I am just reading over this discussion now. I'm uncertain about it right now. I don't know whether I'll close it or let another admin close it. Liz Read! Talk! 00:19, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Please respond
I've left you three pings but to no avail as yet. Could you please head over to that talk page and respond? Schwede66 23:33, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Schwede66,
- I don't check "pings" so I was unaware of this. I'll check out the AFD now. Thanks for leaving a talk page notice. Liz Read! Talk! 23:41, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
- Done As I'm sure you know, I reverted my closure and relisted this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure whether you have been keeping an eye on this AfD but it's been closed as keep. And here is a confession: I hadn't even given the article an in-depth read, or looked at the refs in any detail, before I contacted you. I just know that when Paora puts effort into an article that's at AfD, it's going to be a keep 98% of the time. You couldn't have known that, of course. Schwede66 03:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Done As I'm sure you know, I reverted my closure and relisted this discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:53, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Morning Edition (BBC radio programme)
Hi Liz,
I see that you have deleted my draft of this article, in accordance with established Wikipedia guidelines, and I have no issue with you doing this. However I would like to please ask for your help. Unfortunately I kept coming up against what i though was extremely tight interpretation of Wikipedia policies and no matter what I did, it was never allowed to appear on Wikipedia. The main references were from BBC-provided programme schedules which is allied to, both slightly independent of, the BBC website, taken from a listings magazine which, at the time, was owned by the BBC. Other references were from recordings of the programme. These sources were seen as unacceptable and the article was draftified. Therefore, if you can give me any help with getting this article onto Wikipedia, it would be much appreciated. The article is about a shortish-lived 1990s radio programme on a station which was broadcast across all of the UK.
To my huge frustration I forgot to add the article to my Sandbox so I have requested that it be returned to draftspace so that I can copy and paste it into my sandbox.
Thank you in advance for any help you are able to provide. Rillington (talk) 00:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Rillington,
- While I was getting around to responding to you, I see that another admin has restored Draft:Morning Edition (BBC radio programme) which is what we do with G13 draft articles which are just deleted for being abandoned. So, you can continue to work on it.
- Unfortunately, I'm not expert on content creation so I'm not going to be much help in getting this article in shape. It looks like you have more experience than I do in this part of the project. If there is a relevant WikiProject, you can go to the talk page and see if an editor would be willing to collaborate with you. And if you need a fresh set of eyes, you could put an appeal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors for help. I wish we had some central portal for editors to see help but you might look at similar articles and see if there are any editors who focus on this subject that you might appeal to. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi again and thank you for a most helpful reply. The main issue I have with these, and similar articles is that they are about programmes on a radio station which existed for less than four years in the pre-internet era. Whilst there is no issue with notability as they were broadcast on a national radio station, the issue is finding the references. I have followed your advice and mentioned this on the UK Radio WikiProject talk page and hopefully I will get some help from there.
Deletion of user draft "YΔ- and ΔY-transformations"
I saw you deleted (moved to drafts) my article YΔ- and ΔY-transformations. The reason you give is "Userpage or subpage of a nonexistent user". But I am very much an existent user. I am new so there might be something I don't understand. I would appreciate if we could revert this step. MWinter4 (talk) 13:04, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- @MWinter4 (talk page watcher) I have left message on your draft for the way forward. This could not remain as an article. Draft space allows you to add the references necessary. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- I do not fully understand your reply. What do you mean "This could not remain as an article" and then what is it right now if not an article? I also saw your comment. This draft is nowhere near ready and I am fully aware of it. It would have gotten references in due time. Is there any reason to not revert the move? Note that it was a user draft before that. MWinter4 (talk) 13:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- @MWinter4 Apologies. I misread the logs. It was in user space previously. Now it is a draft. There is no real benefit either space has above the other. As a draft you have the same opportunities to work on it as you did in your user space. If you feel it to be important I am sure it can be returned to your user space.
- I do see the problem. You had used a ":" not a "/" in the file name, thus it was misfiled as if it were a user with a long and complex name. What would you wish to happen? 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:25, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification and sorry for that mistake! I would prefer to have it as a subpage of User:MWinter4. MWinter4 (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- @MWinter4 Done with pleasure. More on your own talk page. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 13:32, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the clarification and sorry for that mistake! I would prefer to have it as a subpage of User:MWinter4. MWinter4 (talk) 13:27, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, MWinter4,
- Thank you for replying, Timtrent. As stated, it was problem with the formatting in the page title. I moved it to Draft space so nothing was deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 18:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Took me a couple of moments to figure it out. 👀😇 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 18:19, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- I do not fully understand your reply. What do you mean "This could not remain as an article" and then what is it right now if not an article? I also saw your comment. This draft is nowhere near ready and I am fully aware of it. It would have gotten references in due time. Is there any reason to not revert the move? Note that it was a user draft before that. MWinter4 (talk) 13:17, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello... I don't know if you got any of my replies yet!?!? I would tag you but that offends people... Sorry to disturb you by the way... CPLANAS1985 🇵🇷 🇺🇸 (Male • T • C • IG • FB) 18:09, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, CPLANAS1985,
- I don't notice "pings" so the best way to get my attention is to post on my talk page like you just did. I'll check out your replies today. Liz Read! Talk! 18:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've responded on your talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- With all due respect... Much easier said than done... I asked them what to do if a merge the material into the network's own article only to see it removed on a revert!?!? I've had too many edits reverted unjustly despite providing facts and sources... But out of everyone involved with the discussion, you seem to be the only person paying attention... CPLANAS1985 🇵🇷 🇺🇸 (Male • T • C • IG • FB) 23:50, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Also they get mad when I tag them... Again, not trying to be mean or rude but I don't know if they're receiving the replies or not... But they're not listening... They're not listening to anything... I just thought you should know that... You have to admit, I make a very valid point... Why try to help and volunteer and add new articles if someone's going to be quick to judgment and try to have it taken down almost as quickly as it went up!?!? Something is definitely wrong there... CPLANAS1985 🇵🇷 🇺🇸 (Male • T • C • IG • FB) 00:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm just a volunteer editor like you are. I've tried to give you the best advice that occurred to me on your User talk page. I can't control the behavior of other editors and just have a few tools at my disposal to address editor misconduct and it doesn't sound like that is happening here. I'll pay another visit to the AFD and make sure that is true. It might be time to allow the AFD to proceed and not respond any longer if you made your best argument there. If you find yourself repeating yourself, it's time to stop talking. Please reread what I wrote to you, that's all I can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Very well then... 🏳🏳🏳🏳 CPLANAS1985 🇵🇷 🇺🇸 (Male • T • C • IG • FB) 01:04, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm just a volunteer editor like you are. I've tried to give you the best advice that occurred to me on your User talk page. I can't control the behavior of other editors and just have a few tools at my disposal to address editor misconduct and it doesn't sound like that is happening here. I'll pay another visit to the AFD and make sure that is true. It might be time to allow the AFD to proceed and not respond any longer if you made your best argument there. If you find yourself repeating yourself, it's time to stop talking. Please reread what I wrote to you, that's all I can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 00:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've responded on your talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Wikigrannies
The author of this article is running riot over Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikigrannies, indulging predominantly in personal attacks rather than making any kind of constructive contribution. I don't think engaging with them there will serve any useful purpose - however, they have picked up on your comment that the nomination was "silly" and I'd be quite interested to know why you thought it so. I obviously didn't think it was when I made it, but as I have long respected your opinion at AfD I'd be happy to put right and/or given the opportunity to discuss. Dorsetonian (talk) 19:11, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Dorsetonian,
- I'm sorry that my comment has led to any disruption of this AFD discussion. I thought the nomination was silly because I think this is a unique group of Wikipedia editors that is notable regardless of whether or not there are reliable sources verifying this. I thought it was an interesting article which, as you know, is not a valid rationale for Keeping it. It's a page that might be moved to Project space. But because I support the presence of articles like this, putting names and identities to groups of hard-working editors, I will not be closing this discussion myself as I have a bias. But I'll put in an appearance at this AFD and see if I can tamp down any inproper language or comments that are going on. Liz Read! Talk! 22:34, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks for your response, both here and at the AfD. Yes, I too think the group is important to Wikipedia and Wikipedians but, of course, that is precisely the point I was trying to make in the introduction in the nomination - we should evaluate the notability in the same way we'd dispassionately evaluate it for any other subject - and in general there are lots of notable products and publications but few articles about individual manufacturing sites or editorial offices. One concern of my own with making the nomination is that those other products and publications can still put what they like on their own websites if they want to - but where else is Wikipedia to go? Of course, Project space as you mentioned is the answer to that question and may indeed be the best outcome here - however, I'll let the AfD play out.
- Just to address the "silliness" of the nomination, if I may: it was made after the article came up on Recent Changes patrol and purely because I thought the group did not meet the usual notability threshold. There is obviously some indication of notability meaning it is not clear-cut and the AfD will decide that. Just for the avoidance of doubt, what I did not do is bring an article to AfD that I believe obviously should not have come to AfD - that would indeed have been silly and a waste of everyone's time; nor did I bring it to AfD to make any kind of point. Dorsetonian (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Dorsetonian,
- Well, my choice of "silly" might have been a mistake but that's because I thought it was obviously notable. I usually do a pretty good job of staying neutral in my comments in AFDs but I might have slipped here. I surely didn't mean for it reflect on your competence as a nominator though. It was just a gut reaction at the time. Liz Read! Talk! 20:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Please help me to recover Andrei Baciu draft, it one of the persons with activity in activity in cancer prevention
You deleted both draft and test page. Please help me and don't do it, is important to be on this page. Danavirgiliu (talk) 08:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Danavirgiliu,
- I see that the good folks at WP:REFUND already answered your request for help and restored Draft:Andrei Baciu for you. Are you also User:Ionicadrgs? Just wondering. Liz Read! Talk! 20:16, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks you for your welcome text!
You have put much information how to edit Wikipedia and the five pillars ... I am more of visual learner so ,would you please suggest me any videos that are live online if you know, for me to better understand Wikipedia's guidelines!? Worldviewfrom (talk) 23:27, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Worldviewfrom,
- Oh, my, I don't know of any videos about editing Wikipedia although I'm sure that our parent organization WMF has probably created them. But that is an excellent question to ask at the Teahouse which is our forum for new editors to come to with their questions. I'm sure someone there can help you. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Input at a Recently Deleted Article.
Hi there Liz, if you have a minute, could you take a look at Gabe Amo along with the conversation on the talk page? The article was recently redirected as a result of a AfD and then almost immediately recreated on account of the circumstances surrounding the subject changing. Not sure what the correct/best/appropriate approach is in this situation. Thanks! - Skipple ☎ 04:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Please undelete my W.W. McCarty sandbox
I have new material and documentation that I recently found that I was planning to add this week. I believe that this additional information would make this proposed entry meet Wikipedia standards. — Carl n8vz (talk) 13:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, n8vz,
- Can you give me a link to the deleted page? Then I can see why it was deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 02:55, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, Liz. The URL for the page I would like undeleted is:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:William_W._McCarty
- Thanks for your help!
- Carl n8vz (talk) 17:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Invitation to Cornell study on Wikipedia discussions
Hello Liz,
I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.).
We wanted to invite you to join the study because you are heavily active in the User Talk namespace and also participate in discussions as an admin; as such, your experience is highly relevant to our research and we would greatly value your participation.
The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.
If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.
If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP. Thank you for your consideration.
--- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 16:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
R2-related proposal at Village Pumps
Hi Liz. I believe you probably delete more R2's than anyone, so I wonder if you have any thoughts on whether new-page reviewers should have suppressredirect
in order to avoid leaving cross-namespace redirects when draftifying (either bundled in new-page reviewer or through requesting page-mover specifically for draftifying). See Primefac's proposal WP:VPR#Give NPR additional rights? SilverLocust 💬 17:56, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, SilverLocust,
- Actually, I think Fastily deletes a lot of CSD R2s as well. It might be helpful for editors to have this ability with cross-namespace redirects but actually I think many page movers don't leave redirects when they should which leaves admins with a lot of broken redirects to clean up. So, I don't know if this proposal is a great idea. But I'll look it over, thanks for telling me about it. Liz Read! Talk! 18:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
This was/is at afd. I was protecting to stop the creator form move warring. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Deepfriedokra,
- I have restored this page. When I saw it, it was a broken redirect, which I see all day long, and I didn't think to look at its history. Editors are draftifying articles throughout the day. I saw I made a mistake and have restored it. I guess we were working on the page at the same time. Sorry to get my wires crossed. Liz Read! Talk! 22:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- No prob. The editor that was warned by us both to stop moving pages moved it cause it's at AfD. Totally for blocking now per WP:CIR -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:39, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Greetings Liz, I was wondering why the two categories I recently created were nominated for SD and I somehow did not find the reason why, I was hoping to get a reason so that I can learn from my mistakes as I thought the categories were to be like Category:AKA (rapper), what is preventing those from being like that instead be nominated for SD? shelovesneo (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, shelovesneo,
- I just tag categories that become empty. But I have a script that states which editor has added or removed pages from a category. It looks like User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars emptied both categories. I advise you to ask them why they decided to do this. Any way, an empty category sits for 7 days before it is deleted just in case it was inadvertently emptied so there is time to straighten out any misunderstandings. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 02:59, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
marked for deletion
hi Liz, I am new to wikipedia.I would want to address any concerns that were raised that is making it marked as to be deleted.The page provides valuable information to readers and has got many references . Jjmgwiki (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Re: redirect CSDs
Hi, for Salaga Senior High School(SASS) you said [1] that WP:R3 doesn't apply to page move URLs but I had thought that redirect would probably be eligible under the "unless the moved page was also recently created" criteria since the article was only at that title from 00:44, 6 June 2023 to 04:35, 6 June 2023. Sounds that sound right, or is it because the redirect itself is reaching the end of that period, probably? Thanks! (Either way no worries just curious for any potential future nominations.) Skynxnex (talk) 23:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Skynxnex,
- Well, that's my understanding of CSD R3 which I've gained, in part, from deleting redirects like this and having editors/admins come to my talk page and say that they weren't eligible for this criteria! I didn't think it was controversial to delete redirects that clearly seem like errors and mistakes but I've faced editors who frequent RFD discussions tell me that I made a mistake. So, I've become more cautious.
- Redirects seem, at face value, to be very uncomplicated but those editors who discuss them are really the experts which is why I pointed you to nominate this one at RFD. It will either be a slam-dunk easy deletion or those editors will say that there is absolutely nothing wrong with Keeping it. Sorry to ask you to jump through one more hoop. Liz Read! Talk! 23:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable :). Thanks for the added insight. Skynxnex (talk) 23:30, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
I think Surat antcomp copied and pasted it from user:Ir. Indah Megahwati, MP I think they are the same person. I think the latter wanted to rename and did not know how. It's all very confusing. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 08:58, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
I have to ask...
Were you moshing to Angry Samoans back in the day...? ;)
Thanks for everything you do. Caro7200 (talk) 14:20, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Caro7200,
- Well, I'm originally from California and I'm old enough to have been working in college radio in the 1980s so while I wasn't a big fan of the group, I'm familiar with them. Seems like another lifetime ago though. I hadn't thought about them in decades until stumbling into that AFD and reading over the article. Liz Read! Talk! 22:42, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Request for review of draft
Hi @Liz, thank you so much for taking the time to reach out regarding my first article - Massimo Vidoni AKA The Truffleman. I'd really appreciate your insight into the re-written article Draft:Massimo Vidoni (AKA The Truffleman)
Best,
Nanwikieditor01 (talk) 18:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Nanwikieditor01,
- I don't think that I've ever been thanked by an article creator for tagging their article for deletion. This version is much less promotional but still a little much. Overly long articles tend to get more scrutiny because it looks like the author is trying to cram in every detail about them which is not encyclopedic writing which is more of a summary and highlights than a comprehensive overview. Remember, AFC reviewers want to see what other, reliable sources have said about a subject, not what the subject has said about themselves. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Liz
- Haha, I'm still learning and the wiki on article creation is a lot to internalise so learning by doing is far more effective for me and I appreciate any and all advice and input I can get from folks who've bee doing this for a lot longer. I appreciate your feedback, I'll make sure to cite from more neutral third party sources and condense my writing. Hope you're having a great day!
- Cheers
- Nanwikieditor01 (talk) 06:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I see you have been online
Hello, I have read that when there is an issue I should seek a recently active admin. Ive been offline for several days, but before, I removed a link to a pedophilia advocacy groups website, which got someone to start cussing me out. Can you check [2] and help me understand if this is acceptable? Underwoods Witch (talk) 03:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Underwoods Witch,
- First, I do not condone the response you received from that editor which was very incivil. But more importantly, you were indefinitely blocked and just were unblocked through a discussion of admins to give you another chance. I don't think you realize how close you are getting to being blocked again and a second indefinite block will not be easily lifted.
- You should stay very far away from contentious areas of the project or making accusations about other editors, this is where you get into trouble. If you don't change direction and start doing some constructive, non-controversial editing, I don't see you lasting much longer as an editor here. The editor you were talking with has years more experience than you have and if they took your exchange to ANI, I don't think you would fare very well there. Stay away from editing in areas that you are emotionally invested in, pick some neglected, boring work to do rather than going to go look for a confrontation. These remarks have nothing to do with whether or not your edit was appropriate, I'm just giving you my best advice at how to best work on a collaborative editing project with lots of editors you might have disagreements with. Admins don't like to see irresolvable conflict so don't give them a reason to reblock you. This has nothing to do with gender or the subject matter but with how you choose to interact with others which is an area where many editors get into trouble. Go write about movies, books, TV shows, historical figures, railroads, suffragettes, but stay away from pedophilia. Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, I am not very vested in the subject, i had just had read a link here where 12 people were banned for adding similar content to that article, and two related articles about a month ago, so I figured I would inform them that this project is against linking to propedophilia organizations. I may have misread it, and will stick to articles about food so editors don't cuss me out again. Underwoods Witch (talk) 03:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Do you think I was wrong to tell them to discuss it on the talk page? Do you think that link should remain? I'm not sure how far out of bounds i may be, so I appreciate your uninvolved input. Thank you for this. Underwoods Witch (talk) 03:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, I am not very vested in the subject, i had just had read a link here where 12 people were banned for adding similar content to that article, and two related articles about a month ago, so I figured I would inform them that this project is against linking to propedophilia organizations. I may have misread it, and will stick to articles about food so editors don't cuss me out again. Underwoods Witch (talk) 03:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
New page patrol October 2023 Backlog drive
New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive | |
| |
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
why didn't you just delete what I tagged?
I indicated in my edit summary for the deletion of User:Fred Luciano that the user already had the same content in a sandbox of which he also has another. Now, that very-confused new user has a third copy at Draft:The Shrine of the Five Wounds of Our Lord Jesus Christ thanks to you, at least one of which you were supposed to delete. Chris Troutman (talk) 12:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Chris troutman,
- How about I just ignore pages that you tag since you are so dissatisfied? I'll let another admin handle them since I'd rather not hear your complaints. Liz Read! Talk! 03:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Adminship is a toolset you utilize for everyone,. I left an edit summary to explicate my reasoning, to try to help you out. The best thing for you to do is simply apologize for an honest mistake and move on. Chris Troutman (talk) 13:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Need solution
Hello @Liz, I hope you're doing well. Thanks for updating User:C1K98V/TestMove. Can you help me out with G6. I'm reaching out to you with lot of hope. Thanks C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 09:03, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, C1K98V,
- I'm not sure what you are seeking to do here. Sheezan Mohammed Khan was already moved to the Sheezan Khan page title a few days ago. If you want to do a page move, it's best to start a discussion on the article talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 03:11, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Septermber GOCE newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors September 2023 Newsletter
Hello and welcome to the September 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since June. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. David Thomsen: Prolific Wikipedian and Guild member David Thomsen (Dthomsen8) died in November 2022. He was a regular copy editor who took part in many of our Drives and Blitzes. An obituary was published in the mid-July issue of The Signpost. Tributes can be left on David's talk page. Election news: In our mid-year Election of Coordinators, Dhtwiki was chosen as lead coordinator, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo continue as assistant coordinators, and Baffle gab1978 stepped down from the role. If you're interested in helping out at the GOCE, please consider nominating yourself for our next election in December; it's your WikiProject and it doesn't organize itself! June Blitz: Of the 17 editors who signed up for our June Copy Editing Blitz, 12 copy-edited at least one article. 70,035 words comprising 26 articles were copy-edited. Barnstars awarded are here. July Drive: 34 of the 51 editors who took part in our July Backlog Elimination Drive copy-edited at least one article. They edited 276 articles and 683,633 words between them. Barnstars awarded are here. August Blitz: In our August Copy Editing Blitz, 13 of the 16 editors who signed up worked on at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 79,608 words comprising 57 articles. Barnstars awarded are available here. September Drive: Sign up here for our month-long September Backlog Elimination Drive, which is now underway. Barnstars awarded will be posted here. Progress report: As of 14:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC), GOCE copy editors have processed 245 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stands at 2,066. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Request for Undeletion of Article Page Qing Madi
Hi i would like to request an undeletion of Article page @Qing madi into draft for further edits. Recent information has been discovered on account of this page as regards chart entries and Nominations.
Thank You
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qing Madi George Nyiam (talk) 15:05, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, George Nyiam,
- Can you give me some indication what new information you have that that would help this article? Because there was a clear consensus to Delete. Liz Read! Talk! 03:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Liz She few weeks earlier she maintained number 1 ( her single "Ole" Ft. bxnx) on apple music Uganda chart, and number 3 in Nigeria amongst other music charts including turntable charts etc.
- https://kworb.net/itunes/artist/qingmadi.html , https://www.officialcharts.com/songs/qing-madi-ft-bnxn-ole/ https://www.turntablecharts.com/Charts/Top50 https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/top-100-uganda/pl.b9e553253ed24c2a829c9c08209e5f67 https://kworb.net/charts/apple_s/ug.html
- If you need more please don't hesitate.
- Warm regards!
- I George Nyiam (talk) 09:13, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Liz, I removed the speedy tag suggesting this one go to AfD due to possible notability. Then I saw you had tagged it; I would have contacted you first before doing this. There are multiple gushy refs but my reasoning was that they are refs nonetheless even if marginal.
Honestly, sometimes I do this sort of thing based on my interpretation of Wikipedia’s guidelines, then look again at what I untagged and wonder why. I see I just untagged an article that fails my own non-binding, invalid, unpopular, personal guideline for many popular culture articles. (In a nutshell: “Why do we want these?)
You do what’s best. —A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, A. B.,
- I have no problem with you untagging the article if you thought the criteria I selected was not appropriate. Editors are going to disagree. Use your best judgment. But I did think the article was unsuitable for the project and so I tagged it for being self-promotional and it was deleted. If there had been more than one sentence of content, I would have chosen AFD but speedy deletion seemed like the right form of deletion.
- Now that I have time to think about it, I probably should have moved it to Draft space instead. And if this article gets recreated, that's what I'll choose to do. Liz Read! Talk! 03:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I’m a secret popular culture deletionist at heart (except when it’s my popular culture.)
- —A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 03:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Lists at FAC
Hi, I see that you deleted Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/List of Bath City F.C. seasons/archive1 per G6 but left Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/List of Bath City F.C. managers/archive1 alone. They were virtually identical: why one and not the other? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Redrose64,
- I patrol CSD categories and this page was tagged for deletion by User:Buidhe. The other page was not. I do not know why one page was tagged for CSD and not the other. Maybe they will see this ping and respond to explain their tagging decision. Liz Read! Talk! 00:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- The FAC coordinators may optionally mark an FAC for deletion if it's ineligible. I did not notice the second one but I have tagged it now. (t · c) buidhe 01:20, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- The FAC coordinators may optionally mark an FAC for deletion if it's ineligible. I did not notice the second one but I have tagged it now. (t · c) buidhe 01:20, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
I think there's been some confusion with the naming. Right now we're trying to separate the actual video game character lists from articles in a list-format per a discussion here. That's why it was moved to the Characters title, because there's some dev/reception going on there instead of a straightfoward list like the Smash Bros. or Animal Crossing ones. Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Kung Fu Man,
- Is there anything you need me to do? Liz Read! Talk! 00:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Ah well see the thing is you ended up moving it from there to List of The King of Fighters characters, and I don't think I can move it back. It was also just the main article and not the talk page from the looks of it?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Kung Fu Man,
- Thanks for telling me about the Talk page, that should have been moved when the article was moved. It was User:Tollens that requested this article move through CSD G6 Move. I have no opinion about it, maybe there should be a talk page discussion or a request at WP:RM. Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi - I requested the move after a discussion at User:Arjayay's talk page (though this should likely have been at the article's talk, my apologies - didn't see that the page was moved recently, let alone from the title it was moved to) - my concern was that the title after a recent move to "Characters of The King of Fighters series" contains no article (since "The" is part of the name of the series). Arjayay had moved the page from "Characters of the The King of Fighters series", which, while grammatically correct, looks and sounds silly. I suggested a pagemove to a less ambiguous title and proposed the current title, but I agree it isn't quite a list. If there is a title which is unambiguously grammatically correct, looks reasonable, and conforms to Wikipedia's naming standards, I would fully support a move there, but I'd rather avoid simply reverting the move to either of the two previous titles as (in my personal opinion) it's more important that the title make sense than it exactly conform to the naming standards. Tollens (talk) 03:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- A talk page or RM discussion might also be helpful to get more brains thinking of a reasonable title - I've been thinking about it for quite a while and can't seem to figure one out. Tollens (talk) 03:56, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- If I might offer a suggestion, why not just Characters of the King of Fighters series, with the lowercase "the"? The series is often shortened in secondary reliable sources so it should satisfy all the issues. What do you think Arjayay and Tollens?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:30, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- There's a consensus at Talk:The King of Fighters#Page name to use "The" in the series name, though it was quite small and 16 years ago - I think your suggested title is better than what we have now (and I'd be happy with a move there if we can't come up with something else) but I'd prefer if we managed to match the other articles about the series. Tollens (talk) 05:42, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- If I might offer a suggestion, why not just Characters of the King of Fighters series, with the lowercase "the"? The series is often shortened in secondary reliable sources so it should satisfy all the issues. What do you think Arjayay and Tollens?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:30, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Ah well see the thing is you ended up moving it from there to List of The King of Fighters characters, and I don't think I can move it back. It was also just the main article and not the talk page from the looks of it?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Witchcraft (traditional)
I was surprised that you chose to delete Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Witchcraft (traditional) while commenting that the content appeared to be valid enough to continue work. I don't understand why the proper venue would be to push it into draft space; I understand the purpose of that is to be part of the AfC process to reduce creation of spam and other inappropriate content by anonymous users. I'm not sure what the benefit of requiring it to go through the clogged AfC process would be. My understanding of Wikipedia is mainspace is supposed to provide constant opportunity for revision and improvement. Regardless, I would very much like to resume providing editing the page to provide sourced material on the topic. Darker Dreams (talk) 01:13, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Darker Dreams,
- I closed this AFD based on the consensus I saw in the participant's comments. I see a couple options available to you. I offered to Userfy this article, that's a possibility. Or, you could go to Wikipedia:Deletion review if you want to appeal my AFD closure. Or you could start a new article from scratch that addresses the problems brought up in the AFD. Let me know how you would like to proceed. Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Fine, please let me know where to find the draft. Darker Dreams (talk) 01:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Just following up on this request. Darker Dreams (talk) 00:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Trying again to follow up on this request. I see you have taken action on other similar requests made since this conversation. Is there something additional that you need from me? Darker Dreams (talk) 05:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Far future release categories?
Hello. A category was recently created to accomodate 100 Years (film). I think this category (and similar others) is of little encyclopedic use, given the utter uncertainty such a release going through (the copy could be damaged or destroyed, someone could steal the safe, the company could change their mind fifty years from now, etc.). While it could be argued that any category for an unreleased work is a crystal ball, something this far out is just too imprecise to serve as anything other than a curiosity. 2803:4600:1116:F44:88B1:E34E:B521:CBD6 (talk) 04:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, 2803:4600:1116:F44:88B1:E34E:B521:CBD6,
- I can't delete a category because you don't like it. You need to make a nomination at WP:CFD put forth your argument and see if the other editors who work with categories agree with you. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 05:44, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
REFUND
Please WP:REFUND the deleted Sudden Death Seven-ball to User:SMcCandlish/Incubator/Sudden Death Seven-ball; a summarized version of it would make reasonable list content, if we do a list of cue-sports media (there are several prior deleted article that would also make good entries). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:15, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, SMcCandlish,
- Done Sorry for the delay, I missed seeing your message and life off-line has been crazy this week. Good luck with the article. Liz Read! Talk! 01:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, and no hurry. It'll take a while to dig up additional material for such a list, if WikiProject Cue Sports is even interested in it. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 01:27, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Ramakrishna Mission Brahmananda College of Education
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ramakrishna Mission Brahmananda College of Education. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Supriyomj16022008 (talk) 11:43, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 58
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023
- New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
- Tech tip: Filters
- Wikimania presentation
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
C1 deletion template
We need to get that template changed. All of those that you restored the template clearly said "on or after" today's date. Looking at the code, I see that the intent is 7x24 hours, but it is only displaying the date. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, I took a stab at updating the template. This should help. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:41, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, UtherSRG,
- All I know is that I've been tagging and later deleting empty categories since I became an admin 8 years ago and this is how we have always handle things. We've always deleted time-based tagged deletions at the time specified, in this case, 7 days after they have been tagged (literally). It just keeps things orderly. Same with PRODs and G13 expired drafts, we either use the time and date tagged or the time and date of the last edit to the page.
- I'll look into the specific wording of the tags, probably with Pppery. Sorry, but I guess I'm just a creature of habit about time-based tagged page deletions especially when there is no reason to delete these pages early. Liz Read! Talk! 16:47, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- (ec) I'll look at the changes made. Liz Read! Talk! 16:47, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- I have no issue with that; I was simply following the instructions on the tag. My change makes it explicitly align with current practice. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:51, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
WP 1.0 updates
We're revisiting the WP:1.0 process, including how it interacts w/ categories + templates vs potential wikidata properties (and other automated assessments now being done continuously by bots and models); and hoping to update the assessments again soon. Give a shout if you're interested in that discussion. – SJ + 16:52, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Undelete Ruslan Sabirly
Hi, Liz. How are you? I am unsatisfied for deletion of Ruslan Sabirly page and don’t agree with the result. Unfortunately, i could not participate in discussion, as I knew about it after page deletion. And also page was deleted with only 3 delete comment. Also it seems Azerbaijani Togrul R. has its own conflict with Ruslan Sabirly as wants delete his page everywhere. This is not first time he does it. Anyway Togrul R. says: “The fact that he is the first verified user in the region doesn't make them notable”. But this is not shown as a reason, this is just like title, because he got verified in 2014, when this was not available in Azerbaijan. He got it from Germany producers, while worked there on movie project. From another point why Togrul mention only this, but not Ruslan Sabirly’s career and activity?
He also mentioned that "Foreign tourism expert" isn't a notable role. But Ruslan Sabirly has played 9 leading roles on famous movies and TV series, which are mentioned in page.
Another Delete comment is: article's sourcing consists of promotional blurbs in clearly unreliable Azerbaijani websites, and passing mentions in slightly better but still probably unreliable Azerbaijani websites. That is not true, there are a lot of articles and interview about him and his career on Ministry of Culture of Azerbaijan Republic’s, governmental news agency AzerTag’s, and Azerbaijani leading news websites as 1news.az, trend.az, milli.az, day.az, azernews.az. these are alla reliable news portals and sources. If you Google his name Ruslan Sabirly (in English) and as Ruslan Sabirli (in Azerbaijani), you can see all this articles and Google Knowledge page. By the way i went through link in deletion discussion panel and it searched “Ruslan Sabirly” which make sense for search result and it brings not correct results.
So, Ruslan Sabirly is not the promo page. Also he was anchor on TV morning show. Also he was directed movie The Call. Also he is founder and producer of big festival which is held with support of government and other organizations for 5 year. This festival brings writers and cinematographers in together, helped them realize theirselves and make them popular to whole country. This project was a first time event in such theme. All mentioned above makes him encyclopedic person. And that is why i am kindly asking yo to undelete this page, please. Best regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russolini1979 (talk • contribs) 11:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Russolini1979,
- Could you provide me with a link to the deleted page? Then I can see why it was deleted and if anything can be done about it. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 15:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Liz. Thank you for your reply.
- Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruslan_Sabirly
- Best regards. Russolini1979 (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Russolini1979,
- This article was deleted in a unanimous decision in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruslan Sabirly. I can't just revert consensus and restore this article to the main space as if the AFD didn't happen. Liz Read! Talk! 03:40, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Liz.
- Unanimous decision of 3 comment, which are not correct and not telling truth. And that was without my arguments. That is not right. I disagree with it. All that means if 3 person agree to delete any person’s page, they can move it to deletion discussion and result will be “delete”. But where is truth, justice? So, we can not trust and believe on Wikipedia.
- What does AFD mean?
- Best regards. Russolini1979 (talk) 12:41, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- What to do know? Russolini1979 (talk) 12:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Russolini1979: You can attempt to take this to WP:DRV, but I expect the deletion would be upheld there. You can read up on what constitutes reliability in sourcing as well as independence in sourcing to better understand why your claims that it should be restored will not work. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- What to do know? Russolini1979 (talk) 12:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz, request undelete the above page under Draft - G13 so I could work on it. Thank you. Cassiopeia talk 03:32, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Liz. Stay safe and best. Cassiopeia talk 03:40, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Restore Kristiāna Zacmane
Hello! Please restore deleted page Kristiāna Zacmane - Latvian women's national team player. I will provide more sources. Thank you Renārs Krīgers (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RenarsKrigers: I have restored it to Draft:Kristiāna Zacmane where you will have some time and space to work on it. Please submit it for review when you are ready. @GiantSnowman: You asked to be pinged on this at the AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:17, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. GiantSnowman 18:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. Today was moving day for me and I'm just logging in now. I appreciate TPS! Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- You bet! - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. Today was moving day for me and I'm just logging in now. I appreciate TPS! Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. GiantSnowman 18:02, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Maliner (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Bicycle Health has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
voorts (talk/contributions) 23:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Report Violation
Hello this article created by same person with another name and change title just 25days after deletion by discussion to bypass wikipedia rules : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitra_Rafee_Nia
The article deleted via discussion : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mitra_Rafee Moaijf92 (talk) 09:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- It has now been deleted as G4. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:48, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, Moaijf92, it looks like it's been taken care of. Thanks for the notice. Liz Read! Talk! 22:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Thinking about a new hobby
Liz, I have edited Wikipedia because it's fun and interesting. I get the feeling I'm doing something useful for society.
That feeling has been fading away since the start of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad. I put in a lot of work with nothing to show for it but a lot of abuse (and your note).
This blatant abuse was tolerated by administrators at:
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kalki Avatar and Muhammad
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ved Prakash Upadhyay
- Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1137#Page blocked for following WP:DENY, without warning, in contentious DRV
- Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 August 17#Kalki Avatar and Muhammad
And now today at:
I try scrupulously to follow the rules and keep my cool even as I'm goaded to try to force a misstep on my part. It's hard work but I think I do it pretty well.
In these discussions, I got attacked. If the abuser lost momentum, other related abusers magically appeared. Finally, some admin maybe stepped in and maybe waved their arms at the abusers - but nothing really changed.
Meanwhile, I get told by regular editors or admins I should maybe have done something differently:
- not posted on the AfD talk page [and with a note on the AfD to go to the talk page] instead of on the AfD page
- not reverted a prematurely closed DRV by an involved editor because "socks" (never mind what policy actually says about reversions)
- not told an IP that I would not give my contact data and only accept messages through the Wikipedia system, thereby encouraging them to contact me because, well, somehow something or the other…
So the abusers get off and I go away chastened, unvalidated and a bit less enthusiastic about helping here.
I think some admin(s) need to seriously put their feet down.
Or am I just a slow learner in the wrong environment? --A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 04:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, A. B.,
- This is obviously very important and serious but it's Friday night where I'm at and this whole week I've been cleaning, packing and moving. I want to give this whole discussion the consideration it deserves but I'll have a fresher mind and more ideas in the morning. That's when I'm most alert. I just wanted you to know that I saw this and will review it all and give it the proper attention tomorrow. This is not a brush-off, I just am tired and know my limitations right now. When dealing with interpersonal issues, it doesn't help things to be at a low point in ones energy and patience. One makes carelesss statements. I hope this delay is okay. I also might choose to offer some of my response in an email if I think that it would be comments that would best not to air publicly like on this talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 04:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Go to bed. I hate all three of those things with a passion.
- --A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 04:25, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- By the way, when I said I hate all three of those things, I meant “cleaning, packing and moving.”
- not something else.
- —A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 23:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 September 2023
- In the media: "Just flirting", going Dutch and Shapps for the defence?
- Obituary: Nosebagbear
- Featured content: Catching up
- Traffic report: Some of it's magic, some of it's tragic
The above two places Tambaram and Avadi were considered suburban areas of Chennai City and are part of it's Metropolitan Area.Recently they were upgraded to Municipal Corporation status by merging adjoining suburbs and local bodies.In India,a Municipal Corporation is considered a City,not a suburb of another City.Please look into the same. Raghavan(Talk) 05:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Raghavan,
- Very interesting but what are you asking me to do? I'm not sure what you want. Liz Read! Talk! 05:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- If you are familiar with Jersey City which evolved as a suburb of New York City and eventually became an Edge City you can relate to this.Jersey is considered a separate administrative unit and not a suburb now.Similarly in India we have cities like Gurgaon and Ghaziabad adjoining Delhi,Howrah adjoining Kolkata and Navi Mumbai and Thane adjoining Mumbai but all are considered separate administrative units.So why not Tambaram and Avadi? Raghavan(Talk) 06:11, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Request for undeletion
Hi Liz! I noticed you deleted The Frog Princess (film) under CSD G8. I’m just leaving this message to request its undeletion, as - prior to this edit by the sockpuppet - it seems that it was a valid redirect to The Princess and the Frog. (I’m hoping that’s the right diff I’ve linked there — I got it from the contribs page that I had open before the deletion took place.)
All the best (also I love your editnotice!), user:A smart kittenmeow 15:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, A smart kitten,
- I just deleted a broken redirect which is a page that has a link to a deleted article, in this case, to The Frog Princess (1954 film). If there is a valid target article, you can recreate the redirect. If you are interested in The Frog Princess (1954 film), please contact the admin who deleted that page. Since it was deleted as the work of a sockpuppet though, it's unlikely that it will be restored. But you can ask. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 01:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz,
- To clarify, I’m not interested in The Frog Princess (1954 film) - I’ve been working through the sock’s contribs and so I think it was probably me who tagged it as G5.
- The reason I was asking for the redirect to be undeleted (and then retargeted back to The Princess and the Frog), rather than just recreating the redirect, was because it seemed like it might have history from a fair bit of time ago, which would be lost if I just recreated it. However, if that’s what would be best, I can do that.
- Best, user:A smart kittenmeow 06:56, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
I see you rejected this draft here. I removed some unsourced content today, and I'm not sure the article is ready for prime-time. Do you feel it should move back to draft? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Magnolia677,
- I didn't "reject" Draft:Paul Grima, it was deleted as an expired draft, CSD G13 which occurs if a draft article has gone at least 6 months without editing. It looks like Paul Grima isn't the strongest article but you can decide whether or not to draftify it. Since you have heavily edited the article already, you might reach out to the article creator with a talk page notice including your concerns. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've never sent an article to draft. Do you I have ability? Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
I want to talk to you sister
I need to talk to you a lot. The topic is about Wikipedia. You give your whatsapp phone number. Then I will talk through whatsapp. Srabanta Deb (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Srabanta Deb,
- There is no way I would give anyone on Wikipedia my personal information. And I don't use Whatsapp. You can post a message here or send me an email message. Liz Read! Talk! 01:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- I created an English Wikipedia entry named Santa Das Kathiababa a few days ago. But after a few days the entry was deleted from Wikipedia. I seek your help with this registration you work to create Santa Das Kathiababa article again. Santa Das Kathiababa was the chief disciple of Ramdas Kathiyababa of the Nimbarka Sampradaya of Hinduism. Former president of Prayag Kumbh Mela, 18th century Indian Hindu leader and religious leader, former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court and social worker. But because there is no detailed information about him on Google or online, he has been deleted from English Wikipedia. I have made Wikipedia entries about him twice before. But deleted both times. Now it is a request to you from the devotees and followers of Santa Das Kathiababa that you work to renew this register and make the new generation interested in knowing about him. Thank you. Srabanta Deb (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Srabanta Deb,
- This article and draft has been deleted multiple times. You can read the reasons why in the AFD. Several administrators have deleted this article and made it clear that, as written, the content is not suitable for this project. Wikipedia doesn't exist for advertising a person or religious group and your writing is heavily promotional. You can start a new draft but if you move a similar article back into main space, it will be deleted again. Personal appeals to me are not effective, this is about the consensus of editors in an AFD deletion discussion and Wikipedia policy on notability and sources. I think it would be best if you moved on to write articles about other subjects. You've been given lots of messages that this article is not wanted on Wikipedia and if you keep ignoring these messages, you could end up losing your editing privileges.
- Consider starting your own blog instead where you can write whatever you want and you don't have to follow Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 01:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Santa Das Kathiababa entry should be on Wikipedia. Because he is an Indian 18th century spiritual guru of Hinduism. 18th century spiritual leaders like Ramakrishna, Sarada Devi, Ramdas Kathiababa, Swami Vivekananda, A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Santa Das Kathiababa was like them. If the registration of all of them can be placed in Wikipedia, then why Santa Das Kathiababa's registration can not be placed in Wikipedia? A group of people or registrants on Wikipedia are doing this to insult the leader and guru of our Nimbarka Sampradaya community. So being a devotee and follower of Nimbarka Sampradaya community we want you to create Santa Das Kathiababa registration yourself. Then this registration will not be deleted from Wikipedia by any administrator or registrant. Srabanta Deb (talk) 02:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- WP:WHATABOUT is not a valid argument. - UtherSRG (talk) 02:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Santa Das Kathiababa entry should be on Wikipedia. Because he is an Indian 18th century spiritual guru of Hinduism. 18th century spiritual leaders like Ramakrishna, Sarada Devi, Ramdas Kathiababa, Swami Vivekananda, A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Santa Das Kathiababa was like them. If the registration of all of them can be placed in Wikipedia, then why Santa Das Kathiababa's registration can not be placed in Wikipedia? A group of people or registrants on Wikipedia are doing this to insult the leader and guru of our Nimbarka Sampradaya community. So being a devotee and follower of Nimbarka Sampradaya community we want you to create Santa Das Kathiababa registration yourself. Then this registration will not be deleted from Wikipedia by any administrator or registrant. Srabanta Deb (talk) 02:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- I created an English Wikipedia entry named Santa Das Kathiababa a few days ago. But after a few days the entry was deleted from Wikipedia. I seek your help with this registration you work to create Santa Das Kathiababa article again. Santa Das Kathiababa was the chief disciple of Ramdas Kathiyababa of the Nimbarka Sampradaya of Hinduism. Former president of Prayag Kumbh Mela, 18th century Indian Hindu leader and religious leader, former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court and social worker. But because there is no detailed information about him on Google or online, he has been deleted from English Wikipedia. I have made Wikipedia entries about him twice before. But deleted both times. Now it is a request to you from the devotees and followers of Santa Das Kathiababa that you work to renew this register and make the new generation interested in knowing about him. Thank you. Srabanta Deb (talk) 01:31, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Srabanta Deb, deleting an article is not an "insult". If the reliable sources aren't there, they aren't there. It might be too soon. If you find some stronger references, maybe there could be an article in the future. I'm sure that the articles have been evaluated according to Wikipedia policies and guidlines and not based on editors' opinion of Santa Das Kathiababa. And I'm not sure what you mean by "registration", that's not a term that's used on Wikipedia. Like I suggested, work on a draft that overcomes the problems that caused the previous versions of the article to be deleted. If you want a second opinion, please bring your concerns to the Teahouse. Liz Read! Talk! 02:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- UtherSRG He added the delete tag to all my registrations a while back. I deleted all his tags. Please see all the registrations I have made. And save my registrations from deletion. Srabanta Deb (talk) 02:45, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- I have no idea what you mean by "registrations". I've been on Wikipedia for 10 years and I've never seen that word used. Liz Read! Talk! 02:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- UtherSRG He added the delete tag to all my registrations a while back. I deleted all his tags. Please see all the registrations I have made. And save my registrations from deletion. Srabanta Deb (talk) 02:45, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Srabanta Deb, deleting an article is not an "insult". If the reliable sources aren't there, they aren't there. It might be too soon. If you find some stronger references, maybe there could be an article in the future. I'm sure that the articles have been evaluated according to Wikipedia policies and guidlines and not based on editors' opinion of Santa Das Kathiababa. And I'm not sure what you mean by "registration", that's not a term that's used on Wikipedia. Like I suggested, work on a draft that overcomes the problems that caused the previous versions of the article to be deleted. If you want a second opinion, please bring your concerns to the Teahouse. Liz Read! Talk! 02:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 02:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
Deauthorized. (talk) 02:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
D.I.C.E. Award winners.
Look, I understand that the individual D.I.C.E. Awards may not be defining but I have to point that there are category pages for the British Academy Game Awards winners at Category:BAFTA winners (video games). In my opinion, the D.I.C.E. Awards are more defining than the British Academy Game Awards. There are also categories for Category:Game Developers Choice Award winners, Category:Golden Joystick Award winners, and even Category:New York Game Award winners. There also category GOTY winner categories for the Game Developers Choice Awards and Golden Joystick Awards. At the very least I will be recreating the categories for D.I.C.E. Award winners and D.I.C.E. Award for Game of the Year winners. MR.RockGamer17 (talk) 14:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Unusable copyvio rewrites
Hi, Liz! I tagged the copyvio rewrite proposed at Talk:Mary Raine (football)/Temp for deletion as G6 as it could not be used to replace the copyvio article Mary Raine (football) because it was not copyvio–free (but was not bad enough to be eligible for deletion as G12). It's a mystery to me why you thought that moving an unrepaired copyvio to draft space was a good idea, but I've gone ahead and deleted it myself this time around. Just a note to remind you that pages with titles such as Talk:Foo/Temp and Draft talk:Bar/Temp are special copyvio rewrite pages. If they're usable they can be moved to replace the existing copyvio page; if they aren't, they should be deleted. I don't know what criterion other than G6 could apply in most such cases, so that's the criterion I use (it's also the criterion I use to delete copyvios that have been listed for over seven days at WP:CP without resolution). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Re: Query
Hi Liz,
Thank you for your query, there is a simple explanation. I had an old draft page for Alex Matos, but I became aware that a page on main space for that football player exists, so my draft had become superfluous. So I deleted the info and used the template to create a page Jefry Valverde, another football player on my to-do list. I appreciate if that’s lazy, I hadn’t done it before and I will happily not do it again, turns out it doesn’t actually save that much time anyway (I’m just meant to be on holiday, and not doing things like that)
best wishes G Hildreth gazzard (talk) 20:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Deletion of Taiporoporo / Charles Sound
Kia ora Liz,
I noticed that you recently deleted the above redirect, which was created following a page move of the article now at Charles Sound, stating that the redirect was "obviously an error". It's not actually an error, but rather the official name of the fiord and has been the article title multiple times in the past. I'm wondering whether it would be possible for you to undo the deletion? Ngā mihi, Turnagra (talk) 09:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Turnagra: I've restored the redirect. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
the new friend......geromy wood
about the deletion discussion in jeremy wood, where's the actual discussion? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 11:12, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Cog-san: There is none. There are three deletion processes: speedy deletion, proposed deletion, and deletion discussion. The article in question is using the middle of the three. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:35, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- i completely misread that lmao
- but if that's the case, i'm in favor of deleting it
- even after another quick look, i didn't find any confirmation that he wasn't just a collective hallucination cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 11:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I was forced to quit editing my Wikipedia because of you.
Why did delete Gopalji Radhabihari Ashram (Santdham) from Wikipedia? All information in this register was reliable and accurate. Why did you delete this edit anyway? Why are you suggesting and deleting all the edits I wrote? You are insulting me and deleting all the edits without showing respect to any of my edits. Again now Nimbarka Ashram, Sylhet and Kathiababa Ka Sthan,Vrindavan and started proposing to delete. You will also delete them. I regret to inform you that I will not be making new edits and entries on Wikipedia. Because you are deleting all my edits. stay well I hope to get the correct answer to my question. Feel free to let me know any feedback you have. Srabanta Deb (talk) 13:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Srabanta Deb: I believe this is directed to me, not to Liz. I blocked you because after multiple warnings about removing AFD tags from articles, you continued to do so. I have placed all of the articles you've created up for deletion review. The community will decide if they stay or if they will be deleted. These discussions are based on our policies, and you have been informed of this previously and we have pointed you to those policies. Your inability to understand these policies does not excuse you from them. - UtherSRG (talk) 14:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Srabanta Deb,
- I closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gopalji Radhabihari Ashram (Santdham) as a Soft Deletion. It can be restored upon request. I'm not following what articles you edit, I just look at open AFDs every day and close the ones that are due to be close. This is not personal. If articles you create are nominated for deletion, you should read the critique of them and try to address what problems other editors are finding in these articles so they meet Wikipedia standards. I have tried to give you advice and feedback over and over again but you don't seem to be reading what I am saying and you are reacting emotionally. Wikipedia is governed by policies and guidelines, not by personal appeals. Liz Read! Talk! 00:27, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Modern Muse
Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Modern_Muse. Sorry, but consensus schmonsensus. I doubt those people even looked. There aren't *any* reliable sources in the article, and given the UPE block of the original creator, the lack of any link to the proposed target, this just doesn't make any sense. If this had been created yesterday, it would have been a no-brainer G11. At least a relist might give a chance for a few more people to take a look and come to the only reasonable conclusion on this one. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:40, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, 35.139.154.158,
- No content was Merged and the page was turned into a Redirect. I guess the AFD didn't close the way you wanted but the situation is moot right now. Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)≤≤≤
WikiProject Celts
Hi Liz, I removed your speedy deletion request for Category:Category-Class Celts articles, because it appears to be a project category for Wikipedia:WikiProject Celts ...no, I'd never heard of the project before either, despite editing Wales articles for 10 years :) Sionk (talk) 13:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Reason for deleting the Sematary article?
I have read the article twice and didn't seem to find anything wrong with it, what was the reason for the deletion? And, if it was bad, why wasn't it rewritten instead of removed? FandomCereal (talk) 15:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- @FandomCereal: The article you are referring to was deleted in accordance with the community decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sematary, and for the reasons so listed. Looking at the deleted article, I do not find a single reference that satisfies the golden rule. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:59, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
FYI
Yet again, I have asked Scope creep to leave me alone. I don't know what else can be done but I've had enough. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Sometimes I wonder!
Knowing you often have words of wisdom for less experienced editors, and seeing that you have already posted some on the editor's talk page (below the item I am linking to), do you have anything you might suggest to them to allow them to remain enthusiastic, but to temper their knee jerk reactions, please?
The full link to the conversation is User talk:OlifanofmrTennant#About a draft you accepted 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 09:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Timtrent,
- I've left them a message. I think they have to decide whether they want to learn and improve with AFC reviewing or move on to another task. It's not easy to hear criticism, and as you know, even very experienced editors receive criticism, but I appreciate the time you spent on their talk page going through different issues you had with their editing and reviewing processes. Leaving personal messages can be time-consuming and you might be surprised by the fact that the vast majority of editors, even ones that have been here a long time, do not leave anything other than template notices on User talk pages. But I think a personal note and gentle nudge can often steer an editor in the right direction and I'm grateful you do so. I wish more editors would communicate one-on-one with editors and not let problems build until they spill into noticeboards. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 18:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hope your message will get though. I haven't read it yet!. I was wondering whether my best was good enough this time. I began to doubt it. I see huge enthusiasm and potential capability.
- Receiving criticism is a decision. We can receive it well and accept or rejects it with a good heart, something I try hard to do, or we can throw a hissy fit! or, we can be somewhere im the middle!
- I chose to ask you because you are one of the remarkably small pool of people who care about the people of the project. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've read it now. Good message, full of balance and caring. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 21:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
New pages patrol newsletter
Hello Liz,
Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!
October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.
PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.
Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.
Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.
Reminders:
- You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
- Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
- To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
- Bulleted list item
Draft abuse?
Hello there. Is this an abuse of the process, as I am sure it is? This article should have been automatically deleted long ago, right? — Smuckola(talk) 17:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Smuckola,
- No, it's not an abuse. I sometimes make dummy edits to an expiring draft so that it is not deleted. It would be simpler if the editor just moved the page to User space but as long as someone is editing a draft, it's not deleted as a CSD G13. It can be irritating when an editor just goes through dozens and dozens of drafts, delaying their deletion (for unknown reasons) but technically, that's no violation either. If it was all the editing an editor did (and an IP editor did that once), it could verge on disruptive editing but I've never seen it result in a block or sanction. Liz Read! Talk! 02:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Okay thanks. Yeah everybody should use a sandbox! What a magical gift of common sense the sandbox is. Of course, Wikipedia should have any real editor training and reputations, and usability engineering, whatsoever. I'm a newb at draft space, because I immediately committed to not make junk or to be a pest since I first started! I'm embarrassed if I make more than two consecutive edits in a main space article! So I was just checking. OK, curiosity answered, and I don't mean to jabber at ya. But you're a very nice person. — Smuckola(talk) 06:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Reason for deleting 613 Torah Ave article
Hi I noticed you deleted "613 Torah Ave" because you couldn't find sources other than online stores. This isn't true. Apparently you don't seem to know "Orthodox Judaism". These are albums that every single kid grew up on. There are numerous articles written on it. Why don't you do more research before deleting it. Or at least give someone a chance to defend the claim. Thanks. BangKettle (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, BangKettle,
- Please provide me with a link to the delete page you are concerned about. Then I can see if anything can be done about it. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:30, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- 613 Torah Avenue
- Thank you BangKettle (talk) 00:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- Any update? BangKettle (talk) 18:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
- @BangKettle: This was an expired WP:PROD. The rationale on the PROD was
Unsourced article. Only found listings on online stores and trivial mentions in some books, lacks significant coverage or reviews to pass WP:MUSIC
As an expired PROD, you can request its restoration at WP:RFU. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
- @BangKettle: This was an expired WP:PROD. The rationale on the PROD was
Your decline of Ussr:James100000/sandbox1
Hello! I tagged that page with WP:A3 because of the misspelled "Ussr", which means that it was technically in mainspace. However, I admit that a better approach would have been to simply move it to userspace and tag the resulting redirect with R2. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 02:18, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Dsuke1998AEOS,
- I didn't even notice that misspelling. Still, A3 wouldn't apply. I did delete it though as a CSD G6 error page. You've got a good eye, thanks for spotting it. Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Second Intifada AfD
Liz, can you reopen the WP:Articles for deletion/Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada as there has been a late comment at WP:Requests for undeletion#Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada. Jay 💬 05:56, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jay,
- Well, just so I'm clear, is this a request to restore the deleted article? Or a request to revert my closure and relist the discussion? Because if the discussion is relisted, it can just be closed by another closer. But it seems like that is what you are asking for.
- By the way, it's late here so I'll be heading to bed in a little bit but if I don't get to this tonight, I'll address it in the morning. Liz Read! Talk! 06:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, to revert the close and relist the discussion, as it was closed only today. Older soft deletes would be restored at RfU. Jay 💬 06:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jay,
- Done Sorry for the delay. Liz Read! Talk! 18:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, to revert the close and relist the discussion, as it was closed only today. Older soft deletes would be restored at RfU. Jay 💬 06:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- For reference, the RfU was archived to WP:Requests for undeletion/Archive 389#Civilian casualties in the Second Intifada. Jay 💬 07:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Need some more RD2s on Richard Thompson Ford
Thanks for cleaning up after the latest incident. Do you think you could go ahead and revdel the stuff from Kianni from the other day as well? It's more of the same. Box of wolves (feed) 02:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Box of wolves,
- Done Thanks for pointing out those edits, I didn't notice them. I've protected the article for a week. Liz Read! Talk! 02:45, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks! Box of wolves (feed) 02:46, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Wildwood Cemetery (Wincester, Massachusetts)
Hi. This is definitely not a big deal, but I moved Wildwood Cemetery to Wildwood Cemetery (Winchester, Massachusetts) to make way for a dab page (thanks for moving that one, btw). Only problem is along the way I accidentally moved it to Wildwood Cemetery (Wincester, Massachusetts), a misspelling. I thought G7 would apply since I'm the one who created the misspelled redirect a few minutes earlier. It's only housekeeping, so we can just leave it as an R from misspelling, but just wanted to let you know my thinking. Station1 (talk) 03:44, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Ahsan Khalil is Pakistani notable writer as you can check his google knowledge panel as well ([[3]]). Kindly restore it, so can wirk on it and replace it resources to independent and reliable resources. Skt34 (talk) 07:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Removing backlinks to pages deleted for G5
Why would you do that? The whole point of removing backlinks is that the pages are not notable. G5 and some other speedy deletion is not followed by any notability discussion. Pelmeen10 (talk) 09:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Organizer Tools Office Hours & Event Discovery Project
(Lire ce message en français); (Ver este mensaje en español); (Angalia ujumbe huu kwa Kiswahili); (إقرأ هذه الرسالة بالعربي) Please help translate to other languages. .
The Campaigns team at the Wikimedia Foundation has some updates to share with you, which are:
We invite you to attend our upcoming community office hours to learn about organizer tools, including the Event registration tool (which has new and upcoming features). The office hours are on the following dates, and you can join one or both of them:
- Saturday, October 7 at 12:00 UTC (Register here)
- Languages available: Arabic, English, French, Swahili
- Tuesday, October 10 at 18:00 UTC (Register here).
- Languages available: Arabic, English, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Swahili
We have launched a new project: Event Discovery. This project aims to make it easier for editors to learn about campaign events. We need your help to understand how you would like to discover events on the wikis, so that we can create a useful solution. Please share your feedback on our project talk page.
- Thank you, and we hope to see you at the upcoming office hours!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:54, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you subscribed to this list
Hi Liz,
who has once created this? Thanks in advance.--U. M. Owen (talk) 00:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, U. M. Owen,
- An editor named User:OfficiallyGoodenough created this draft in 2022. Liz Read! Talk! 03:12, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Saed Ahmed Bhalli
Greetings. Did this AfD close correctly? It doesn't seem so. -The Gnome (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Akaspo (user)
Hi, Liz. There's a new editor, Akaspo, that has a history of suspiciously sockpuppet-esque activity. The articles Battle of Chumb (1965) and Rajasthan Front were recently deleted, but they have since been recreated by this WP:SPA. Also created have been Draft:Battle of Batapur and Draft:First Battle Of Hilli. Additional actiivties by this user have been to change articles relating to Pakistani wars by spreading pro-Pakistani propaganda (e.g. "changed it to pakistani victory"; "Pkiatsni [sic] Victory, the other person did not put any source"; "There is nothing that implies 18 Pakistani soldiers were killed"; "Pakistani military victory, Diplomatic stalemate", "changed the claims"). All of the drafts and articles they create are riddled with pro-Pakistan propaganda using poor, pro-Pakistan sources. I believe both of these articlespace articles should be re-deleted until they can be reinstated by a neutral editor, as they are so thoroughly riddled with propaganda that they're beyond salvaging.
Additionally, they have attempted to externally network with blocked, known-sockpuppet accounts such as Altay74 and Pr0pulsion 123, learning Pr0pulsion's Facebook account and going so far as to confirm that they added Altay74 on their Instagram account ("I added you"). (Incidentally, Pr0pulsion 123 has gone on to throw a tantrum over their ban, which is how I found this in the first place). It is abundantly clear, therefore, that this band of users will continue to sockpuppet, and thus I believe these articles should also be WP:SALTed for extended-confirmed protection under WP:CT/IPA.
Although their edits on existing articles have been reverted, I feel like these users are knowingly employing a Gish gallop-style exploitation of Wikipedia's ease of article creation, wherein it takes considerably more effort both to get an article deleted than it does to revert an edit and to even find the article in the first place.
This has all been done in the span of under two weeks and is very clearly an instance of Pakistani nationalism, WP:NOTHERE, and extraordinarily likely sockpuppetry being coordinated outside of Wikipedia. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Template talk mistake
Thank you for fixing my muck-up at Template talk:John Cain Jr sidebar. Sorry: thought I knew what I was doing and got carried away. AukusRuckus (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
First Time Posting a Wiki Article - May I please get feedback
Hello!
Thank you for your time. It looks like you are the editor that reviewed an article I recently just tried to publish. On the Redirect to deleted page "User:Aidan Park") Tag: Twinkle (thank). May I please get more clarification on what this means exactly so I can make the changes necessary and know what to do moving forward?
Thank you, have a great evening! Nscheuerman95 (talk) 03:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) Hi, and hope you're well. Based on the edit history, you moved the draft to the wrong place, so Liz just moved it to the right place. As for the draft itself, you can consider some feedback Anachronist left at Draft:Aidan Park (beginning
This draft isn't written in a neutral tone
...). After you address it, you can click the button that saySubmit the draft for review!
. After that, prepare to wait for a while; it may take a while for a reviewer to get to your draft. Hope that helped, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:04, 27 September 2023 (UTC)- this was very helpful! thank you so much. :) cheers, have a great evening! Nscheuerman95 (talk) 01:31, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for George Andrews Reserve
An editor has asked for a deletion review of George Andrews Reserve. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Govvy (talk) 19:26, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Govvy,
- Thank you, I appreciate you informing me about this. Liz Read! Talk! 19:42, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Randal Alexander McDonnell, 10th Earl of Antrim
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Randal Alexander McDonnell, 10th Earl of Antrim. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Pilaz (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Pilaz,
- Thank you for the notification. It's appreciated. Liz Read! Talk! 19:41, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Why did you delete this article? A founding member of the IOC, he was an important and notable sports administrator internationally. Norden1990 (talk) 19:22, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Norden1990,
- The deletion rationale is included at the top of every deleted page, in pink. This article was created by a very prolific sockpuppet. Feel free to write a new article that doesn't have this problem. Liz Read! Talk! 19:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- As I recall, it was an excellent article with proper sources and references. --Norden1990 (talk) 19:58, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) It wasn't. The vast majority of the article was unsourced. I do hope you'll create a new one. I'll paste the couple sources used at your user talk page. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
- As I recall, it was an excellent article with proper sources and references. --Norden1990 (talk) 19:58, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Request for undeletion of 2023-24 North Dakota State Bison men's basketball team
Hello,
I saw that you deleted the 2023-24 North Dakota State Bison men's basketball team page on September 26th, due to the reason of "Relying on a non-existent page". I was curious of the exact page that it relied on, as typically sports team pages will reference a couple different pages that will be created later on in the season due to the lack of relevance on those pages at the present moment. No harm, no foul of course, I just was curious why this page got deleted versus the other pages created for the 2023-24 NCAA Division I men's basketball season that do the same thing and didn't get deleted. I am requesting either an exact page that caused the deletion and/or the undeletion of the article or at least moving it to draft space so I able to remedy the reason for deletion.
Thanks, natethegreat4226 natethegreat4226 (talk) 14:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, natethegreat4226,
- I'm not sure what happened here. I restored 2023–24 North Dakota State Bison men's basketball team and it showed the page as a broken redirect to Template:2023–24 Summit League men's basketball standings with a bright red/pink box from a bot saying the page was eligible for speedy deletion. Then I refreshed the page and everything looks okay now. I think when the template that was trancluded was tagged for speedy deletion several days ago, it indicated that this page should be deleted as well. Now that you recreated the template, everything is okay. Tricky things can happen with templates when they are tagged for speedy deletion. For example, if a userbox gets tagged for CSD deletion, every user page that it's on gets tagged for deletion at the same time.
- Thanks for following up on this and asking for the article to be restored. Liz Read! Talk! 17:42, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for helping me out with this! I found out that the template was deleted because a banned user created it, so like you mentioned I recreated it after talking with the user that deleted it. Thank you again for your help with this! natethegreat4226 (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
User page as G13
Liz, you were pinged at User talk:Jayneelyn#Paid editing. Jay 💬 17:25, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jay,
- I responded to you there. Basically, they used their User page not only as a site for COI disclosure but also to house a draft that reached its 6 month mark. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Re: List of Palestinian civilian casualties in the Second Intifada
Hi Liz,
You recently restored the following page Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Palestinian civilian casualties in the Second Intifada (2nd nomination), in addition to the Israeli casualty page, and the master second intifada page.
Revisions were commenced on all three pages, but an editor just swooped in and deleted the Palestinian Civilian casualties page while there still was a discussion going on as to the proper future to the page (this has now hobbled the master article, and other editors are now pushing again for the deletion of all three under the justification that one of the articles was already deleted).
Looking to have the page restored per the last undelete so revisions may continue. And if deletion is ultimately necessary, given that this is an ARBPIA topic, isn’t it in accordance with contentious topics guidelines that more discussion and consensus seeking is warranted before things as severe as deletion occurs? Mistamystery (talk) 19:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Mistamystery,
- You're concerned about List of Palestinian civilian casualties in the Second Intifada, right? I didn't delete this article. The first step is to go to the administrator who closed this AFD discussion and make your case to them. It's best for you if you know what you are asking for, in this case, you might be asking for the discussion to be relisted for another week. If you think the admin made an incorrect assessment of editor consensus in the discussion, then you should appeal the decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review. You need to present a good argument there. But as I see it, those are your options. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi friend. Hope you're having a good weekend. Normally I'd restore a G13 with just a ping, but wanted to ask if I was missing anything here since it didn't seem stale. It's not enough to go to mainspace, but I think there may be enough sourcing. Any red flags I should know about? Thanks either way. Star Mississippi 01:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Star Mississippi,
- Oy! This was my mistake. Here's how we handle CSD G13s. We work with a list generated a week previously by SDZeroBot. For example, today's list is here. As you can see, it was generated a week ago. Then on the day of expiration, we review drafts according to the time signature. Before any draft/User page is deleted, it must be checked to see if there have been edits in the intervening 7 days. I guess I didn't check this one closely enough. The last "human edit" was March 7th, I thought, so it was deleted 6 months later, on September 7th. But an editor had edited the page on August 30. I hope you will believe me when I tell you how rare I think this is. I check every single draft before it is deleted but I guess I was in a hurry or distracted. I've restored the draft. I hope this explains things. Thanks for checking. Liz Read! Talk! 01:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- No worries at all, it happens especially the volume of articles you process and I never have a reason not to believe you. Fun to see the report, I never had before and kind of wondered how that worked. Good to see you have an aide. I can't keep track of my own drafts. Have a good evening/rest of the weekend. Star Mississippi 01:49, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
bludgeoning AfD
Hi @Liz, To respond to your comment of " bludgeoning" in this discussion. I am not trying to persuade others to my point of view but to participate in the discussion. What I find challenging during an AfD is when an editor casts a KEEP vote claiming that "lots of supporting sources exist" without providing them, and then other editors (often from the same WP) start showing up to also vote KEEP per that editor’s “findings”. I must admit that I get frustrated by this, as I have seen it happen before and it can be a pretty effective way (when combined with votestacking, stealth canvassing..etc) to rig the system. Wafflesvarrg (talk) 09:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Requesting attention to spam user account
@Liz Happen to come across Special:Contributions/Hussain5121472 seems has spammed some number and info in multiple articles, most still not reverted. Idk if a case of doxing or just spamming.
Approached you since you seem to be last active admin on ANI. Bookku (talk) 10:18, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Thanks! I've reverted everything and reported to WP:AIV —siroχo 10:39, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Julian Calv
Hi - thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julian Calv. The nomination also included Route 4/Thorn and Roots, and that article is now also CSD A9 eligible. Would you be able to take care of that one as well? Many thanks! Dorsetonian (talk) 16:55, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of it! Dorsetonian (talk) 05:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
@Liz:
I want to make an article about Raditya Adi Mars1117 (talk) 02:56, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Mars1117,
- If so, then you are a sockpuppet and will soon be blocked. Liz Read! Talk! 03:05, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
requesting removal of an article containing sensitive information
the article for my band (wristmeetrazor) has been repeatedly edited to remove my legal name, as i am in the process of scrubbing in from the internet. someone has made it a point to replace my name and harass me about how i “shouldn’t be in a band” if i don’t want my name online. i’m trying to either gain admin access to the article, or have it completely removed, so that i can fully remove the sensitive info from the edit history. the article is also abandoned and not being kept up to date, and i would like to have full control over it myself to be able to run it properlyUserelaine (talk) 03:38, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Userelaine: Firstly, Wikipedia articles (not "pages") are not under any individual's control; they can be edited by any member of the community. There is no article-based admin privileges. As for removing the article, it can not just be removed because it contains
sensitive info
andis also abandoned and not being kept up to date
. See our deletion policies to see if there are any legitimate reasons that fit your needs. While Liz may have some additional thoughts on the matter, you may be better off asking at the Teahouse or the Help Desk to receive a broader answer to whether or not your concerns merit removing the article. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2023 (UTC)- someone using an article to harass me and dox me, on an article that is under the name of a band/LLC that the original writer did not own the rights to, is not grounds for deletion? am i going to have to file some sort of DMCA complaint about this for any action to be taken? i’m not understanding how sensitive info is not grounds for something to be done, at the very least for the person who keeps adding it to be prevented from continuing to do it. Userelaine (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- I see no harassment or doxing. But like I said, please consult the Teahouse or the Help Desk. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- i will do that, but “putting of personal information including full legal name” is listed under wp:harassment as harassment. Userelaine (talk) 12:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- That portion of the policy specifically limits it to an editor's personal informaiton. The next section is on what to do:
If you have accidentally posted anything that might lead to your being outed, ... it is important that you act promptly to have the edit(s) oversighted. Do not otherwise draw attention to the information.
I now suggest Oversight as your next step; though the only outing of your connection to that name was called out by you. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:37, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- That portion of the policy specifically limits it to an editor's personal informaiton. The next section is on what to do:
- i will do that, but “putting of personal information including full legal name” is listed under wp:harassment as harassment. Userelaine (talk) 12:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- I see no harassment or doxing. But like I said, please consult the Teahouse or the Help Desk. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- someone using an article to harass me and dox me, on an article that is under the name of a band/LLC that the original writer did not own the rights to, is not grounds for deletion? am i going to have to file some sort of DMCA complaint about this for any action to be taken? i’m not understanding how sensitive info is not grounds for something to be done, at the very least for the person who keeps adding it to be prevented from continuing to do it. Userelaine (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
File Deletion Request
Hello, I would like File:Catalan Girl wearing Estelada as Cape.jpeg to be deleted please! I was the person who uploaded the file, but now I would like it to be deleted please and thank you! 😅 — SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 21:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, SnowieLuna1212,
- It looks like this file has been deleted. You can thank User:Whpq. Liz Read! Talk! 05:44, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 3 October 2023
- News and notes: Wikimedia Endowment financial statement published
- Recent research: Readers prefer ChatGPT over Wikipedia; concerns about limiting "anyone can edit" principle "may be overstated"
- Featured content: By your logic,
- Poetry: "The Sight"
Request to check my draft
Good morning, please can you help me to access or check my drafts I made yesterday. It was two drafts here are they Draft:Caroline A. Wanga and Draft:Nicolas M. Chaillan Wappa PZ (talk) 21:08, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2023).
|
|
- An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text:
Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.
- Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)
- The 2023 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of one new CheckUser.
- Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections opens on 2 October and closes on 8 October.
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I suppose you receive a lot of these, but I wanted to show my appreciation for all that you do regarding deletion. After being active in speedy deletion for some months now, I can see the incredible amount of effort you put into this side of the project. Please accept a heartfelt thank you for your tireless work; I don't know where we would be without you. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 17:45, 4 October 2023 (UTC) |
Greetings, Liz
It's taken long but I wish to revive now the article about Minus one (music) which I orphaned back in 2022, for the dearth of effective (non-blog) citations. I would like to give it another try. May I respectfully request for its undeletion, if still possible? Help, please.
Truly yours, Buszmail (talk)
- Hello, Buszmail
- I'm sorry it's taken me so long to reply to you but I just saw your message. I restored Draft:Minus one (music) for you. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 21:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Note about a past FfD
Hello, Liz! I noticed this FfD from August 2023. It should be noted this user has been blocked indefinitely on Commons for disruptive editing and changing images with no comments or reply after multiple times. I would suggest if they proceed with any future vandalism, an indef from the File namespace should be done. – The Grid (talk) 15:03, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Barnstar for thanks
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar | |
To the administrators who've been deleting my many user pages as I clear out the chaff: I imagine its tedious work, and thank you for your patience and professionalism! I'm finally done, and further want to express my appreciation for the expediency all of you demonstrated. I wish you the best! — Fourthords | =Λ= | 16:08, 5 October 2023 (UTC) |
Liz, please reopen this discussion. It does not seem proper to hinge the fate of a decades-old article with dozens of editors on such a brief and low-participation outcome. BD2412 T 16:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- Also, I am easily finding sources that could have been cited in the discussion, the sort for which User:QuicoleJR asked to be pinged if found, indicating that their !vote was conditional on such sources not being found. I have added two such sources to the article. BD2412 T 00:23, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, BD2412,
- I will look at this AFD again and consider relisting.
- By the way, please look at this upcoming expiring draft list. Once again, because of your liberal use of AWB we have during the 18:00-19:00 UTC hour has over 500 drafts expiring and over 100 expiring in the 19:00=20:00 hour. Typically, over an hour, there are between 4 and 12 drafts expiring. Having hundreds of expiring drafts over a short period of time (10 minutes?) really overwhelms the few admins who review possible CSD G13s when you do mass edits like this. Maybe try not to use AWB in Draft space where this logjam then happens. Liz Read! Talk! 00:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- I will attend to some of those. BD2412 T 01:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, BD2412,
- I've really grown to hate AWB for the havoc it creates in Draft space with G13s. You're not the only editor who utilizes AWB but it seems like I come across your edits most frequently. All 700+ of these drafts will still need to be manually checked but perhaps you could delay deletion for some of them. Liz Read! Talk! 01:28, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- AWB is just a tool. I have used it on drafts to give editors working on a slew of drafts more time to address them, but if no one has touched these drafts in the six months since I extended their lives, perhaps they deserve to be deleted. If not, then we should have a different draft status for drafts that should not be deleted even if abandoned. The whole six-month rule is frankly counter-productive. BD2412 T 01:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, BD2412,
- A fair number of the drafts on this page are placeholders for FloridaArmy drafts. I've alerted them. Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- I am aware of that as well. The reality of the situation is that some editors create more drafts than they can handle (I teeter on the edge of that status myself), and these will inevitably end up being repeat cases brought to WP:RFU. BD2412 T 01:44, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- AWB is just a tool. I have used it on drafts to give editors working on a slew of drafts more time to address them, but if no one has touched these drafts in the six months since I extended their lives, perhaps they deserve to be deleted. If not, then we should have a different draft status for drafts that should not be deleted even if abandoned. The whole six-month rule is frankly counter-productive. BD2412 T 01:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- I will attend to some of those. BD2412 T 01:24, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello Liz, thanks for checking the deletion discussion. I think the main consensus was deletion of the article, as seen by the three deletion votes, one redirect vote, and two keep votes (one of whom was the original article creator and the other failed to provide arguments on how this article fulfilled WP:Notability). I think it will be reasonable to reconsider the no consensus tag, or at the very least, reopening the discussion. Makeandtoss (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Gokhshtein AFD
My point wasn't about the editors ethnicities, my point is that there's likely off-wiki canvassing going on in that AFD. Any accusation of canvassing is obviously an aspersion, but it think it's something closer should assess. The cryptocurrency topic area is notiorous for UPE/COI promotional issues. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:20, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Hemiauchenia,
- I purposely didn't single anyone out there in my remarks. I just wanted that tangential discussion to end and to get back to discussing the article. But thanks for clarifying your position. Liz Read! Talk! 05:25, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- I vigorously reject your characterisation of me as tagging users as potentially cavassed primarily because I disagreed with them. I have legitimate concerns that these users have been canvassed, regardless of the merits of their arguments. I removed the canvassing tag I added to Shoerack even though they voted keep, because I later judged that I did not think it was likely they were canvassed. Rescedent for example had not edited at all since 2016, before returning solely to edit the article and AfD (I have no reason to suspect that they are Nigerian), which strikes me as suspicious. I only brought up the Nigeria thing because I thought it was odd that a large proportion of keep voters were Nigerian, when I rarely see Nigerian editors on Wikipedia. I am not prejudiced against Nigerian editors. Their nationality was tangential to my other arguments, which is that they were all only infrequently active and most them did not edit about cryptocurrency related topics or participate in AFDs. I checked Google, and it's not even possible to find the article by Google searching currently. I am just concerned that there may be a sophisticated astroturfing operation going on. Hemiauchenia (talk) 06:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- The tagging was inappropriate. The only time it's understandable to tag an editor like that is when they have no other edits except to the AFD or if they are a sock. Some of the editors you tagged have been editing Wikipedia longer than you have. It was a badge of shame and just because you have suspicions doesn't mean you can violate AGF. A closer can evaluate their contributions and come to their own conclusions. Liz Read! Talk! 06:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- I vigorously reject your characterisation of me as tagging users as potentially cavassed primarily because I disagreed with them. I have legitimate concerns that these users have been canvassed, regardless of the merits of their arguments. I removed the canvassing tag I added to Shoerack even though they voted keep, because I later judged that I did not think it was likely they were canvassed. Rescedent for example had not edited at all since 2016, before returning solely to edit the article and AfD (I have no reason to suspect that they are Nigerian), which strikes me as suspicious. I only brought up the Nigeria thing because I thought it was odd that a large proportion of keep voters were Nigerian, when I rarely see Nigerian editors on Wikipedia. I am not prejudiced against Nigerian editors. Their nationality was tangential to my other arguments, which is that they were all only infrequently active and most them did not edit about cryptocurrency related topics or participate in AFDs. I checked Google, and it's not even possible to find the article by Google searching currently. I am just concerned that there may be a sophisticated astroturfing operation going on. Hemiauchenia (talk) 06:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello! I wanted to let you know that this page (India–Vanuatu relations) was seemingly recreated, after this AfD discussion resulted in a delete vote back in December 2021. I'm letting you know this because you re-deleted the page under CSD G4 back in June 2022. However, it's not "back" in its original form, but is a redirect to a NEW page. That page is India-Pacific Islands Relations, and almost exclusively focuses on India's relationship with Vanuatu. I can't see what the original India-Vanuatu page content entailed, but whether this is the same type of article, or different, I wasn't sure whether or not this would fall under the same umbrella as the last deletions. Anyway, thank you for your time! Utopes (talk / cont) 06:35, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Utopes,
- India–Vanuatu relations was just created as a Redirect which is perfectly okay, it's not a recreated article. If it gets transformed to an article, you can consider tagging it as a CSD G4. If you have issues with a redirect, you can always nominate it for deletion at WP:RFD but you should have a good argument for why it should be deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 00:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm specifically referring to the target that the redirect is pointing to, which seems to be either a recreation or derivative thereof from the India-Vanuatu relations article that was deleted. Besides 3 sentences about Fiji with hatnote, the aforementioned target of India-Pacific Islands Relations is written nearly entirely about Vanuatu. I'm not sure how much different it is from the original Vanuatu relations article, though, and was curious whether there was anything you remembered about the original article's relationship with this one. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:46, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Liz: Unsure if you saw this followup ^^ Utopes (talk / cont) 03:43, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Utopes,
- No, I didn't see your follow-up message. I gather than you are concerned about India-Pacific Islands Relations and whether or not it is a recreation of India–Vanuatu relations which was deleted in an AFD. The deleted article was pretty short and just concerned India–Vanuatu relations, not that of other Pacific Islands so I do not think they are similar. Even the section on Vanuatu in the new article is twice the size of the original article which talked about a paint factory and an agreement with Tata motors. Sorry it took me a while to see your message and respond. It's an area I could improve upon. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 03:55, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
AfD
Hi, Thanks for taking the time to close the proposed deletion of Battle of Kelmendi; I'm not sure I understand your decision since by closing that AfD as “no consensus” we keep an article that has been twice nominated for deletion, is likely only supported by primary sources and as such is failing GNG and WP:EVENTCRITERIA guidelines. That last comment by @JoelleJay was a request to see non primary sources in support of notability. The discussion was closed after that. According to your assessment: “This is not a comment on the article content, sources or page title which can be discussed on the article talk page” but how do you judge if sources contribute to GNG and WP:NOTABILITY without discussing them? It would have been worth extending the discussion a little more to finally find out. You did not answer my previous message and I suppose you are too busy but this whole process has been quite a disappointment. Have a good day. Wafflesvarrg (talk) 09:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Wafflesvarrg,
- There were quite a few editors arguing to Keep this article and, if anything, I was leaning Keep rather than Delete. But you were quite insistent about having this article Deleted and I ended up closing it as No consensus because I didn't see any agreement. It was obvious that you were critical of those advocating Keep but my job is to assess comments and arguments made in the deletion discussion, not investigate the article's sources. Your job, as nominator, is to make a persuasive argument about why the article should be deleted and you didn't seem to persuade the bulk of the editors participating in the AFD.
- I'm sorry if I missed a previous message you left. This talk page gets a lot of traffic and as messages age and move up from the bottom, I can miss replying to them once they go into the middle of this enormous talk page. You can always copy and paste a comment that has not be responded to back to the bottom of the page.
- I also regret that you are disappointed in the AFD process. Discusseions don't always close with a result that an editor is happy with. There was a time about a year ago when we were closing dozens and dozens of AFDs on athletes as Delete because the guidelines on notability had changed and there were many editors who had worked on these articles that were disappointed with that common outcome. I guess I'd suggest that if you are unhappy that this article wasn't Deleted, then work on making it as accurate as possible. You can always renominate the article but that is much more successful if you wait at least 4-6 weeks (or months) before doing the whole AFD over again. If you launch a second AFD too soon, it can be closed as a procedural Keep because little time has passed since the first AFD and so opinions are likely to not have changed. Liz Read! Talk! 00:36, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Marsden Road Public School
Can you please explain why you closed the AfD as delete? There was a clear alternative to deletion which I explained in the discussion. Can you please undo so I can redirect and keep the history? There's no reason why that can't be done. Deus et lex (talk) 11:47, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- WP:DELETIONREVIEW might be the route to take. – The Grid (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2023 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
- Hello, Deus et lex,
- I typically do choose an ATD but in this case, I didn't see additional support for a Redirection beyond you. Is there a reason why you can't just create a Redirect like I suggested in my closure? Why do you want to preserve the page history in this case? Were you going to try to restore the article?
- A deletion review is a possibility and it can be useful in the case of close calls but I don't think that occurred here. You might find some support for your argument but first, please, answer my questions. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 16:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Nominator withdrawal
Liz, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trimble County High School, the nominator has withdrawn the nomination. There are 5 keep votes (there was 1 merge, changed to keep) and no discussion in favor of deletion. Do the 7 days have to roll by before it can be closed? Can it be closed by anyone other than the nominator? Thanks! — Jacona (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jacona,
- It looks like an editor has already closed this discussion. Sorry to be late responding to you. I think there is a preference for only experienced editors to close AFD discussions, in general, but the fact is that editors of all experience levels, beyond newbies, have closed AFD discussions in the past. In the case of a withdrawn nomination (with no Delete votes), even the nominator can close an AFD discussion. It happens. But in no other instances (or with a result other than Keep) can a nominator close an AFD discussion. I just had to revert one done mistakenly yesterday. I hope this answers your questions. Liz Read! Talk! 15:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Deceased mentor
Hello, I'm posting this here because I don't know where I would post an edit request for a special page. User:Nosebagbear has very unfortunately passed away but they're still listed as a mentor which can cause some issues as the assigned mentees will not be able to have their questions answered. Can you use Special:ManageMentors to remove their mentorship? Thanks. FatalFit | ✉ | ✓ 02:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, FatalFit,
- I am not familiar with this page/feature and how it works. But I "removed" them from the list. I hope that takes care of the problem. There are issues with other mentors, at least one of whom is blocked. Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Aquadoodle
Hi Liz, I do not understand why this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aquadoodle was delete instead of merge. As I noted, there are sources online such as https://www.proquest.com/docview/219290997/6E57753E1A144653PQ/11 and https://www.proquest.com/docview/330502121/1DC3FE7F5A264022PQ/15 to support the material. Can you please draftify the article so that I can merge the content? - Indefensible (talk) 17:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Indefensible,
- There were three editors arguing for deletion and one specifically arguing AGAINST Merger. But I will restore this article for you in Draft space at Draft:Aquadoodle. Take into consideration though the opposition to your idea of a Merge. Liz Read! Talk! 23:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. None of the votes to delete seem to have really looked at the available sources though, except for https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/02/become-an-art-attack-star_n_8151918.html by Oaktree b. - Indefensible (talk) 23:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Arepera Socialista
Kind regards! Many thanks for following the AfD discussion of Arepera Socialista. I wanted to ask: given the minimal participation, wouldn't the outcome be closer to a soft delete instead of "no consensus", like other similar discussions about Venezuela? Best wishes and many thanks in advance. NoonIcarus (talk) 19:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Have to disagree with you on that case, no consensus was the right outcome. - Indefensible (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, NoonIcarus,
- Closing an AFD discussion as a Soft Delete is like treating it as a Proposed deletion (WP:PROD). An article can't be deleted as a PROD if there are any objections to the deletion, it must be uncontroversial, and in this case, there was a vote to Keep the article so that makes it ineligible for a Soft Deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 00:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- I understand, and I can imagine that a Keep vote would be like disputing the PROD, even if it is a single one. Kindly thank you and best wishes. --NoonIcarus (talk) 09:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
RfC on the "Airlines and destinations" tables in airport articles
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) § RfC on the "Airlines and destinations" tables in airport articles. I saw that you participated in a discussion on a similar topic. Sunnya343 (talk) 18:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello Liz,
The draft is obvious UPE with no proper sources and an npov-infested text that was composed by an SPA. I mean, look at this: [4], Special:Diff/1179211692 – which account created just four days ago is so good at editing Wikipedia? The editing pace also doesn't match someone who is new but gets good advice. Please have a second look. All best, --Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 21:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Johannes,
- I promise to give it a second look but it didn't look like obvious paid editing to me and it seemed like the page creator was sincerely looking for help to improve the article. I hate to delete a draft when an editor is seeking to meet Wikipedia guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 21:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz -- I wonder if you would consider reopening this AfD for further comment and source analysis? I have found the deletion proposer to be rather indiscriminate in their deletion/redirect work; they do not seem to perform adequate searches, and disagree with what I believe to be consensus on fictional character notability. In the course of contesting their redirection of Horatio Caine, I came across multiple sources for Mac Taylor, suggestive -- in addition to those found during the AfD -- that the character might be notable. Thanks, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with Espresso Addict's assessment of the quality of nominations being made by the editor in question. In some cases, multiple rapid-fire nominations incorrectly asserting lack of sources in the article and asserting that sources can not be found through a search where reasonably diligent searching in fact yields sufficient sources. BD2412 T 01:54, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Espresso Addict and BD2412,
- I agree that the nominator has a focus on proposing deletion for many articles on characters from popular U.S. television series (with a particular focus on police procedurals) but in the case of this AFD, I thought I was taking a bit of a leap in closing it as Merge as the consensus in it was to Delete the article. If I have any leanings in closing AFD discussions, in general, is that I tend to favor ATDs when that option is presented. I don't think that reverting my closure and relisting this discussion would result in a tidal wave of support for Keeping this article. I'm open to changing my mind on my AFD closures when they are challenged but, in this case, there was little support for Keeping this article so I don't think a revert and relist would result in a different outcome.
- If you are concerned about this nominator's AFD nominations there have been several dozen so far, many of which have closed as Redirect. Darkfrog24 has been a consistent presence in these AFD discussions, arguing that these articles be Kept and finding sources for articles in several discussions. Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Just giving you the head's up that, per request at WP:RFU, I have restored an article that you speedily deleted, and have nominated the same for deletion via AfD. BD2412 T 01:52, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, BD2412,
- I appreciate the courtesy of the notification but I trust your judgment as an administrator and have no problem with you moving the article from a CSD to an AFD discussion. Thank you for letting me know. Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Joined the tea house Draft: Brian E. Kinsella
Hi Liz,
Thank you for inviting me to the TEA house. I joined, I think that will be so helpful! :-) Mwikiforce (talk) 01:57, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Mwikiforce,
- I found the Teahouse was a friendly place when I was a new editor. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Liz,
- That would be awesome. I think that’s s more me :-)
- Thank you for the good wishes, I think I need it :-)
- Best, Mwikiforce (talk) 03:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
AfD
Regarding this. Would you be so kind as to fix the nominator's mistake shown? They apparently reopened the closed discussion to renominate the article and then just removed the previous discussion thinking that fixed the error. Thanks. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 19:47, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, 4.37.252.50,
- Thank you for telling me about this. What a mess! I don't know why they didn't open a new discussion on this article and instead went back to a 17 year old discussion and blanked the page. I think things are back to normal with a second AFD for this article. I've been closing AFDs for almost 2 years now and it's the first time I've run into this happening. Liz Read! Talk! 21:24, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
Refund Draft:Makita AWS
Hello Liz, yet another refund request for Draft:Makita AWS, found myself hunting for the information yet again, and realised it never got migrated to article space. —Sladen (talk) 07:58, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Liz, any thoughts? —Sladen (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz, just stopping by to say thanks for adding your observations. That's a weird sock who has caused quite a disruption so its good when we can nip them in the bud quickly. S0091 (talk) 17:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
I've mentioned you...
...in a discussion I've started about administrators and notifications. I simply mentioned you as an example of an administrator who (to my knowledge uncontroversially) does not have them enabled, so there is nothing to worry about, but you may be interested in the discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Failed Drafted Article
Good day dear @Liz i had an issue today moving an article to draft space so i can work more on it having no idea how that works i just tried to do it the way i can the article has already but i felt it needed more work thats why i moved it to draft so i can work on it better but then i see that it was deleted by you kindly explain this is it Keithian (singer). with love and have a blissful day. Randomwookiemarley (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- You may be unsurprised to learn that this account was a sock of Oneboygreen. I too wish you a blissful day though. Girth Summit (blether) 13:48, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Please undelete
Did you even look at this? Talk:Marshall_Islands_national_football_team. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:43, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Koavf,
- Of course, I read the page. But orphaned talk pages are deleted. If you want me to tag it with a G8-exempt template, I can do that. Liz Read! Talk! 23:03, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- But the request is to make the page. Please undelete the talk page and make the page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:12, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Koavf,
- In the future, if you do not want an orphaned talk page deleted because the talk page contains content that should be preserved, place {{G8-exempt}} on the page and that will prevent it from showing up on deletion lists. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
- But the request is to make the page. Please undelete the talk page and make the page. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:12, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Scotched English
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Scotched English. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. CiphriusKane (talk) 06:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Deletion of Kang (Android) (disambiguation)
Hi Liz,
I see you moved Kang (Android) (disambiguation) back to Kang (Android) rather than speedily deleting it per G6. However, as stated in the reason provided for CSD, Kang (Android), the original page Kang (Android) (disambiguation) associated with, has been deleted and no other topic in Kang couls match the qualifier "Android". That's why I self-reverted the same move I made to hold the base name, and requested G6 deletion instead, which is quite a similar situation like Eastern (country subdivision) (disambiguation).
Thanks, NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 06:41, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Note: Kang (Android) has been retargeted to AOKP by Curb Safe Charmer which finished the job. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 11:45, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
G5
G5 should not be applied to transcluded templates or populated categories unless they have been transcluded or populated entirely by the banned or blocked user; these edits need to be reverted before deletion.
Please can you revert all of the edits made by Teslacarowner then, as per WP:DENY? It's much easier for an admin to mass revert these. All of these categories also violate WP:SMALLCAT, which isn't surprising given that they're the sockpuppet of someone stopped from editing due to CIR. Keeping loads of crap categories created by a sockpuppet is not beneficial to the encyclopedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Really?? Would you redirect Central Park to New York Yankees because they have trained there?? Why would you redirect a whole entire park to a football club? That makes no sense, can you please fix your redirect and point it too Keilor Downs, Victoria and it needs merging into that article too. WP:COMMONSENSE applies. Can you please fix this close, as from my point of view, it's a poor close. Govvy (talk) 13:05, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
WikiProject Adele templates
Hey Liz! Could you undelete several of the WikiProject Adele quality templates deleted on 29 March 2022, like Category:High-importance Adele articles and Category:B-Class Adele articles? The project has recently become active again. This would be a big help.--NØ 14:37, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
Userfy please
Hi Liz, would you be willing to userfy XMedia Recode after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XMedia Recode. I understand consensus shifted on that, but I'm confident the article can be reworked to be less promotional, and to highlight the notability. I will not merely add the sources I already found and move it back to mainspace. —siroχo 01:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure Liz is about these days, so I've done so in her stead: Draft:XMedia Recode
- You obviously don't need to go through AfC, that's just the headers that the script adds, so feel free to clean up. Not watching the page, so ping me if you need anything @Siroxo Star Mississippi 16:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Star Mississippi. Liz Read! Talk! 17:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Reaching out
I think I might have discovered who one of the watchers of my user/talk page is. :)
Or maybe it was a chance crossing of paths. In either case, thank you for the assist regarding the near deletion of Outline of reptiles.
By the way, I'd like to run something by you, to see what you make of it...
I've been using an AI search engine/chatbot, but I don't have anybody to talk to about it. Everyone else in the household here are technophobes when it comes to AI.
It's not quite advanced enough to talk intelligently about itself, in the first person, in a satisfying way, otherwise, I would be having this conversation with it — though it is getting scarily close. It's writing quality varies, but fairly often it writes (erm, produces output) better than I do.
It's called perplexity.ai. It's free, and it doesn't require registration, which is why I use this one.
It's an app built on top of various 3rd-party server-powered APIs, though there are murmurs across the Web that the company is developing its own in order to escape dependence on other companies' programs and fee structures. As far as I can tell, its an integration of at least 4 AIs so far, and they don't appear to be generally aware of what each other is doing, which makes the thing come across as somewhat schizophrenic from time to time.
The 4 AIs that I know of are:
- Natural language understanding prompt parser, that interprets what you ask of it or tell it to do. A "prompt" is analogous to a search query in a search box, except that it is whatever you type at the AI in natural language, which isn't limited to mere search terms. The parser forms a search query from your prompt, which it sends off to 2 search engines...
- Bing-based AI search engine. Returns the 6 best search results based on the search query. Then the prompt and the search results are sent off to #4, below.
- AI image-search-engine, though I don't know if it is Bing. Operates independently of #2 and #4 on this list.
- GPT-3.5 (a large language model from OpenAI) then takes the prompt and the search results, loads the web pages from those results, and then formulates a response based on your prompt from the web pages provided from the search. Sometimes, you can get it to reach beyond the search result's webpages into its training data, but that is hit and miss, and gets less likely as the developers plug the holes. This module has nothing to do with the pictures, and if you ask it about those, it doesn't know what the heck you are talking about.
So, what can it do besides look up a simple search term?
Well, you can type at it conversationally, and it answers apparently intelligently, much of the time. It remembers the current thread quite a ways back, and so you can discuss or have it modify previous responses, or refer to aspects of those responses, and it will answer in context. For example, you can have it write an essay, or build a table, and then specify how you want it to change or expand it. Or, if you've just had it search for a movie, and you tell it to "summarize the plot", it will summarize that movie's plot and not the plot of some random novel, short story, or Shakespearean play.
When you ask it a question, it delves into the webpages returned by the search engine and formulates a response from those, and pulls the answer out for you. It can integrate what it finds into a single response, or it can report what each page's relevant answer is. This saves you the time it takes to skim the pages to find specific facts. It pulls them out very fast.
Because it answers from the web pages it has found, it bypasses most of the problems with "hallucinations" or making things up that other chatbots have. But there are fringe use cases that it chokes on, and spits out delusionary content. If you force it to make a list of like 100 wikipedia articles, some of them may not be real. If you ask about that in a later prompt, it might even confess.
If you ask it a question in different ways, it tends to find different material to work from, which can reveal more about a topic as you go along.
You can also provide it with your own input. Like an essay for it to edit, improve, stylize, transform, translate, or whatever. Though the size is limited.
It can produce output in a variety of formats, which is more of a function of GPT-3.5 than of perplexity.ai per se. When you start asking it about itself, sometimes it describes perplexity, and sometimes it talks about its own capabilities. It's easier to find out about what it can do by asking it about ChatGPT, which it has most of the functionality of, but for which there is far more coverage online than for perplexity.
You can specify style and format, and it will comply much of the time. It can write the output in English and who knows how many other languages. It can write output as articles, essays, profiles, book summaries, outlines, resumes, poems, song lyrics, bullet lists, tables, or software programs in something like 20 programming languages and CSS. It can provide output in html, xml, JSON, wiki source text, etc. You can specify style, such as "like a Pulitzer Prize-winning article from the New York Times", to "in the style of William Shakespeare". Or you can be less specific, like "in a journalistic style", or "in the style of an expert scientist on the subject".
It can summarize subjects, stories, news coverage, and specific web pages. It can write initial drafts of emails, invitations, birthday cards, Wikipedia talk posts, etc. It can answer as if it is a particular person, in the first person.
I think its limits are dependent in large part on the imagination of the user.
The one thing that annoys me the most about the thing is that it sure apologizes a lot. And, no matter how many times I ask or instruct it not to, it does anyways, even in the same response that it promises not to do it anymore. It's coming from a part of the program other than GPT-3.5, and that answer engine isn't aware that the apologies are being added to its responses. To avoid the apologies, don't criticize or point out errors. :) Good practice for being diplomatic.
A weird trait that the answer engine has is that it can be pretty literal, like an evil genie purposefully corrupting the wishes that it grants by twisting your words. So if you ask it "How can this Wikipedia article be improved?", it may answer by explaining how to go about improving it (like "visit WikiProject X") rather than recommend specific improvements. It makes you think more about how you phrase things.
Aside from its quirks, it is next generation compared to conventional search engines. And while I rely on it the most (and have been doing so since February), I still use duckduckgo, in combination with Snap Links, such as for scanning my favorite 50 news sites, etc. I switch back and forth a lot. Perplexity is really good at clarifying or expanding on specific points, and homing in on the epitome of things. So even when I'm not using it to produce something, I have it on standby on a separate screen to answer quick questions.
What does this have to do with Wikipedia?
It speeds up online research, and is one hell of a research tool. For example, you can ask it to make lists of citations, in MediaWiki wiki text format, for specific titles or URLs that you provide, like a list of news stories, and it will. It can summarize Wikipedia policy, and answer questions about Wikipedia and how to do things on Wikipedia.
I've experimented with it on building outlines, in Wikipedia outline style, but they're rudimentary at best, and it struggles with adding more than a few links at a time. But I haven't spent much time honing my prompts on this particular activity.
If you happen to be a user of it, or decide to try it out. Let me know what you think about it.
I hope I've piqued your curiosity, or that you at least found this post entertaining.
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 09:00, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, The Transhumanist,
- I'll look all of this over and get back to you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:39, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, The Transhumanist,
- Your experience with these tools is very interesting. I haven't used them much and when I did, it was a simple test to see what they could do. Our guidance regarding them is at Wikipedia:Large language models and according to WP:RSPCHATGPT, they are considered an unreliable source. But I see you have made edits to that LLM essay so you are familiar with it already. The editor I've come across who seems the most familiar with their chatbot output is User:Rsjaffe who has tagged drafts that he believes are generated by tools like ChatGPT. You might share your experiences at Wikipedia talk:Large language models but there seems to be a lot of suspicion and dislike of these tools so it might not be a receptive audience. Maybe creating a WikiProject or User group to investigate them further would be a good idea although it would be a big investment of your time. Two works in process to better articulate Wikipedia's position are Wikipedia:Computer-generated content and Wikipedia:Using neural network language models on Wikipedia but they have had no recent activity on those pages.
- If you are just looking for a sounding board, I'm open to hearing how you use perplexity.ai but if you are looking for someone knowledgeable about these systems, I'm sorry but that's not me. Your message has piqued my curiosity though! Liz Read! Talk! 22:50, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I spearheaded the discussion that inspired the creation of WP:LLM. But, that's not why I'm here.
Some of the responsible ways to use AI for generating content are 1) don't, 2) converse with the AI for ideas on a piece of content you wish to write, 3) use it as a research assistant rather than as a co-author, and 4) have it create a preliminary draft, but personally overhaul and vet every word of it before posting it to WP.
As you can see from my post above, my use of perplexity is primarily off-site. The way that it impacts my participation on Wikipedia is that it speeds up browsing the web and Internet research through how it answers questions and summarizes Web content, and formats in pretty much any way I want. It's also very good at zeroing in on specific points of Wikipedia policy, which is a massive time saver.
My purpose in talking to you about perplexity.ai is not to explore related policy or advocate for AI-generation of content on Wikipedia. I'm interested in finding someone, anyone, experienced with Wikipedia, interested in trying it out, so that there is somebody to share perspectives and usage styles with.
I'm sure my use of this thing is skewed or hampered by my ideosyncrasies. I'd like to find out how other Wikipedians might use it to explore the Web in support of their activities on Wikipedia, and the techniques, benefits, problems, and issues they encounter as consequences of such use.
So, if you do wind up using or experimenting with perplexity.ai, keep me in mind to bounce experiences and ideas off of. With that said, I hope you try it!
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 00:28, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I spearheaded the discussion that inspired the creation of WP:LLM. But, that's not why I'm here.
Close of second deletion nomination of Chase Oliver
I've never done a WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
As you know, Wikipedia is built on consensus and not popular vote. In establishing consensus, users must back their assertions with a rationale.
While opposers of the opposition claimed in the deletion article that they saw GNG criteria being met, there was a lot of counter-discussion that what was being cited to assert GNG criteria being satisfied actually fell short/was unpersuasive. Others who asserted GNG criteria was met did not provide anything to back up their assertion.
Your close simply cited that the consensus was that "the individual meets GNG coverage even if they haven't acquired notability through WP:NPOL" utbdoes not elaborate on what was persuasively cited in establishing such a consensus. Could you elaborate on what means of achieving notability the consensus agreed on? If a consensus was reached that GNG was met, surely there was a solid means of general notability agreed about to reach such a consensus.
n SecretName101 (talk) 17:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- In addition, I am concerned your close failed to weigh the discussion that the subject failed on the grounds of WP:ONEEVENT. The coverage of the individual cited was contained to their campaigns in elections, and did not extend beyond it nor establish particular note for the campaigns themselves. That was clearly discussed as a reason the individual lacked individual notability needed for an independent article. The fact that their coverage does not extend separately from the elections themselves provided a strong argument on these grounds that several cited. SecretName101 (talk) 17:39, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, SecretName101,
- I'll review this and see if I think further action is warranted. There is always Deletion review but it's considered best practice to contact the closer first so I appreciate you doing that. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you SecretName101 (talk) 17:43, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, SecretName101,
- Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chase Oliver (2nd nomination), I think that I could have closed that discussion as "No consensus" rather than "Keep" but I'm guessing that you would still find that result equally unacceptable. The closer doesn't investigate the sources in the article, they assess the arguments in the deletion discussion and I tend to rely on the judgment of editors that I know are experienced in AFD discussions. One editor challenged your judgment of WP:GNG stating that
You are setting the bar for articles on political candidates so far and above what is outlined in WP:GNG that I don't think most elected officials would meet it.
and you dismissed sources that other editors stated establish that GNG had been met. - While I can acknowledge your challenge of their position on the sources in the article and those that were brought into the discussion and change the closure to "No consensus", if you are seeking to overturn this closure to a "Delete" opinion, I'm afraid that you will have to go to Deletion review. While I dislike that forum, I can't do a 180 degree change in the closure that I think you are seeking. Tell me what you think about my proposal or if you'd rather take your concerns to DRV. Sorry that I can't give you what you are seeking here...I realize that I also closed the first AFD as a "Redirect" but different editors showed up to the second AFD with different arguments and my closure here changed. As an aside, if I had seen that TheGuardianOfTheWiki had reverted the redirect that was the result of the first AFD, I would have reverted them and perhaps added some protection to the page. But since that action in August, more editing has been done to the article, more sources added and it came back for a second AFD so a simple revert is no longer possible. Liz Read! Talk! 22:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you SecretName101 (talk) 17:43, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maida of Aukh
Hello! I think you have misunderstood my request. I nominated not only Maida of Aukh, but also Chakhig, Khour I, Khasi I, Khasi II, Surakat, Battle of Gebak-Ghala, Yanbek, Battle of Arm-Kurt as I mentioned at the beginning of the discussion. Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 18:56, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, WikiEditor1234567123,
- I'll have to review that AFD as the discussion wasn't presented as a bundled nomination (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to nominate multiple related pages for deletion for instructions). I'm not sure that the other participants were reviewing all of these articles so I'll check and see if the discussion needs to be relisted. Liz Read! Talk! 19:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- It wasn't presented as a bundled nomination? Must be my mistake... I followed those instructions but I assume, I might have did the request incorrectly as it's my first time ever requesting deletion of articles. Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, WikiEditor1234567123,
- Not only was it not presented as a bundled nomination (with the proper code, not just adding the linked articles to the deletion nomination) but the AFD wasn't transcluded correctly to the AFD log (a bot handled that for you) and you didn't properly inform the article creator that you had nominated articles they worked on for a deletion discussion. This is a very important step as content creators should participate in a deletion discussion should they want to so they can offer a response to your critique of the articles and their sources. Since this was your first AFD, these mistakes are understandable. I encourage you to become acquainted with Twinkle, an editing tool which is used by most active editors to tag articles for deletion (CSD, PRODs, AFD/RFD/CFD/TFD/etc.). It will carry out the whole process for you and if you set your Twinkle Preferences to "Notify page creator", it will post these notices on your behalf. It really makes the process foolproof, you just need to provide your deletion rationale and any other comments you want to make in your statement and Twinkle will take care of tagging the articles and starting the AFD page for you and adding the discussion to the daily log.
- I've gone ahead and deleted the other articles as you did mention them in your deletion statement but because of these oversights and the low participation in this discussion, I've changed my closure from a straight "Delete" to a "Soft Delete". This means that an editor can go to WP:REFUND and request the restoration of these articles. If, instead of closing the AFD, I had relisted it, perhaps a regular "Delete" would have occurred but I would still feel reluctant about that as the article creator was not informed about the scope of this AFD. Depending on if the article creator pursues restoration, you might be facing a return visit to AFD but it looks like you had compiled a lot of evidence for your argument, it just would have helped if more editors were willing to invest the time in reading it all over and evaluating all of these articles. We're seeing lower participation, by editors and discussion closers in AFDs this year and you had a complicated argument so this is not surprising. I hope this better explains the AFD process. Thank you for the research you did on these articles. Liz Read! Talk! 19:38, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks alot for the advice and help, I will try not to make those mistakes again! Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- It wasn't presented as a bundled nomination? Must be my mistake... I followed those instructions but I assume, I might have did the request incorrectly as it's my first time ever requesting deletion of articles. Best regards, WikiEditor1234567123 (talk) 19:19, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello
Good afternoon ma'am. I wanted to ask if it possible to restore the category "anti-islam sentiment in Iran" in the future since there are legitimate cases and examples of such sentiment in the country. Firekong1 (talk) 20:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Firekong1,
- Can you provide me with a link to the deleted page you are concerned about? Then I can see why it was deleted and if restoration is a possibility. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's not a deleted page, it's a deleted category. There are several cases of attacks on muslim clerics, and one party in Iran (the pan iranist party) also seems to be gaining traction as an anti muslim group. Firekong1 (talk) 23:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- I still need a link to the deleted page, Firekong1. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Here:https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Category:Anti-Islam_sentiment_in_Iran&action=edit&redlink=1 Firekong1 (talk) 01:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Firekong1,
- Oh, this one is easy. Category:Anti-Islam sentiment in Iran was deleted because it was an empty category. As soon as an article is appropriately placed in this category, it can be recreated. Unfortunately, Wikipedia doesn't have a record of the contents of categories so it's impossible to see what pages used to be in this category that were removed. But I wonder, is there really anti-Islam sentiment in Iran? It's a Muslim country. Liz Read! Talk! 01:18, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I know, I want to fill in the category sometime.
- There is, Islam has been shown to be a minority in the country now (as confirmed by clerics and by private polls showing a high number of christians, zoroastrians, and atheists), and attacks on islamic clerics are examples of anti islam sentiment. Not to mention the general public opinion of islam among the average Iranian (especially amongst the youth). Firekong1 (talk) 01:35, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I find that hard to believe as Muslim clerics are believed to basically run this country. Individuals that dissent from the status quo aren't necessary attacking anyone, they just hold a different point of view or political opinion. But if you can find articles on this subject that are appropriate for this category, it can be recreated. Liz Read! Talk! 02:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Muslim clerics ruling Iran does not necessarily mean that islam is the majority. There are sources in articles on wikipedia stating and showing that Islam has declined in Iran and is no longer the majority and is now a minority, instead other religious groups (Christians and Zoroastrians mostly) are rising and taking Islam's place.
- Also, I'm not sure if the articles I can link as proof might be allowed to be used as sources for wikipedia. But I'll let you decide what you think I should do. I just think that there is legitimate examples of anti islamic and anti muslim sentiment rising in Iran. Firekong1 (talk) 04:15, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I find that hard to believe as Muslim clerics are believed to basically run this country. Individuals that dissent from the status quo aren't necessary attacking anyone, they just hold a different point of view or political opinion. But if you can find articles on this subject that are appropriate for this category, it can be recreated. Liz Read! Talk! 02:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Here:https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Category:Anti-Islam_sentiment_in_Iran&action=edit&redlink=1 Firekong1 (talk) 01:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I still need a link to the deleted page, Firekong1. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 00:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's not a deleted page, it's a deleted category. There are several cases of attacks on muslim clerics, and one party in Iran (the pan iranist party) also seems to be gaining traction as an anti muslim group. Firekong1 (talk) 23:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, LaundryPizza03,
- I'm not sure why removing a CSD tag from one template page needed to be escalated to WP:AN but I appreciate the notification and have responded there. Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Mail Call!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the
no rush whatsoever and no answer needed, just leaving the note per your request. Star Mississippi 00:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know, Star Mississippi. Since my family and friends moved to texting, I rarely get personal emails and so don't check my Inbox regularly. But now I will! Liz Read! Talk! 00:15, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hah! I just said the same to a friend today. If you're not using my work email, please text me to tell me you've sent it otherwise I'll see it in a couple of weeks. There's just too much clutter and junk email. Enjoy your evening. Star Mississippi 00:21, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/Emmanuel Daniel
Hello, I’m a Wikipedia contributor who has done work on several Wikipedia pages, such as the one for Emmanuel Daniel, founder of The Asian Banker, which was recently deleted in favour of a Nigerian footballer of the same name. I've been looking into how to get the page back up again (with the appropriate disambiguation pages, of course, for the second Emmanuel Daniel). I missed the notification in May pertaining to the discussion for deletion, to my regret, as I believe the entry has merit. Mr Daniel founded The Asian Banker in 1996, and the organisation has become a significant contributor to the financial services industry in APAC through journalism, research and events. As a journalist, Mr Daniel has interviewed significant figures in global finance and politics, including Mark Mobius, Barnie Frank and Chuck Prince, as well as prominent central bankers and former heads of state, most of whom have their own Wikipedia pages.
In the “Articles for deletion/Emmanuel Daniel” project page, Mr Daniel is described as “non-notable” and “not much for sourcing” and “yet another influencer fluff piece". I believe these are unfair assessments. One comment, “I can’t find mentions of this individual” is puzzling, as a simple Google search will reveal a good online presence, most recently for his financial book The Great Transition, published on World Scientific press. You were so kind as to relist the discussion to "generate a more thorough and clearer consensus", I wish I'd joined in. Thank you very much for being fair-minded in light of the negativity. The main fault of the page is that it hasn't been maintained/updated. I guess these things happen.
I seek your advice about getting this page back on Wikipedia, and I believe there are two options: submit a request for un-deletion, or re-create the page and have it evaluated. Which course is more effective? I'd like to get the old page un-deleted, for its history, but it may not be the best course. I appreciate your thoughts, thanks. Citizenzen (talk) 02:20, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Citizenzen,
- I'm afraid that going to WP:REFUND will not be useful in this case, they will restore uncontroversial deletions, like Proposed deletions, articles that receive "Soft deletions" or expired drafts (CSD G13s). There are several different deletion processs on Wikipedia, it is confusing for newcomers and I wouldn't expect you to know any of this! But deleted pages can sometimes be easily restore or, on the other hand, next to impossible to restore. In your case, I would advise you to go to the admin who deleted the article (which you can see in the AFD page) and ask to have "the article restored to Draft space". Most admins will agree to do this but if you get a "No" come back here. While you are working on the draft, whatever you do, do not just move it back to main space because it will be deleted through speedy deletion, CSD G4, and then you are unlikely to get it restored a second time.
- The only way I know to overcome an AFD decision to delete an article is to create a draft article (or get the deleted article restored to Draft space) and then submit it for review to Article for Creation. These AFC reviewers want to see that the reasons why it was deleted in the first place do not still exist in the article. They can sometimes be hard to please but this is the only way I know of how one can get a deleted article back into the main space of the project.
- If you have questions about all of this or editing on Wikipedia, the Teahouse can be a very helpful place to go to get answers to your questions. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- A final thought:As you work on the draft, please make sure that it is not seen as "promotional" or advertising. This has a lot to do with the languages that you use like "well-known", "accomplished", "first in their class" and the like. That can result in a quick deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 02:34, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your great advice, Liz, and thanks for responding so quickly! This is super helpful and greatly appreciated. Yes, I always try to keep my language neutral and objective, so words like the ones you mentioned are not part of my contributions. I also seek outside sources so that there's a good balance. Based on what you advised, I've worked out which admin on the AFD page had the final word on deletion, so I'll approach that individual. I believe that this deletion may have taken place because the original page wasn't updated recently, so any new draft will contain recent and relevant updates. I want to do a good job, and live up to Wikipedia standards. Citizenzen (talk) 07:12, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, thanks again for your advice in this matter. I followed your steps, requested the article to be restored to draft, and the administrator restored it. I've reworked the piece quite extensively and I believe it meets Wikipedia's criteria and is ready to be submitted for review to Article for Creation - it is updated, referenced to third parties, and written in a neutral voice without promotional language. How do I do this? The only option I see is "Publish Changes". Will this then submit it for review to Article for Creation? Citizenzen (talk) 23:27, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- A final thought:As you work on the draft, please make sure that it is not seen as "promotional" or advertising. This has a lot to do with the languages that you use like "well-known", "accomplished", "first in their class" and the like. That can result in a quick deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 02:34, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Regarding 'Priya Devi Elangbam' article - Now deleted
Hi Liz, Greetings and thanks for the review of Priya article. As part of the Women in Red project, I have been creating pages for red links and also expanded articles for Indian woman medallists during Asian Games. I realised that All medallists at Asian Games pass notability criteria, as Asian Games is listed as a continental championship where top-8 are considered as notable as per the criteria in athletics and other games. Also of the five-member team, the same editor created pages for four others and they were reviewed and okayed. I also noticed that a lot of references and secondary, reliable sources are available, including from Manipur newspapers. So I am wondering, if the draft which exits can still be developed. Please advise... thanks and regards, david Davidindia (talk) 12:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello,
- Ordinarily in these situations, I would offer to restore Priya Devi Elangbam to Draft space but there is already a draft article, as you mention, that is very similar that was created around the same time. It's hard to know when an editor will spot an article that they believe doesn't satisfy notability guidelines and nominate it for a deletion discussion when very similar articles meet no resistance at all. But some sports seem to be targeted a lot, usually because they are not covered as much by reliable sports media as more high profile sports like football and cricket and sports like volleyball and badminton seems to be two of those sports.
- I checked out the sources on the draft and they just aren't adequate for a main space article. I couldn't get the .pdf to open and in the other two articles, Priya Devi Elangbam is just mentioned as being on the team which is what we call a "passing mention". Sources reviewers are looking for focus on the article subject, cover them in depth (like a profile) and aren't interviews where most of the content is supplied by the article subject. Unfortunately, in some countries and for people in some occupations, coverage like this is uncommon and in that case, drafts are not approved and articles are deleted.
- For the future, if you do get an article into main space and it is tagged for an AFD deletion discussion, it really all comes down to two factors: a) having an adequate amount of high quality sources of significant coverage that support claims of notability and b) having interested editors show up to an AFD discussion and support Keeping an article.
- I would never want to discourage a content creator from creating articles and drafts on subjects that aren't currently covered well on the project, it just means that you have to work harder to find SIGCOV for many of these athletes and try looking for sources in less typical places. Like, perhaps an athlete was covered before they made a team and when they were younger or, if they are a woman, perhaps they were profiled by a woman's magazine, not a national mainstream newspaper. It is a challenge though and I see plenty of articles on subjects who I think are interesting not get approved or get deleted because there is not adequate sourcing, right now, to retain these articles. But sometimes, it is simply TOOSOON so, depending on their career, they could get those profiles next year or the year after that. And if you ever have questions about an AFC reviewer declining a draft, you can ask them about it on their User talk page or go to the AFC Help Desk for an explanation. Good luck! 22:13, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
Lied
Wut?-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Deepfriedokra,
- Okay, maybe I shouldn't have used that word but if you look at the deleted draft, you'll see how this teenager claimed they had been on all of these magazine covers and walked the runways for fashion shows. I see wannabe teenage fashion models write exaggerated autobiographies like this about themselves every week, it's just unusual that I called this editor out on it. But if you think it is too harsh, I'll delete my comment or at least part of my comment that you believe is offensive.
- I'm usually a very patient editor but sometimes I see an over-the-top autobiography that just hits a button. Yesterday, I saw one, also by a teenager, which claimed they had won Grammy awards when they haven't ever put out an album. Or "best-selling authors" who self-published 14 page ebooks on Amazon, motivational speakers offering "life lessons" who are 14 years old. For some young editors, overstatement is quite common. Liz Read! Talk! 21:49, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
- I just thought you saw something I missed. I blocked him for self-promotion. But, yes. There's a lot of that sort of thing.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Reasonable verdict. Sent to AfD. To me it appears to be an org attempting to profiteer from the unpleasant conflict and which has fooled the creating editor. I had a 50:50 decision, draftify vs CSD. AfD is likely better than either. Time will tell. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 06:26, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Name a Game deletion
Hi. I saw that you deleted the Name a Game article a couple of days ago.
There are definitely quite a few news sources on it:
https://www.afl.com.au/news/54130/end-of-an-era-for-name-a-game-dvd-service
https://www.triplem.com.au/story/the-name-a-game-dvd-service-is-wrapping-up-at-the-end-of-june-95905
https://www.footyalmanac.com.au/vale-name-a-game/
The service, though defunct, is an important historical aspect of cataloguing the game, and it has transitioned into a limited capacity into https://www.afl.com.au/matches/match-videos?comp=1
I think the page should be reinstated or put to a vote. Electricmaster (talk) 02:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Electricmaster,
- Can you provide me a link to the deleted page? Because Name a Game isn't it. I need to see why it was deleted before I can respond to your request. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Name A Game Electricmaster (talk) 06:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Electricmaster: As an expired PROD, you can request restoration of this article at WP:RFU. I expect that it would be formally nominated for a deletion discussion if restored, but you would have some time to improve it. Cheers! BD2412 T 06:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Name A Game Electricmaster (talk) 06:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Diaspora (video game)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Diaspora (video game). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Mikesc86 (talk) 10:02, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Growth team newsletter #28
Welcome to the twenty-eighth newsletter from the Growth team! Help with translations
Community configuration 2.0
- Community Configuration 2.0 is a feature that will enable Wikimedia communities to easily customize and configure features to meet their unique needs. This approach provides non-technical moderators with more independence and control over enabling/disabling and customizing features for their communities.
- Technical approach and associated tasks are detailed in this Epic task on Phabricator.
- Initial designs are drafted for two different approaches (see images). We will soon demo interactive prototypes to interested admins, stewards, and experienced editors (T346109). Please let us know if you have feedback on the design approach, or want to participate in prototype testing.
IP Masking
- The Growth team has been working on several updates to ensure Growth maintained features will be compatible with future IP Masking changes. This work has included code changes to: Recent Changes (T343322), Echo notifications (T333531), the Thanks extension (T345679) and Mentorship (T341390).
- Before December, the Growth team will initiate community discussions with the goal of migrating communities from Flow to DiscussionTools. This move aims to minimize the necessity for additional engineering work to make Flow compatible with IP Masking. (T346108)
Mentorship
- We assembled some resources for mentors at Mediawiki wiki. This resource page is translatable and will be linked from the mentor dashboard.
- We are working to resolve a bug related to mentors properly returning after being marked as "Away". (T347024)
- Half of newcomers at English Wikipedia get a mentor assigned to them. To ensure every newcomer receives mentorship, we need additional volunteer mentors at English Wikipedia to achieve a 100% coverage rate. We also encourage experienced users from other wikis to help newcomers at their own community.
Scaling Growth features
- We continue the deployment of the structured task "add a link" to all Wikipedias. We plan to scale the task to all Wikipedias that have link suggestions available by the end of 2023.
- We plan to scale the new Impact Module to all Wikipedias soon, but first we are investigating a bug with the job that refreshes the Impact Module data. (T344428)
- At some wikis, newcomers have access to the "add an image" structured task. This task suggests images that may be relevant to add to unillustrated articles. Newcomers at these wikis can now add images to unillustrated articles sections. (T345940) The wikis that have this task are listed under "Images recommendations" at the Growth team deployment table.
Other news
- We disabled the “add an image” task temporarily (T345188) because there was a failure in the image suggestions pipeline (T345141). This is now fixed.
- You can read a report about the Growth team’s representation at Wikimania in Singapore here. Growth team members presented two sessions at Wikimania Singapore.
- After a 2.5 years-long collaboration with Bangala Wikipedia, we have decided to start a collaboration with another wiki. Swahili Wikipedia is now a pilot wiki for Growth experiments.
Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
Trizek_(WMF) Talk 23:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
Please undelete and relist
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Głusza, Wałcz County. I just posted there with a comment noting I've started a deletion discussion on pl wiki and asked for more time to review arguments made there. That was two hours ago, now I was going to change my comment to weak keep, but you deleted this without addressing my comment. Would you mind going back and relisting this? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:16, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Piotrus,
- I saw your comment. But how long is a discussion on a different Wikipedia supposed to delay the closure of this AFD? One week? Two weeks? Do we wait until that discussion is closed before we can take action in this discussion? Liz Read! Talk! 06:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Liz A week seems like a good rule of thumb. In some cases I try to get a discussion on pl wiki to see if something can be found there or argued by experts. I try to note this in relevant discussions. Recently we got a bunch of geograophical nominations, I am not very familiar with this, an editor I pinged did not reply, so I just got around to reporting this to pl wiki's AfD forum. If we can wait a few days to see if anything useful emerges from that, it would be good. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:57, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Just checking if you'll consider my request? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz. I was wondering why you added the category to this page? That category would usually be applied by a template, but the WikiProject has decided to stop using that class in their assessment scheme, so I am trying to empty the category — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:46, 18 October 2023 (UTC) Hello, MSGJ,
- We have tens of thousands of empty assessment categories from WikiProjects. We do not ordinarily delete them as empty categories unless a WikiProject goes inactive or, more likely, defunct and then all of the assessment categories empty out. So, I can not figure on what basis you are removing the Empty Category tag ("Do not delete even if this category is empty") on some of them so that they get tagged for CSD C1 speedy deletion. What is your selection process? Why do, for example, some empty SIA WikiProject categories have their Empty Category tag removed while others do not? Are you basing this on the specific WikiProject? Do you have some way of knowing that these categories will always be empty? I just want to understand your thinking process so that your decisions on these categories is understandable to me because right now it isn't.
- Another example, I added Category:SIA-Class Weather articles to some categories because if you use the tool that shows what pages have been added or removed from categories, there are lots of pages that have been added to that category (through tags) that don't show up in that category for some reason. So, I added the category manually because the indication is that pages like Talk:List of storms named Graham should be in that category but they aren't shown as being in the category. Then, you remove all of these categories that I added even though they state that they are Set Index Articles. I don't understand. Thank you, in advance, for any explanations you can provide. Liz Read! Talk! 17:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- I removed {{empty cat}} from Category:SIA-Class Weather articles because I had already adjusted Template:WikiProject Weather so this category would no longer be populated. This was after a discussion with the weather project, when they decided that List-class would be okay for these pages. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:59, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- On the wider issue, yes there are hundreds of categories with empty cat which are no longer used, but I can't see an easy way to know if they are still being used or not. The only method would be looking at the templates code, which would be very time-consuming. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:02, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Request
Hello Liz , hope you are well. I self requested this article for deletion even though it was successfully reviewed. I would like it to be undeleted so that I could continue working on it (improve it) as I found lots of references online. I could use WP:REFUND, but since I am the only author who created it and requested for deletion later, I thought of contacting you since you were the sysop who deleted it. However, if this is not reversible then I will understand. All the best. Thanks :) -- Tumbuka Arch (talk) 18:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
Category:14th-century Norwegian people by occupation has been nominated for merging
Category:14th-century Norwegian people by occupation has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 23:20, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
SPI
FYI, you gave a notice to this user on the 8th to which they failed to respond. You listed an account they may be coordinating with off-Wiki and was hoping you could share those insights at the SPI. Cheers! CNMall41 (talk) 03:23, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, CNMall41,
- I left a note on this SPI earlier today. Thanks for alerting me. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Green Gully Reserve
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Green Gully Reserve. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Sorry Liz, but I feel strongly this still needs sorting out. Hope you understand, regards Govvy (talk) 09:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Govvy,
- It seems like this discussion is more about the RFD that followed this AFD than about my AFD closure. I have left a reply at the deletion review. I appreciate you informing me about it. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
- All I wanted in the end was to redirect to Keilor Downs, Victoria, I thought I made that pretty clear, I don't understand why one would redirect a massive entire park to a football club article!! Seems totally illogical. That to me is like redirecting the Lake District to Liverpool F.C. or redirecting Central Park to New York Yankees!!! :/ Govvy (talk) 11:09, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Your message
I refer to the message you placed on my talk page.
I answer to your "question", it ought to be obvious to you that I have no personal connection whatsoever to Jolly. I (and several other editors, including Dormskirk, PamD, TheBirdsShedTears, Das osmnezz and Atchom) reacted to two related indiscrimate mass draftifications of articles (including at least twelve obviously notable articles by Jolly that satisfy GNG, criteria 1 and 3 of ANYBIO, AUTHOR and POLITICIAN; and also a number of obviously notable articles by Atchom; and possibly articles by a few other editors). It is entirely usual for editors to oppose any indiscrimate mass draftification of obviously notable topics on the kind of scale that was performed.
I became aware of the draftification spree by Pilaz because I normally edit topics related to Who's Who, and the draftification spree by Pilaz was a campaign to delete articles that were originally referenced to Who's Who. I then became aware of the draftification spree by Smuckola when I looked at Jolly's talk page while I was investigating the mass draftification of obviously notable people who were Principal Private Secretary to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in Who's Who by Pilaz. To cut a long story short, nine of the Smuckola draftifications that I found, and a further 17 pages that were pushed back into the mainspace by five other editors (namely Dormskirk, PamD, TheBirdsShedTears, Das osmnezz and Atchom) [5], were so obviously erroneous that it was obvious that the whole lot need to have a WP:BEFORE search done by someone other than Smuckola.
Please do not put a personal attack of that kind on my talk page ever again, as it is offensive. You might as well say something like "righteous deletionists have a holy right to go on indiscriminate deletion sprees of obviously notable articles, and any evil inclusionist who systematically opposes a particular deletion spree must be a sockpuppet or meatpuppet, because all inclusionists are bad faith trolls". Because that is how your comment actually comes across. (For the avoidance of doubt, I do not support the use of the labels "deletionist" and "inclusionist").James500 (talk) 22:11, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, James500,
- I have tasks that I take care of on Wikipedia at different times of the day. So, please give me a little time to digest the 11-edit message you left for me. I'm sorry if I offended you, but initially it seemed like peculiar behavior on your part to work so hard to delay deletion of an unrelated editor's drafts. I'll be back to digest your entire message and give you a proper response later tonight. Again, I didn't see my message as a personal attack, just a query asking about your relationship to the other editor. I leave messages like this on User talk pages quite often and so far haven't found them to be taken as attacks, they are just an admin's inquiry when they see something out of the ordinary. I'll be back to reply in full later, just wanted to let you know that I saw your messages. Liz Read! Talk! 01:00, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, James500,
- I have read and understood the message you posted here which provides a very full explanation of your actions (and that of other editors). I agree that inappropriate draftification can be a problem with some overly eager editors and I've posted many a User talk page message to some editors outlining the limited circumstances when draftification is an appropriate solution to an undersourced article. I'm sorry that you took my query as an attack, I was just trying to understand what was going on and you have provided a very thorough answer so thank you. I don't expect to come to your User talk page with another question like this one. Sorry for any unnecessary stress this put you under but I'm glad it led to this exchange which answered my question. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 07:16, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Question regarding CSD
Hello Liz, I see you have recently reverted my edit regarding CSD saying I should choose the options on Twinkle and not state my own reasons, if there's nothing I can find to explain my reason isn't that why there's a costume rationale option? I stand to be corrected and learn Thank you. dxneo (talk) 02:42, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, User:dxneo,
- The criteria for speedy deletion are intentionally very limited. Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion is one of the most used policy talk pages and has 86 pages of talk page archives as the limits of different criteria are debated and new criteria proposed. There are even several criteria that used to exist but that have now been "retired". So, if circumstances don't fit a criteria and you really belive the article/page is unsuitable, they seek another deletion process, like WP:PROD or WP:AFD or WP:RFD. But sometimes, you come across a page that you really think is inappropriate and there is no way to deal with it aside from a deletion discussion. And if that discussion closes as Keep, then you have to live with the fact that there is an article you really think doesn't belong on the project that does. I know of several articles I think should be deleted but the consensus is against my opinion so you just learn to live with it.
- If you have questions about a specific article/page, you can always bring it to the attention of an experienced editor or administrator or even the Teahouse and get a second opinion. But, especially with CSD, you can't blaze your own trails, you have to use an agreed upon criteria. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 02:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- So in this case the CSD tag on L’A Capone is inadequate and the article should go through XfD/PROD? Where I have to look at WP:BEFORE and WP:NEXIST. dxneo (talk) 03:06, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, User:dxneo,
- The problem is that you are presenting an argument that is more appropriate with a PROD or at an AFD. CSD tags are just intended to identify which CSD criteria applies, Twinkle includes a field for "Custom reason" but it's not a good idea to use that field. Providing your own reason why an article should be deleted increases the chances that an admin reviewing it will reject your deletion rationale and it's also likely to go down the bottom of the pile of tagged articles that need to be reviewed. Admins patrolling CSD categories know what a G11 or a G4 or a U5 look like so they can review those tagged pages quickly and decide, "Yes, this is a correct tagging and the article needs to be deleted" or "No, this article is incorrectly tagged". Writing a long explanation requires more time on an admin's part so the tendency is to pass on acting on those pages and letting someone else make the decision. So, this article with such a long explanation is likely to hang on for hours or maybe even days before an admin decides to spend the time to assess it.
- If you are interested in new article patrolling to be a part of your editing on the project, then your taggings have to be consistent and accurate and then admins will see that you have tagged them and their respect for your abilities will be a part of their assessment process. I just want to say that the CSD criteria are tricky and complicated, I know editors who've been editing for decades who still misunderstand a few of them. So all of this discussion right here is part of you learning how to handle doing this, no one instinctively understands CSD criteria. So, I don't mean to discourage you just read over WP:CSD thoroughly and practice, practice, practice. In fact, look over the CSD categories and see other articles that have been tagged, for what criterias and see how other editors judge to be a solid G11 or A7. Learn from more experienced editors. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 03:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- So in this case the CSD tag on L’A Capone is inadequate and the article should go through XfD/PROD? Where I have to look at WP:BEFORE and WP:NEXIST. dxneo (talk) 03:06, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
Greetings Liz,
Hope you are doing well. I think something sneaky is happening with reference to Akoto Ampaw. I have moved it to draft space due to notability issue. Then original creator again paste the content to main space. I later nominated it for quick deletion as A7. Another editor giving the false edit summary of clean up removed the quick deletion template twice. Requesting your attention here. Sorry for not providing diffs as it is not visible to non administrators. Maliner (talk) 04:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Maliner,
- It looks like your tag was removed when the copyright violations were revision deleted. However, an admin, Nthep, did look at this page and didn't judge it to be suitable for deletion. You could try tagging it again or taking it directly to AFD, it depends on how vigorously you want to pursue this. As for copy and pasting a draft back into main space, I look over the Draftification list every day and it happens more often than any of us would like. I did post a notice on the article creator's User talk page telling them not to do this again. Liz Read! Talk! 04:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- The tag was removed by Jkaharper twice by giving false edit summaries. Maliner (talk) 05:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- At 14:14 and 14:30. Unable to provide the diffs. Maliner (talk) 05:02, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- The tag was removed by Jkaharper twice by giving false edit summaries. Maliner (talk) 05:01, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
Should I relist?
Hey, the first and last time I started relisting some AfD discussions, you've notified me that I had done it too early. I've noticed that this AfD discussion has not been relisted for 17 days. I've already voted, but is it appropriate if I relist it now, since the one-week period has already passed, and this discussion is probably lost in the list of old discussions so that no one will see it? Aintabli (talk) 23:17, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @Aintabli I've just happened onto this AfD as well. It was not listed at all, as it seems like it was not transcluded properly in the first place, but given it's a G5 in my opinion it's more or less a moot point and can be resolved at the discretion of any individual administrator, so I have tagged it as such. Alpha3031 (t • c) 05:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Randan
I don't believe Randan should have been converted to a soft redirect to wikt when there are other articles that might be titled "Randan", and a disambiguation page at Randan (disambiguation). I have converted Randan to a disambiguation page with a wikt link, and converted Randan (disambiguation) to a WP:INTDAB link. I thought you'd like to know. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:14, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Mass stabbing redirects
Hi Liz, I noticed you reverted this creation of a redirect: [6] The same editor has redirected many standalone stabbing articles to List of mass stabbing incidents (2020–present). I see these as also being problematic, as there has been no discussion or consensus. Do you agree? Thanks, WWGB (talk) 05:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, WWGB,
- I'm not sure where this discussion should be held except for on their User talk page. I'm not the only editor who has reverted their blanking of pages and redirecting those articles, I've come across at least two other editors who have reverted these redirects with other articles. Although I'm not sure I could track down who they were at this moment. I only stumbled upon these because they emptied out categories which were then tagged for CSD C1 speedy deletion. I think this actually might have been the impetus for creating these redirects as all of these categories just had one article in them. For some editors, that's a nudge to recategorize or remove categories from an article because it's a small category that isn't being fully used and it can then be tagged for speedy deletion as an empty category. Liz Read! Talk! 06:07, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 October 2023
- News and notes: Where have all the administrators gone?
- In the media: Thirst traps, the fastest loading sites on the web, and the original collaborative writing
- Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to know how to restore images to make massive improvements
- Featured content: Yo, ho! Blow the man down!
- Traffic report: The calm and the storm
- News from Diff: Sawtpedia: Giving a Voice to Wikipedia Using QR Codes
Deletion request
Hello Liz, thank you for fulfilling my CSD G7 request for my old userpage User:SanemAyhan07. Could you please also delete the associated user talk page User talk:SanemAyhan07? 𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 12:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, DreamRimmer,
- Done However, if anyone goes to that page, they can see that there was a username change. But there is no more direct link to your current User talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 21:16, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
G13 category
As one of the admins that processes G13s, you may be interested in efforts to fix the G13 category: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/SDZeroBot 12. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:42, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Novem Linguae,
- Yes, there are only 3 or 4 of us who handle CSD G13s so thanks for letting me know. I'll look into this. Liz Read! Talk! 21:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
London International Awards - Deletion
Hi Liz, thanks for everything you do to look after Wikipedia. Hope you had a nice start to the week.
I saw you were the editor to recently close the discussion on the page for London International Awards (10/12). The page has been live on Wikipedia for over a decade, and it went through a relatively quick deletion process for a page that was live for so long. I scoured the internet for as many updated worthwhile sources I could find based on other editors' feedback, only to have the matter closed within a day of my numerous edits.
Are you able to provide any feedback on how I can best argue for its reinstatement? I read through the 'Why was the page I created deleted?' page and understand I am able to make an undeletion request to retrieve its text. I am not sure if a deletion review is the appropriate next step, or if it is better I first conduct further discussion with you. Please let me know if I can provide any other info.
Thank you in advance for your help. Chilled Bean (talk) 00:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Chilled Bean,
- The only way I know to overcome an AFD "Delete" decision is to work on a new draft version, submit it to Articles for Creation for review and, hopefully, approval. But if I restore this article to Draft space and you move it back to main space, it will be deleted via speedy deletion, CSD G4 and if this happens, it will be much more difficult to ever restore this article again. Let me know if you want to spend the time working on a draft version and through AFC. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, thank you for the quick reply! I went through AFC back in June 2013 and received an initial Start-Class assessment on the article. I only mention that to illustrate that time was spent to put together and review the page and ensure it went through the proper approval process. It was added to over time, but I suppose those edits either didn't improve the article or were detrimental. I would like to please restore within the draft space and resubmit through AFC, it sounds like that's the best path forward. I won't move it back to the main space. Thank you again! Chilled Bean (talk) 00:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Chilled Bean,
- You mean this article, the one that was nominated for deletion, had already passed an AFC review? It's tough to get approval from AFC so I'm surprised that it ended up at an AFD. It doesn't influence whether or not I restore it, I'm just surprised. Liz Read! Talk! 02:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Liz it was, by now inactive editor. AfC yes really just means it has a chance to survive AfD, not that it definitively well. @Chilled Bean, I think what you've run into here is consensus changing, which happens. I suggest Liz's proposal of working on it in draft space to show how it should meet Notability. Star Mississippi 00:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, I'm sorry for my delayed reply. Thank you for the feedback, @Star Mississippi.
- @Liz, would you be able to please restore the London International Awards article to my draft space? Then I will go over and submit for review. Apologies if I am missing anything, as this is my first time going through this process. Thank you for your help. Chilled Bean (talk) 00:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Chilled Bean, could you give me a link to the deleted page? I look at hundreds, maybe thousands of pages a day so a direct link would speed things along. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Liz it's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London International Awards and London International Awards. Star Mississippi 01:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Star Mississippi. Chilled Bean, you can find the article at User:Chilled Bean/London International Awards. Please do not move it back to main space or it could be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4. Work on improving it, addressing problems brought up in the AFD and then submit it to WP:AFC. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you both! I will let you know if I have any questions. Hope you have a nice rest of your weekends. Chilled Bean (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Star Mississippi. Chilled Bean, you can find the article at User:Chilled Bean/London International Awards. Please do not move it back to main space or it could be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4. Work on improving it, addressing problems brought up in the AFD and then submit it to WP:AFC. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Liz it's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London International Awards and London International Awards. Star Mississippi 01:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Chilled Bean, could you give me a link to the deleted page? I look at hundreds, maybe thousands of pages a day so a direct link would speed things along. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- @Liz it was, by now inactive editor. AfC yes really just means it has a chance to survive AfD, not that it definitively well. @Chilled Bean, I think what you've run into here is consensus changing, which happens. I suggest Liz's proposal of working on it in draft space to show how it should meet Notability. Star Mississippi 00:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, thank you for the quick reply! I went through AFC back in June 2013 and received an initial Start-Class assessment on the article. I only mention that to illustrate that time was spent to put together and review the page and ensure it went through the proper approval process. It was added to over time, but I suppose those edits either didn't improve the article or were detrimental. I would like to please restore within the draft space and resubmit through AFC, it sounds like that's the best path forward. I won't move it back to the main space. Thank you again! Chilled Bean (talk) 00:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz. I guess you didn't realize it, but the template:Copyvio/core specifically asks users to create a temporary subpage using this format. Such pages should not be deleted or moved to draftspace. Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 12:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Diannaa,
- I don't know how commonly this is done because every day I check for orphaned talk pages and I never came across a page like this before (marked "Temp") in all of my years of deleting orphaned talk pages. I move to Draft space any ones that look like they might be articles. But usually, they are joke pages or autobiographies by editors who are not auto-confirmed or test edits. And I see that you deleted this page a few hours after I did. So, I appreciate you telling me about how copyright violations are handled. I guess if I run across any talk pages like this one in the fugure, I can post a G8-exempt template on the page. Liz Read! Talk! 01:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking into this. The G8-exempt template is a good idea for sure. — Diannaa (talk) 01:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Donvale Christian college
Hi Liz, I recreated donvale christian college with new sources that were not present at previous deletion discussions. I don’t think a G4 was appropriate Jack4576 (talk) 16:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jack4576,
- Can you provide me a link to the deleted article you are talking about? Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Liz, it was Donvale Christian College Jack4576 (talk) 11:29, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Newcleo
Hi Liz, normally I do not have a problem but I do not understand how this can be a redirect after I responded to HighKing's analysis and was pending their response. You also said in the last relist that keep or no consensus was the most probable outcome, I do not see HighKing's analysis changing that. Is there a way to leave it open for a while longer for more discussion or close it as no consensus with an immediate renomination? - Indefensible (talk) 03:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Indefensible,
- Let me ponder this and see if talk page stalkers have any opinion on this. I already get flak for relisting discussions three times (many editors believe there should not be more than 2 relistings) so I'm unsure about a 4th relisting. I think I would hear complaints about that. I'll just say that these kind of AFD analyses on companies is HighKing's specialty right now and he is highly respected. But he is very strict in his interpretation of independent significant coverage. But let's give it some time and see if anyone else contributes to this conversation. Give me a few hours before opening up a case on Deletion review. Liz Read! Talk! 03:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. I believe that I rebutted HighKing's analysis, specifically for the reference from Le Monde. What I mean is not a 4th relist but a close with no consensus per the earlier discussion you commented on, and followed by another nomination for additional discussion if needed (I believe there may be some examples of this, i.e. renomination without prejudice). - Indefensible (talk) 03:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) As an uninvolved admin, I endorse the close of this discussion as correct. HighKing's source analysis was solid, and there is no deprivation of information if the redirect target is supplemented with the few lines of usable content that can be properly derived from these sources. Noteworthiness for mention in a broader article is a substantially lower bar than notability for a freestanding article. BD2412 T 04:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Just to confirm, did you actually review all of the sources yourself? Per my reply, if you look at the references from Le Monde and BNN for example, I think HighKing mischaracterized the articles which invalidates the position. These are not simply "regurgitations" of company PR. Furthermore if the discussion had been cut off at the 2nd or 3rd relist, it would simply have been a keep or no consensus at worse based on Liz's comment. With the outstanding reply and discussion, I think it should at least get the chance for more discussion with a renomination. - Indefensible (talk) 04:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I reviewed enough of the sources to have confidence in HighKing's efforts. One need not eat the whole apple. In any event there is absolutely nothing stopping you (or any editor) from a) adding some of this content to the redirect target, and/or b) starting a new draft and looking to build a new article with new sources for submission via WP:AFC. I expect that the latter would be a more fruitful effort than disputing an entirely defensible close. BD2412 T 04:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- How do you reply to what I wrote about the article from Le Monde then? - Indefensible (talk) 04:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't come here to relitigate the discussion. I would reiterate that starting a new draft would be a better use of time and effort than engaging in such relitigation. BD2412 T 04:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- This is handwaving to be honest, saying that HighKing was correct without actually looking at the rebuttal and leaving it without any reply is a double standard. Also I disagree, leaving the article under no consensus was the easiest and least work for everyone, as it should have been at the 2nd and 3rd relists. Rebuilding the article would be unnecessary and extra work. - Indefensible (talk) 04:30, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I didn't come here to relitigate the discussion. I would reiterate that starting a new draft would be a better use of time and effort than engaging in such relitigation. BD2412 T 04:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- How do you reply to what I wrote about the article from Le Monde then? - Indefensible (talk) 04:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I reviewed enough of the sources to have confidence in HighKing's efforts. One need not eat the whole apple. In any event there is absolutely nothing stopping you (or any editor) from a) adding some of this content to the redirect target, and/or b) starting a new draft and looking to build a new article with new sources for submission via WP:AFC. I expect that the latter would be a more fruitful effort than disputing an entirely defensible close. BD2412 T 04:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Just to confirm, did you actually review all of the sources yourself? Per my reply, if you look at the references from Le Monde and BNN for example, I think HighKing mischaracterized the articles which invalidates the position. These are not simply "regurgitations" of company PR. Furthermore if the discussion had been cut off at the 2nd or 3rd relist, it would simply have been a keep or no consensus at worse based on Liz's comment. With the outstanding reply and discussion, I think it should at least get the chance for more discussion with a renomination. - Indefensible (talk) 04:08, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Uninvolved-ish (I did relist it once, but gave no opinion on merit). @Indefensible, rebuilding the article isn't any work, the history is under the redirect. If you want to improve it, I'm sure someone would be willing to draft it for future potential spinoff Star Mississippi 00:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- It would probably not pass AFC based on this AFD unless someone actually looks at my rebuttal and decides the refs and content were actually meeting requirements. There would need to be some changes just for the process, which is extra work. - Indefensible (talk) 01:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Arriving at consensus is extra work. Editing to others' standards is extra work. Collaborating is extra work. But that's what makes Wikipedia work. In the long run, it will make the article better than it would have been. Welcome to the club. ;) — The Transhumanist 07:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- There should have been no consensus to delete if you look at the AFD in my opinion, especially after my reply was left unanswered by the close. In any case, I do not have any COI or really care at this point to be honest. - Indefensible (talk) 17:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Indefensible: I looked at the situation, and saw a single human edit (one editing session) to the article after it was nominated for deletion, over a period of one month. By comparison, a lot more work was put into the AfD discussion itself, and into post-AfD discussion on this user talk page. I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the focus had been on rescuing the article instead. Yet, the article is still there, behind a redirect, still subject to being rescued. Coming from AfD, that's a win!
The path of least resistance at this point is to fix the article, as new sources become available. Do you have anything against article rescue activity? (The edit histories show you haven't edited the article, nor contacted the article rescue squadron, but, have only written in deletion discussions about it.) Just curious.
That being said, what would you say to just deleting articles en masse without having them go through AfD at all? That's exactly what is being proposed at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Unreferenced_articles. It is essentially a proposal to delete 100,000+ unreferenced articles, without lifting a finger to try and fix them, taking AfD out of the loop. No doubt someone will be using a bot or semi-automated tool like WP:AWB to facilitate the process. Now, that's scary. — The Transhumanist 23:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)- Any changes would still have to clear AFD, otherwise such improvements are wasted effort. More direct to gain consensus not to delete and then any new content which is missing can be added in my opinion, although I can see others trying to pass WP:HEY instead. And furthermore a number of AFD reviewers with deletionist tendencies also screen the AFC list which is gatekeeping to a degree, but I am not looking to overthrow how the whole process works.
- No, of course I do not think articles should just be deleted en masse without AFD review. - Indefensible (talk) 23:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Indefensible: I looked at the situation, and saw a single human edit (one editing session) to the article after it was nominated for deletion, over a period of one month. By comparison, a lot more work was put into the AfD discussion itself, and into post-AfD discussion on this user talk page. I can't help but wonder what would have happened if the focus had been on rescuing the article instead. Yet, the article is still there, behind a redirect, still subject to being rescued. Coming from AfD, that's a win!
- There should have been no consensus to delete if you look at the AFD in my opinion, especially after my reply was left unanswered by the close. In any case, I do not have any COI or really care at this point to be honest. - Indefensible (talk) 17:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Arriving at consensus is extra work. Editing to others' standards is extra work. Collaborating is extra work. But that's what makes Wikipedia work. In the long run, it will make the article better than it would have been. Welcome to the club. ;) — The Transhumanist 07:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi! Query here not of your close, but of whether you recall an AfD recently which had a transclusion that needed to be enacted. Looking for it as a model for a solution, but can't find it. No worries if you can't either, I know you act on so many XfDs daily and thanks either way! Star Mississippi 00:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Star Mississippi,
- I could have sworn that I closed an AFD about one of these articles about casualties. I remember it because there were dozens of redirects that had accumulated over the years for the article that had been nominated and then deleted. But going through the comment at Seraphimblade's page, I don't see a link to an AFD that I closed. I will do a little homework to see if I can trap it down. If an article is transcluded improperly, I would just remove that transclusion from the article. Often it is just {{article name}} that has to be deleted. I'll think more about this but I tend to pass on closures where the consensus is very complicated, like turning articles into disambiguation pages. I know my limits. Liz Read! Talk! 00:38, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Same re: limits, that's why I noped out of that close. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truist was as much as I can manage, technically.
- No worries and thanks anyway. Have a good evening! Star Mississippi 00:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Star Mississippi,
- Oh, I remember that AFD! Thank you for taking it on. The suggestion of what to do with that article actually got simpler at the end of the discussion than it was in the middle but it still seemed to me like, "Move X to Y, turn Y's page into a Redirect and merge it all of the old content into Z". I think participating editors overestimate what our closure tools can accomplish. It's also hard to get a consensus on some of these more complicated suggestions, maybe because they are hard to follow. The funny thing is that some of these suggestions are actually much easier for editors to take care of outside the confines of an AFD before an AFD begins than at the end of an AFD discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 00:56, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm so grateful to @BegbertBiggs who just fixed the last of it which was way beyond my technical skills and I think used two scripts.
- There was another one recently where not only was there no consensus between merge or redirect, but it was split re: targets. We're admins, not wizards. Have a great day! Star Mississippi 13:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Liz. Just flagging that I mentioned you & @Jay at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2023_October_27. It's not your close and this is a "good" DRV in that we all want a long term solution, but wanted to be sure you were aware in case you wanted to weigh in. Star Mississippi 17:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Mesen (emulator)
Hi I don't know why you removed my draft page Draft:Mesen (emulator) blazingly fast even that it's a draft, I wonder what makes it so promotional, I will remain silent since there is nothing I can do, whatever I write however I write somebody comes and stops me, and they spams me with a lot and a lot and a lot of pages to read and rules that makes me think that I am a criminal (I seriously started believing in this). But I think this is it, it's the end, I will never write again in wikipedia en. KaderRocket (talk) 01:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, KaderRocket,
- Well, there isn't "nothing" you can do, you came here to ask me about the page deletion. The draft was tagged for deletion by User:Cryptic, who is another administrator. In the past, they also deleted the version of this article in main space with a deletion rationale that the article was promotional. I deleted the draft because Cryptic is a very experienced editor and I trust their judgment. If you want to pursue this, you might ask them what you could do to avoid the promotional aspects that the draft has since they seem to be knowledgeable about the subject.
- You are not a criminal, you just ran afoul of Wikipedia guidelines. I see pages tagged as promotional every single day so you were definitely not singled out. I hope you don't quit participating in this project but that's up to you.
- If you have questions about the deletion processes on Wikipedia or other editing issues, you'll find help at the Teahouse. The hosts there really helped me out when I was a newer editor. Good luck. Liz Read! Talk! 01:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'd have hoped you deleted it because you also found it unacceptably promotional, even in draftspace, not just because it was me that tagged it. Otherwise, I might as well have just deleted it again myself instead.KaderRocket: I had begun writing something here about the problems with the draft and with the article before it, and why your comparison to FCEUX on Talk:Mesen (Emulator) (other admins: this revision now at Draft talk:Mesen (emulator)) was, while perhaps understandable, logically fallacious, until I saw your repeated retributive taggings of that article. That's a rotten way to convince people that you're worth the time and trouble of helping out. —Cryptic 02:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Cryptic,
- Well, yes, of course, I reviewed it, too, before the draft was deleted. But since you had spotted problems in both the Draft and main space versions and seem to know something about the topic, I thought you might have some helpful advice. I apologize if you found my ping unnecessary. Liz Read! Talk! 03:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I asked them many times what I am I promoting, nobody answered, because it's not promotional, Mesen Emulator is an open source non profit in anyways software why would anyone promote it ?
- I did the move on FCEUX to explain (to those who don't know a damn thing about emulators) that I did write about Mesen in the same way FCEUX did (OR BETTER), since I even used the same template to fill the basic information about Mesen.
- I don't know why would you delete the page based on a trust you built with another so called admin, cryptic knows 0% about the emulation field and I here challenge him on every aspect whether on Emulation field or to find what am I promoting, I did write about Mesen from all my heart with a neutral point of view, if something is good then it's GOOD, what do you want me to NOT promote Mesen to say that it's a bad emulator ?
- Yes you and especially Cryptic are treating me like a criminal, look at the way he is replying treating me of using a rotten way and repeated whatever tagging is talking about fallacious and that he was about to delete it himself if you didn't and that I am not worth the time.
- In the end, All I did is that I tried to write about Mesen emulator because it deserves a lot, I was not promoting, I was writing from all my experience with the emulation field, it was even a draft to some point because I planned to write a big article about it, but the problem is you people who are stopping me based on NOTHING, yes nothing because none of you understood the article and none of you helped in anyway possible.
- I am sorry, All I did is trying to write something from the bottom of my heart doing it as I was doing it since 2007 were wikipedia was a place for everyone to contribute, and I assure you I never broke a wiki guideline.
- good luck. KaderRocket (talk) 11:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'd have hoped you deleted it because you also found it unacceptably promotional, even in draftspace, not just because it was me that tagged it. Otherwise, I might as well have just deleted it again myself instead.KaderRocket: I had begun writing something here about the problems with the draft and with the article before it, and why your comparison to FCEUX on Talk:Mesen (Emulator) (other admins: this revision now at Draft talk:Mesen (emulator)) was, while perhaps understandable, logically fallacious, until I saw your repeated retributive taggings of that article. That's a rotten way to convince people that you're worth the time and trouble of helping out. —Cryptic 02:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Immigrants to the Kingdom of Prussia
This category is no longer empty. Since 1 of the two editors who previously supported merger is no longer supporting merger, I think there is no consensus to remove it. So I am pretty sure adding to the category will not be seen as disruptive at this point.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:27, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, John Pack Lambert,
- Sorry for my delay in responding. If you are talking about Category:Immigrants to the Kingdom of Prussia, that was deleted through a CFD discussion, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1#Category:Immigrants to the Kingdom of Prussia by User:JJMC89 bot III. So, I'm not sure how I'm involved. You'll need to refresh my memory if this issue is still concerned. The problem I see with CFDs is that unlike AFDs, it's hard to recreate categories that have been deleted through CFD discussions without them being tagged for CSD G4 deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 00:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Ping didn't work
Hello Liz, i replied to your message on my talk page, but apparently the ping didn't work. ◅ Sebastian Helm 🗨 12:43, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I responded a few days ago on your talk page but I'll see if you responded to my comment. Liz Read! Talk! 00:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Undeletion of Elliot Omose
Top of the day! Permit my indulgence on drawing your attention on the page Elliot Omose. It was place on AFD on the basis that some of the lines were not well sourced. The article was edited and more than 7 secondary sources which are very reliable was added. The page also meet the notability standard. However it was further deleted without the observation of these sources that are very independent. I am interested in reviewing the page ma'am, kindly look into this and restore so that i can properly edit it. Thank you. Randiajifo (talk) 11:50, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Randiajifo,
- Sorry for the delay in responding. First, before restoration is considered, who is "we" in "we added". Are you representing an organization? Do you have a conflict-of-interest regarding this subject? Liz Read! Talk! 00:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Liz,
- Sorry for the delay response as well. The "'we'' is a typo error, I meant ''was'' please. And I do not represent any organisation. I call your attention, because it is necessary. hank you. Randiajifo (talk) 14:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Outdated "Canadian expatriate hockey players in ..."
Hi Liz - Consensus among WikiProject Ice Hockey editors is that "Canadian expatriate hockey players in (foo)" categories are useless and should be removed if the player has moved on from whatever country the category is for. Please see the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive82#Question_about_expatriate_players and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey/Archive81#Connor_McDavid. Regards, PKT(alk) 12:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, PKT,
- Thank you for the links so I can look into this. But I'm not sure how authoritative WikiProject discussions are, consistency tends to be more important so that expatriate players for ice hockey are categorized in the same way as athletes in other sports. But I'll look at the discussions. Liz Read! Talk! 00:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Wow
You get around. — The Transhumanist 07:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, The Transhumanist,
- I'm so tardy at responding to messages, I've lost the context of what I did to get your attention! But I guess I'll take that as a compliment. Liz Read! Talk! 00:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- I was looking at your talk page and your contributions. — The Transhumanist 00:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Always precious
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Gerda, that is very kind. I've only been editing a little over 10 years so I must have caught your eye soon after I started here. But it's always nice to be remembered. Liz Read! Talk! 00:23, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
November Articles for creation backlog drive
Hello Liz:
WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.
You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.
Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
Happy Halloween!
Knowledgegatherer23 has given you a Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove through chocolately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Happy Halloween (or fall if you don't celebrate Halloween) to a great admin!
Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
Knowledgegatherer23 (Say Hello) 17:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Knowledgegatherer23! Like many others, I love chocolate. Liz Read! Talk! 00:22, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Blood Red Throne
What does "Tes" mean at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Blood_Red_Throne_(2nd_nomination)#Ronny_Thorsen? --Jax 0677 (talk) 11:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jax 0677,
- I simple typo on my part. I meant to type "Yes" but the "T" is right next to "Y" on my keyboard. Liz Read! Talk! 00:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
SGUL Teddy Bear Hospital
Hi Liz, please could you relist or reclose as delete the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SGUL Teddy Bear Hospital - I certainly don't see any significant coverage of that, and as noted the St George's just seems to be one amongst very many. I would like to vote to delete this. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 17:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- I stumbled upon this looking at RMs, I would be inclined to vote delete as well if it were up for deletion, looks like pure promotion to me. ASUKITE 15:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Amakuru,
- That AFD discussion was relisted three times, we really don't relist any discussions four times unless it's happened by accident. And I still read this discussion as No consensus as I interpret Siroxo's comment as a Keep. I usually advise editors to wait awhile between AFDs but with the low participation, I think it's okay to bring this back to AFD for a second look. We have just been having problem getting more editors to participate in AFD discussions if the subjects aren't hot topics. But having both you and Asukite interested in weighing in on this future discussion would probably mean that this discussion wouldn't even need one relisting. Liz Read! Talk! 00:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
07:06, 22 October 2023 Liz talk contribs deleted page User:Guimaraeslr/sandbox (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)
Hello Liz. I hope this message finds you well.
I believe there was some misunderstanding regarding the evaluation of my article about the author Suzy Giordano, which you requested to remove.
Obviously the content did not promote the author in an advertising way or in any other way.
The article was clearly written to inform people about the author's undeniable contribution to the field of sleep and child development. This contribution is recognized worldwide by several important publications, as mentioned in the article and referenced with the hyperlinks of each publication cited.
I kindly request that you reconsider your assessment and restore my article, as I no longer have a copy of it and would have to write it again.
Thank you in advance and I'll wait your response.
Best Regards, Leonardo Guimarães Guimaraeslr (talk) 15:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Guimaraeslr,
- This was one of the most promotional articles I've come across. It was pure advertising. Wikipedia is an referenced encyclopedia, not a directory where article subjects can brag about their accomplishments.
- If you enable email access for your account, I can email you the content of the article but I won't restore it, primarily because it would just be tagged for deletion and deleted again. There is no point in restoring an article only to have it deleted a few hours later. Let me know if you want the last version of the article emailed to you through Wikipedia's email system. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
User strike out
One of the gadgets I have checked in preferences is Strike out usernames that have been blocked.
I find it helps you know whether to expect a reply if you should answer one of their posts.
Then I came across a post by BrownHairedGirl, and was surprised that her name was crossed out.
Whoa. Wasn't expecting to see that.
So, I traced the block back to the ArbCom case, and learned that it was the 3rd one in which she'd been held accountable, this last one being the final straw triggering an indefinite ban.
Whoa. Wasn't expecting to see that.
I knew about the first one, but not the later two.
ArbCom was really fed up this time, not even allowing her to edit her talk page during the ban.
Whoa. Wasn't expecting to see that.
End of an era.
On retrospect, should have seen it coming, but the community put up with her antics for so long, it was easy to believe that it would never end.
I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.
On the one hand, she was a talented prolific editor, and a major loss to the project.
On the other hand, all she had to do was tone it down, but she just couldn't bring herself to do that.
I just don't get it.
Well, I guess the drama reduction will do the project good.
Hopefully, she'll take the lesson to heart and come back with a refined attitude.
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 14:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Undeletion request for Lalitha Jewellery page
Dear Liz, I found that you deleted the page I created Lalitha Jewellery in the AFD discussion well before I could give my points and keep vote as I was out of town. I have lot more news articles to add in it and that jewellery has the world's largest jewellery showroom 130000 sq ft and over 50 outlets throughout South India and there are many factors that could be pointed out towards it notability through the news links. I request you to please undelete the page as its a soft delete and allow me to improve the page in a much better way. Have a Great Day ahead Anbupaithal (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
"I need more bullets" deletion discussion
Hello,
There is currently a deletion discussion occurring for the article I need more bullets. The current consensus is speedy delete.
As others have said in the discussion, the subject is not notable and the article likely also qualifies for WP:SNOWBALL. If you could help close the discussion with a speedy delete, I feel it would help Wikipedia's integrity as a whole.
Thanks! Coalah (talk) 16:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Categorizing redirect
Hi Liz,
Bhaskar (Indian werewolf character) and Yapum were deleted under WP:G8. These do appear useful to me as redirects and I had done so. Would you be willing to restore these as drafts or restore the categories that these pages had? That would be really helpful.
Thanks Gotitbro (talk) 07:05, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Request
Based on advice I've provided to members of the next generation of Wikipedians, I've started a revamp of Wikipedia:Tools/Optimum tool set.
Please take a look and let me know if there are any essential techniques or must have tools that you think should be included.
Thank you.
Sincerely, — The Transhumanist 08:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 6 November 2023
- Arbitration report: Admin bewilderingly unmasks self as sockpuppet of other admin who was extremely banned in 2015
- In the media: UK shadow chancellor accused of ripping off WP articles for book, Wikipedians accused of being dicks by a rich man
- Opinion: An open letter to Elon Musk
- WikiCup report: The WikiCup 2023
- News from Wiki Ed: Equity lists on Wikipedia
- Recent research: How English Wikipedia drove out fringe editors over two decades
- Featured content: Like putting a golf course in a historic site.
- Traffic report: Cricket jumpscare
Heads-up
Hi Liz. I just closed this DRV, which is going to require me to undelete a very large number of G13s. It'll probably take me a little while to make the dummy edits and remove any tags, so you may see some of them showing up in CAT:CSD or other lists at some point in the next hour or so. No need for any action on your part—just wanted to give you a heads-up in case you see any drafts where they don't belong. Hope you're doing well! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Extraordinary,
- I glanced over the DRV and don't see the mandate to undelete a lot of pages so maybe I'll read it over more carefully. I've seen tens of thousands of G13 drafts and sandboxes and there have been very very few ones that have been labeled Outlines. So, maybe there aren't as many as you might anticipate.
- I will say that I'm heading to bed in about an hour so you might alert the night crew (well, it's night for me) which is Explicit and Fastily about this. Of course, if a page shows up in a CSD category than any patrolling admin could come across it. But thanks for the head's up. Liz Read! Talk! 06:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- There's a list of 140-some-odd of them in the "extended content" box in the DRV. (Thank goodness for Twinkle batch-undelete!) I confess I don't really see the point of all these outlines, but c'est la vie. Hopefully I'll have everything wrapped up within the hour, but if not I may have to let Explicit and Fastily know. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Extraordinary Writ, I've never used batch-undelete before. Do you just work with a list of linked, deleted pages? Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yep, batch-undelete (the "und-batch" button in the Twinkle menu) works just like batch-delete except in the other direction. The only problem is that it doesn't remove any deletion tags or make any dummy edits, so I have to do that either by hand or with another script (like AutoWikiBrowser). But it definitely saves a lot of time on things like this! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I've tried looking at AWB years ago and found it mystifying. I run into problems with G13s though as we have several editors who use AWB to do mass-minor copy edits on drafts so we'll have a hundred drafts expiring over 10 minutes. I think it's a little too powerful. Maybe one day though I'll try it again. Liz Read! Talk! 07:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, this should be done now (I think). If you see anything outline-related in the next few days, it may be a leftover from tonight's activities—let me know if there are any large-scale problems. Good night! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, and if you ever need any help on those days when there are hundreds of drafts expiring at once, feel free to let me know. Usually I try to leave G13s to the handful of admins who specialize in that area, but I'm always happy to help when there's a need (assuming I'm around). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, that is good to know. Josh used to help out a lot tagging drafts before he because an admin and now it helps out with deletion. But nobody works 24/7 so it's good to have folks that you can call on for help. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 08:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I've tried looking at AWB years ago and found it mystifying. I run into problems with G13s though as we have several editors who use AWB to do mass-minor copy edits on drafts so we'll have a hundred drafts expiring over 10 minutes. I think it's a little too powerful. Maybe one day though I'll try it again. Liz Read! Talk! 07:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yep, batch-undelete (the "und-batch" button in the Twinkle menu) works just like batch-delete except in the other direction. The only problem is that it doesn't remove any deletion tags or make any dummy edits, so I have to do that either by hand or with another script (like AutoWikiBrowser). But it definitely saves a lot of time on things like this! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Extraordinary Writ, I've never used batch-undelete before. Do you just work with a list of linked, deleted pages? Liz Read! Talk! 06:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- There's a list of 140-some-odd of them in the "extended content" box in the DRV. (Thank goodness for Twinkle batch-undelete!) I confess I don't really see the point of all these outlines, but c'est la vie. Hopefully I'll have everything wrapped up within the hour, but if not I may have to let Explicit and Fastily know. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Proposal to rename category
PLease see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Lists of indigenous peoples of Russia to Category:Lists of Indigenous peoples of Russia. Hugo999 (talk) 01:33, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).
Interface administrator changes
- The WMF is working on making it possible for administrators to edit MediaWiki configuration directly. This is similar to previous work on Special:EditGrowthConfig. A technical RfC is running until November 08, where you can provide feedback.
- There is a proposed plan for re-enabling the Graph Extension. Feedback on this proposal is requested.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
- Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
- Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
- Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
- Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
- Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
- An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.
- The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
RfC on deletion of species names
Hi Liz, I've started an RfC on deletion of species names that have not been accepted, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Biology#Request_for_comment,_deletion_of_dubious_species, in hopes of getting a general policy, given that we've had a regular stream of very similar cases turning up lately. Is there a good place to bring this to the attention of the AfD community? I absolutely don't want to bypass the AfD process or undermine any existing AfD's, so if you think I'm muddying the waters and it's inappropriate, just tell me, and I'll withdraw it. Elemimele (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Album article redirects
Thanks for redirecting a lot of these PRODs. In the future, can you please add {{r from album}} and retain the categories? Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Justin,
- Oh, I didn't know about that tag. There are a lot more coming up on November 13th, too. I've asked the editor twice now if they could redirect the articles rather than PRODding them but they don't seem inclined to do so. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 20:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yeesh. Yeah, Wikipedia is a big place and even us old-heads don't know everything. Thanks for all you've done for the past 15 years or so. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Can IPs close AfD discussions? I was going to ask the closer to relist this instead. Given it is an IP close, do I need DelRev or can you handle it? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This IP close has already been reverted by another editor. Cheers! BD2412 T 15:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- BD2412, even here an IP closed a discussion and they keep "reverting our reverts". dxneo (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- This appears to have been addressed with a brief block of the IP. BD2412 T 14:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I hope it's OK to add to this, there is an LTA, related to (or is this user) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BuickCenturyDriver who likes to mess with AFD'S when the Billy Cranston and other articles have been protected. They usually select two AFD requests at random to mess with then move on to other nominations once they've been protected. Knitsey (talk) 14:55, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- This appears to have been addressed with a brief block of the IP. BD2412 T 14:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- BD2412, even here an IP closed a discussion and they keep "reverting our reverts". dxneo (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Jill Ovens DRV
Thank you for telling PP666 to be less aggressive. I found them difficult at a DRN about association football results because they were unnecessarily verbose, and were complaining about a combination of conduct and content issues in a content forum (DRN), but I didn't want to rebuke them because I usually try to remain neutral at DRN. Maybe they will pay attention to you. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Robert,
- Thank you but I'm doubtful. If you look at their talk page you can see that several editors have told them what I tried to tell them, in different words, and it wasn't received well. When a relatively inexperienced editor thinks they are right and just about everyone else is wrong, it's usually a sign that a NOTHERE block will eventually come their way (I don't block for this reason but there are plenty of admins who do). The only way to dig oneself out of this hole would be to have some humility, see other people's words as advice, not rebukes, and to move on from whatever dispute one has become enmeshed in. That takes a certain amount of maturity and foresight to see that one may lose an argument but become a better editor in the process and time will tell if this editor has those characteristics. It's unfortunate when an editor sees other folk's good intentioned warnings as "a pile-on" but that seems to have happened here. As you well know, some arguments go your way and some don't...if you are here for the long haul, you have to graciously live with both results. Liz Read! Talk! 17:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes. I was expressing optimism, but I didn't have a reason other than hope to express optimism. I think that I may be trying too hard to be optimistic about other things because my brother died suddenly last week, and life goes on for those for whom life goes on, or in another world. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- I saw their talk page when I closed the case about football results. They were complaining that there is article ownership and other misconduct at Wikiroject Football. I said to report it at WP:ANI, or don't report it. Oh well. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Regarding Deleted Page.
@Liz Can I restart a page which was deleted. Actually this page was created by me. At that time I was unaware of WP:SCHOOL as I was a newcomer. Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 06:32, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Deletion review for Saydulla Madaminov
PetrovMD has asked for a deletion review of Saydulla Madaminov. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 19:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Cryptic,
- I've responded there but I appreciate the notice. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:46, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
You comment here was very kind. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:09, 14 November 2023 (UTC) |
- Hello, Magnolia677,
- Well, thank you for the acknowledgment. I don't think this editor will stick around for long but I'd rather that they leave with an impression of Wikipedia that isn't awful. And it doesn't take any more effort to be kind than to be sarcastic which can be the default response around here. In other instances, I've seen some eager but misguided new editors treated horribly on Wikipedia but there's a general feeling that we shouldn't be handing out civility blocks to longtime editors so I just try to leave a personal note where I think it might help and demonstrate that we are all human beings here, not just a mass of bureaucrats enforcing rules. Liz Read! Talk! 21:51, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted Draft: Christina Henry
Dear Liz, I was just contemplating as to why the author Christina Henry does not yet have a Wikipedia entry and then stumbled across your now deleted draft. I would like to work on an entry for Christina Henry and wondered, as to why your draft was deleted. And what is your take on the subject in general? Thank you in advance! Best wishes - DarkGreenAndSunny (talk) 21:41, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, DarkGreenAndSunny,
- I probably can do that for you if it was a simple CSD G13 deletion but could you provide me a link to the page you are referring to? It's a little step to take but I look at thousands of pages a day and would help me respond quicker if I didn't have to search for it. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, sure! This is the link to the deleted draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Christina_Henry. It seems to have been a CSD G13 deletion. DarkGreenAndSunny (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Liz, in the meantime I composed the German Wiki entry (Christina Henry). I would be happy to translate it into English, if you get around to reopening the draft Draft:Christina Henry. Thank you very much and all the best - DarkGreenAndSunny (talk) 09:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, sure! This is the link to the deleted draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Christina_Henry. It seems to have been a CSD G13 deletion. DarkGreenAndSunny (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Bright (American band)
Hi, as you are the deleting admin for Bright (American band), could I request restoration of this PROD? There are additional sources not considered by the nominator - e.g., [7], [8], [9]. I can add these to the restored article. Thanks. Chubbles (talk) 06:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Liz,
Regarding the locomotive article, there's discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Australian_railroad_IP. In it @Jay has stated "As undeleter of Southern Pacific 4450, I'm at fault for failing to check the cumulative diff at the AfD. It would have shown how Delete was manipulated to Soft Delete. I would suggest re-deletion". Are you fine for me to go ahead with me readding the CSD G4 or would you prefer this to proceed to an AfD? There was also Southern Pacific 4451 which I had added a CSD G4 to, which was revived because of the same IP, but I quickly reverted that when I saw you turn down my speedy. TarnishedPathtalk 08:09, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
A7 on Chilufya Tayali
Hi Liz -- I don't think this is A7 material; he's a candidate for the mayor of the capital city and leader of an opposition party; some of the sources look ok. As the creator has already moved it back from draft, looks like AfD is the only option. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 08:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Espresso Addict,
- I thought it might be declined but thought I'd try any way. I understand your decision. Thanks for letting me know why. Liz Read! Talk! 08:06, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
Quick question
What are the requirements for a musician to have a template, I hope my question makes sense or you can redirect me to a specific page if there is one Thank you. dxneo (talk) 13:08, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, dxneo,
- I'm not very knowledgable about templates and guidelines surrounding them. I'd just look at examples of other musician's templates and work off of them. See Category:Musician templates and Wikipedia:Template index and just explore. More general information can be found at Help:Template.
- If you want to do some homework, you could browse through WP:TFD discussions and see which templates are kept and which ones are deleted. By looking at TFD, you could see editors who are actively evaluating templates and ask them for advice. Sorry I couldn't answer your specific question. Liz Read! Talk! 19:27, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
Question regarding article you deleted
Hi Liz,
I'm looking at Priya Venkatesan, a redlink created after you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Priya Venkatesan. This individual appears to have had an article re-created at Priya Hays (note the middle name and the identical nature of that biography's education details to that of Venkatesan).
Is there anything from the old article that's worth saving and importing into the new one? I'd like to create a redirect from the old name to the new name, but I know that can sometimes screw up restoration/histmerges, so I wanted to check.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz,
- Just wanting to follow up on this question.
- — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:10, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Red-tailed hawk,
- Sorry, I'm behind in responding to User talk page messages. I'll look into this today. Liz Read! Talk! 19:17, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz. Any updates? — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:43, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
AFDs
Hi Liz. Have you noticed any increase in the number of AFDs recently? Curious. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:03, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Dr. Blofeld,
- There are regularly about 75-100+ AFDs posted to the daily log page (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 November 18 as an example). When I compare today's log page with the same date in 2022, 2021, 2020 and 2019, there is a definite increase in number of discussions but I think it is still fewer AFDs than the "glory years" of 2006-2009 when so many pages were getting created and deleted. But I noticed this AFD increase occurring a few months ago at the beginning of the summer so it isn't "recent" in the sense of happening just in the past few weeks.
- I think that there are at least two factors going on here, first, more AFD discussions are getting relisted which increases the number of deletion discussions on the daily log page. There are a couple reasons for that, the primary one being that we have fewer participants in AFD discussions these days so it's more difficult to arrive at a decisive closure decision in 7 days. Secondly, we've had several newer editors who have posted dozens of AFD discussions at a time, rather than doing a bundled nomination, and that results in more discussions per daily log page. Because of the investment of time editors put into evaluating articles/redirects/categories/templates for deletion consideration, we try to discourage that behavior.
- That's just my first impression. Liz Read! Talk! 00:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Liz. Yes, I mean "recent months/weeks" . I've noticed an increase in the frequency of geography AFDs in particular. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Help please
Hi Liz, can you take a look at this [10], I'm not sure what that's about? Knitsey (talk) 22:09, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- The edit summary I mean. Knitsey (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Dealt with, I read some of their other messages and reported to AIV instead, sorry to bother you. Knitsey (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Knitsey,
- No problem. You acted correctly Edit summaries have been revision deleted and User:Hope a Dope a Rope has been blocked. Sorry not to respond more switfly. Liz Read! Talk! 22:37, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Nah, if I had spent another few minutes checking other edits I could have gone straight to AIV. But thanks so much. Knitsey (talk) 22:53, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Dealt with, I read some of their other messages and reported to AIV instead, sorry to bother you. Knitsey (talk) 22:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, Good Morning, Greetings of the day. this is regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Smiley_Children_Society
still researching and got some more notable things, its there any chance that i get some more time to add the notability information in "Smiley Children Society". got news links from wayback machine. and i can see many wikipedia pages just relay on single source, just to bring you notice, iam mentioning here [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
I've come across a few pages in my research, and regarding the Smiley Children Society page, could you kindly allow some time? After incorporating the additional references and content, I believe it would be beneficial for you to make a decision. Having dedicated almost a week to this content, I suggest taking a decision after reviewing the supplementary information on the Smiley Children Society — Preceding unsigned comment added by CAJaganaddamRJY (talk • contribs) 05:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Liz, you should be aware of Special:Diff/1185823260, for all that I declined to reinstate it after another user (accidentally?) removed it. —Cryptic 08:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Liz. I see you deleted Draft:Coco & Clair Clair; could you please restore it because they appear to have attracted sufficient attention for their recent album Sexy to pass WP:GNG? Thank you. --Launchballer 11:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Launchballer,
- Done It was a straight CSD G13 deletion so it was easily restored. Liz Read! Talk! 21:38, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Cow belt
There is a another similar redirect Cow Belt of Cow belt white redirects to Indo-Gangetic Plain. Can you fix it? 103.39.128.65 (talk) 16:06, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- I've boldly done this. (talk page stalker) — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:31, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
javier milei result
i saw you closed the discussion on Political positions of Javier Milei as keep for "views" and delete for "positions", but unless i am mistaken, it looks like the opposite is what actually resulted in happening. i am confused. can you please clarify for me? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political views of Javier Milei Iljhgtn (talk) 16:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- It looks like the article formerly at Political positions of Javier Milei was deleted, and then the article formerly at "Political Views of Javier Milei" was moved to usurp the title of Political positions of Javier Milei. This is consistent with the closing summary of the deletion discussion. (talk page stalker) — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, Iljhgtn, Red-tailed hawk is correct. "Views" was Kept, "Positions" was Deleted and then "Views" was Moved to the "Positions" page title so "Views" became a Redirect. It was one of the more complicated AFD discussion closures that I've done but the consensus seem to rest on this resolution of the discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- i am confused, shouldn't "positions" be the redirect to "views"? (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- No, Iljhgtn, as I said, we moved "Views" to the "Positions" page title. So, that is where the Views article is now, under the page title of Positions. Please look at the AFD where it is all explained. Liz Read! Talk! 23:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- i am confused, shouldn't "positions" be the redirect to "views"? (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, Iljhgtn, Red-tailed hawk is correct. "Views" was Kept, "Positions" was Deleted and then "Views" was Moved to the "Positions" page title so "Views" became a Redirect. It was one of the more complicated AFD discussion closures that I've done but the consensus seem to rest on this resolution of the discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 21:36, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Undeletion request for "K._S._Lewkowicz"
Hi Liz - I’m writing to request your advice please. Would it be possible to get access to the draft of the deleted K.S Lewkowicz page to add further notable references? This is to strengthen the page and see if you agree that the page could then be reinstated and the deletion discussion reopened to review the new references.
I was going to add these before the page was deleted and would appreciate the opportunity to to so. The topic is relevant to contemporary musical theatre and will meet WP:N and WP:V. I do appreciate your work, your experience and your consideration. Richardavenger (talk) 23:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Richardavenger,
- Can you provide me with a link to the deleted page? I'm not sure if it was in main space or Draft space and I need to see why it was deleted. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 23:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's K. S. Lewkowicz (AfD discussion) - section title was correct, section contents weren't. —Cryptic 00:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello User:Liz
- Apologies for the slow response (Thanksgiving travel!). Here is the deletion discussion:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/K._S._Lewkowicz
- Appreciate your time.
- Cheers
- Richard 24.183.162.122 (talk) 14:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz - are you able to look at the articles for deletion for this topic?
- (sorry, I just noted my 25 November response was not when logged in...too much turkey dinner!)
- As I say, there are substantive additional references to be added to the page.
- This is a genuine topic of interest for London UK, Mexican and European theatre, IMHO.
- Cheers
- Richard Richardavenger (talk) 18:00, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- It's K. S. Lewkowicz (AfD discussion) - section title was correct, section contents weren't. —Cryptic 00:13, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
CSD G6 of redirect with history
Hi, I haven't been around for a bit so forgive me if my understanding of page edit history preservation is no longer correct.
You CSD'd Reyna909/Yara Amaral, which was moved by User:Reyna909 from draftspace to mainspace, from where I merged the content from to Yara Amaral (diff: [16]). AFAIK, the standard procedure for merges is (was?) to use Template:R from merge, and keep the page, not because it is a useful redirect but because we must preserve the edit history. Now the edit history of User:Reyna909's contributions is gone.
Please let me know if I'm mistaken about policy, I performed the merge incorrectly, or if there's a way to correctly restore the edit history.
A412 (Talk • C) 06:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- The speedy delete was correct - there's only one author to the page and since they put the username in their page title the content you merged would still be correctly attributed. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 November 2023
- In the media: Propaganda and photos, lunatics and a lunar backup
- News and notes: Update on Wikimedia's financial health
- Traffic report: If it bleeds, it leads
- Recent research: Canceling disputes as the real function of ArbCom
- Wikimania: Wikimania 2024 scholarships
Speedy deletion declined: Himanshu Singhal
Hello Liz. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Himanshu Singhal, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: there's some sources provided which is enough of a credible asseertion of notability. Needs to go to AfD if deletion is still required. Thank you. GedUK 10:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Ged UK,
- Well, thanks for letting me know. If I'm unsure about a speedy deletion (especially A7s), I tag the article and let another administrator review the decision. I appreciate the follow-up. Liz Read! Talk! 02:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi pls Read ma’am
hi I would like the page title Bahari Ibaadat to be consider to be undeleted one because someone with no experience, has edited the article and has completely messed up the article this is the reputation of an artist with having deleted articles on her name can put dark mark on her name. Second reason that I can provide non-trivial reliable source to help the article. I would like to have the approval from the respectful admins to allow me to work on article or have it on draft the article so it can be ready for publication thank you DWashingtonn (talk) 04:53, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, DWashingtonn,
- Please provide a link to the page you are interested in so I can see why it was deleted. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 05:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Here is the link ma’am
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahari Ibaadat (2nd nomination) DWashingtonn (talk) 05:04, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- I also want to put note that this article was active article for almost 9 years thank you ma’am hopefully I’ll get a chance to work on this article to have it ready with Wikipedia rules DWashingtonn (talk) 05:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- I was also advised by other administrator to make the request with you after your approval I can work on the article thank you DWashingtonn (talk) 05:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Can't fault deleting that. Consensus was delete. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- FWIW, was create protected by the Materialscientist. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- What does that mean DWashingtonn (talk) 16:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- In this instance, only an admin can create the article. So the way to proceed would be to create a WP:DRAFT, receive acceptance from the WP:AfC reviewers, and then request unprotection. Hope that helps, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- I note there's an SPI related to the OP. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:00, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Can someone help me with WP:DRAFT ? And before that I was told to get approval of miss liz DWashingtonn (talk) 18:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- In this instance, only an admin can create the article. So the way to proceed would be to create a WP:DRAFT, receive acceptance from the WP:AfC reviewers, and then request unprotection. Hope that helps, -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:51, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- What does that mean DWashingtonn (talk) 16:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- FWIW, was create protected by the Materialscientist. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- Can't fault deleting that. Consensus was delete. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- OP has been indef sock blocked. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
- I am the admin who advised the OP to post here, asking to restore the deleted article to draft space for improvement. After looking at the deleted article, I felt it had potential. But that isn't relevant now that the OP has been discovered to be a sockpuppet. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Too soon
I have thought that for unsubmitted drafts, but never declined as "too soon." Never saw that done before. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thank you for always being so generous of spirit. You're a class act in every which way and a role model to every other person here. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:58, 22 November 2023 (UTC) |
Malti Chahar
Hi Liz! I see you've protected Malti Chahar from being recreated. Could you please look at Malti Chahar Actress to see if it should be deleted? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 06:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
File:European_Club_Association_logo.svg
Good day, mind undeleting the initial revision? Need it to fix the rendering issue. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
To promote WikiLove
Cookies! | ||
ThatOneWolf has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}! |
--ThatOneWolf (talk|contribs) 14:40, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
November 2023
Hi Liz, I'm reaching out to inquire about the possibility of restoring an article on my User Page. It was deleted due to insufficient sources and content. During that period, my activity on Wikipedia was limited, leading to a lack of attention to the article's improvement. I want to highlight my increased involvement now and draw your attention to a similar article I've created, titled Works of Zakariyya Kandhlawi. Inspired by this, I am eager to dedicate time to enhancing Abdul Majid Daryabadi's bibliography. I kindly request your assistance in restoring the deleted article to my user page. Thanks.–MinisterOfReligion (Talk) 02:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Don't think I was edit warring
Hi Liz, you accused me of edit warring[17]. Category:Republic of Crimea was created on Nov 20. Republic of Crimea (and other pages) were added to the new category by the creator of the category on Nov 20 and on Nov 21 and by a third user on Nov 24. Each time I reverted them shortly afterwards, returning to status quo. The creator of the category started the discussion on Category_talk:Republic of Crimea immediately after my second revert. I continued the discussion at Talk:Republic_of_Crimea#A_new_category_for_this_? after leaving a link at the category talk. The creator of the category and other people took part in that discussion, and I was active there, too. On Nov 24, there were three participants (including myself) against the new category, two in favour, including the creator and the "third user" I mentioned above. Since consensus had not been reached, I saw the addition of a lot of pages to the new category as disruptive and reverted them.
As I see it, reverting to status quo while constructively taking part in the discussion is a perfectly normal and accepted behaviour. Meaning, you should not have templated me. If I'm right, I ask you to strike your comment on my talk page. If I'm wrong, please explain which rule was overlooked by me. Rsk6400 (talk) 07:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Paid & COI notifications
have recently been contemplating and have already begun creating some paid Wikipedia articles, adhering to WP:PAID. Are there any rules or regulations regarding the removal of the paid article listing from my profile after it's been removed from Wikipedia? Furthermore, if I delete a COI article that I authored, can I also remove it from my profile? If I request to delete my userpage, do I still need to mention these actions on the new userpage? If so, could you provide some criterias? DIVINE 22:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
AfD to be closed
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MLW M-640 - Wikipedia
Result: Two counts of Keep and one comment suggesting to keep it, I assume good faith that this article can be kept on wikipedia. 118.210.56.198 (talk) 22:19, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- Now its three counts of Keep 118.210.56.198 (talk) 22:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oh wait nevermind, it was closed already 118.210.56.198 (talk) 06:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Balrampur AfD
Hi Liz, can you revert and relist the Balrampur AfD for another week, to avoid the scenario of a nom trying to reverse a soft delete. See WP:Requests for undeletion#Balrampur Chini Mills Limited where you were pinged. Jay 💬 09:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Arlyson Gomes
Hi Liz, vide Arlyzinho BR, name variation of Arlyson Gomes. Thanks 79a (talk) 13:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Tetramind
Hi Liz! I don't know why I was looking but I noticed you removed my G4 tag from Draft:Tetramind, mentioning that WP:G4 doesn't apply to drafts. The CSD reads that draftspace is excepted "where the content was converted to a draft for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy)" (emphasis added). This draft was clearly circumvention of the deletion discussion: the draft creator made the only two comments supporting draftification in the discussion and tried to move it while the discussion was open, and then created the identical draft anyway a week after the discussion closed. They even copied the {{advert}} tag from the deleted article (their only edit to the draft since was removing it) so they obviously made a copy somewhere. Would you reconsider? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:14, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector: I don't think we can say that the sole reason for moving to draft was to circumvent deletion. Maybe the editor has a good faith intent to improve the draft, but hasn't gotten around to it. I would suggest restoring the {{advert}} and cautioning the editor against removing it until the issues are independently determined to have been resolved, and leaving it be. It is quite likely that the draft will end up abandoned anyway. BD2412 T 16:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Note: I went ahead and restored the tag with that instruction. BD2412 T 16:20, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I am substantially in agreement with Ivanvector. I saw your edit, Liz, and considered commenting on it to you, for a couple of reasons, including the fact that "G4 doesn't apply to Draft space" is far too broad and general a statement, but decided to leave it; however, now that I see that there has been further discussion I have decided to add my comment. BD2412, you say "I don't think we can say that the sole reason for moving to draft was to circumvent deletion". Well, no, we can't: we can never be certain that we know the whole of another editor's motivation for an action, but taking account of the whole history, I think we can reasonably be confident that that is the main effect of the re-creation. I would myself have deleted it if Liz hadn't got there first, but it is clear that there is nothing like a consensus to do so, so it should remain for now. I am also surprised that none of you picked up the fact that it is an unattributed copy of the deleted article. I have rectified that by a dummy edit with attribution in the edit summary. JBW (talk) 20:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks all, I think this is a constructive approach. Regarding attribution: I actually think that the restored draft is a copy of an earlier revision of the draft, when the creator was at the time the sole editor, so maybe attribution didn't need to be repaired. Better to over-attribute than under-attribute, I suppose. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector: I confess I merely compared the draft with the last version before deletion, without checking the earlier editing history, and I saw it was virtually identical, but, prompted by your comment here, I have now checked the rest of the editing history. In fact there never were any substantial edits by anyone else, so I suppose attribution is not really important, but the new draft does incorporate a few changes made to the article by other editors, although only very minor ones. JBW (talk) 21:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks all, I think this is a constructive approach. Regarding attribution: I actually think that the restored draft is a copy of an earlier revision of the draft, when the creator was at the time the sole editor, so maybe attribution didn't need to be repaired. Better to over-attribute than under-attribute, I suppose. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:29, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I am substantially in agreement with Ivanvector. I saw your edit, Liz, and considered commenting on it to you, for a couple of reasons, including the fact that "G4 doesn't apply to Draft space" is far too broad and general a statement, but decided to leave it; however, now that I see that there has been further discussion I have decided to add my comment. BD2412, you say "I don't think we can say that the sole reason for moving to draft was to circumvent deletion". Well, no, we can't: we can never be certain that we know the whole of another editor's motivation for an action, but taking account of the whole history, I think we can reasonably be confident that that is the main effect of the re-creation. I would myself have deleted it if Liz hadn't got there first, but it is clear that there is nothing like a consensus to do so, so it should remain for now. I am also surprised that none of you picked up the fact that it is an unattributed copy of the deleted article. I have rectified that by a dummy edit with attribution in the edit summary. JBW (talk) 20:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 59
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023
- Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
- Tech tip: Library access methods
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
In memory
my story today |
---|
Today: in memoriam Jerome Kohl who said (In Freundschaft): "and I hope that they have met again in the beyond and are making joyous music together" -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Citations for templates
Hi Liz, hope you're doing well. I have a question about an issue I'm considering bringing to RfC. I noticed that there was a significant spike in articles tagged as unreferenced in the past two months and realized that an editor had been tagging Canadian election templates (this, for example) as unreferenced and this was tagging the entire article as unreferenced. Many of these Canadian election templates were created by one editor over a year ago and they have remained largely unedited and unreferenced without issue until recently. It has created a weird patchwork of some templates tagged, most not tagged, and a surplus of otherwise well-sourced articles as being considered entirely unreferenced with duplicate redundant and inaccurate tags. I'm not sure if there's anything to be done other than to provide a citation for each template as it's been tagged but I wasn't sure if there's a specific guideline for how to cite templates or if it follows the same rules as citing articles. Any clarification you can offer would be much appreciated. Best, Kazamzam (talk) 20:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Revdel request
https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKoavf&diff=1187241241&oldid=1187189885
Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Koavf,
- Just appalling. I saw your message earlier and I saw the other editor has already been indefinitely blocked. Sorry you had to receive that abuse. Liz Read! Talk! 02:55, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- No worries, L--my work here has made me a target for a bunch of gross trolls, but I can deal with them. Merci and be well. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello
I would like to request article link Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahari Ibaadat (2nd nomination)
to be restored to draft for improvement I would like ot work on it thank you Jessica9B9 (talk) 02:47, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Jessica9B9,
- Ordinarily, I would consider this request. But this page has received full protection by another administrator, User:Materialscientist, so it is highly unlikely that an article on this subject will ever be in the main space of the project. It also has been consistently recreated by sockpuppets, which I hope you aren't. You can approach Materialscientist to see if they are willing to lift protection on this page title. And then I can consider restoring this article.
- If you have questions about AFDs or page protection, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 03:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you I’ll request Materialscientist hopefully they will Jessica9B9 (talk) 03:06, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- I just want to put a note that this topic was active for almost 9 years till some Sockpuppet eiditing it and then recreated it Jessica9B9 (talk) 03:11, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Requesting a withdrawal for an AfD
Hi! I decided to withdraw an AfD I initiated, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6AQ5. There are several who agreed with my initial deletion request, so I don't know if withdrawal here means the AfD is qualified as a speedy close. However, if it is, I would greatly appreciate you taking that action. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Pbritti,
- I see you posted your withdrawal statement which is about all you can do at this point. There are several editors arguing for a page deletion so this AFD can not be closed until it is closed by an administrator since it might involve deletion. I'll take a look at it and keep your change of opinion in mind. Liz Read! Talk! 06:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, figured that may be the case. Thank you for checking! ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:03, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
United Semiconductor Japan
Hi, Liz. I just created an English version of United Semiconductor Japan, but it was deleted. Why? Currently, the site of the parent company United Microelectronics Corporation is linked, but can it be reinstated? Take242106 (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Request observed a art file made from copyrighted tv movie from article Draupadi
The file File:Draupadi, the empress from Mahabharata by Aman Varma.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Draupadi,_the_empress_from_Mahabharata_by_Aman_Varma.jpg actually a digital painting from Mahabharat Stories | B. R. Chopra | EP – 46 original screenshot(Time frame 38:36), A drawing or painting made from copyrighted serial --Nimburaj (talk) 17:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Nimburaj,
- I don't see that I deleted this file but there is a deletion discussion at the Commons which you can see here. Liz Read! Talk! 01:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Deletion of Jeddah Internation School
Hi Liz! I was shocked to see my school's page deleted? May you please share why, thanks! 2001:16A2:F0CF:F300:1C66:4630:68A2:11C (talk) 18:18, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- This is me, but I registered now. Awaiting your response! Zainiieeee (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Zainiieeee,
- Can you give me a link to the deleted page? Then I can see why it was deleted. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darren_Harris_(law_enforcement_Officer)
Hello, a speedy deletion was declined by an admin with 17 years as a wikipedian Yesterday. Your tag seems controversial Comintell (talk) 01:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Comintell,
- The article is Darren Harris (law enforcement officer). I don't think it's controversial but I didn't notice it had already been tagged for speedy deletion and declined. I'll take it to WP:AFD instead. Liz Read! Talk! 01:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Well Liz, if that's really how you feel I understand. Comintell (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi! I was just on your page for something else and noted this. I should have pinged you, but Harris is now at AfD independently of this conversation. Apologies Star Mississippi 01:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Kosovo Air Force
You recently closed the AfD for Kosovo Air Force as delete, but Eron Lushaj seems to have kept a backup on their userpage and has recreated the article. There is currently an ANI discussion involving this user. ZLEA T\C 02:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, ZLEA,
- Thanks for letting me know. I'll check out the ANI discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:10, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- I tagged the article for speedy deletion, CSD G4. I'd rather have another administrator take action since I just closed the AFD discussion and deleted the article. Liz Read! Talk! 03:16, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Re:Aadam Hamed
Hi Liz! First of all, let me apologize for the late reply, 4 days after you wrote me.My arthritis and neuropaty sometimes make me take days to answer. Second, let me tell you, how happy I am to be writing to a fellow woman, as you know, Im transgender but i considered myself a woman ever since I was about 3 years old, my whole life! Im on the Women in Red project etc, etc, im a feminist...i watched Sex and the City religiously with my sister and we laughed hard, I love the Spice Girls and Kitty, the women's heavy metal band...and Im also a huge boxing fan and with that also women's boxing. So anyways...Aadam Hamed...he only has one professional fight and did not win any significant medals as an amateur so boxing notability guidelines would disqualify him so far for Wikipedia because it says that the boxer must win a medal at an IOC-recognized competition or be ranked among the top ten in his or her division at some point in his or her pro career. That said, he is the son of a legendary boxer (God was I a huge fan of his father in the 90s!) but notability is not inherited...I mean my article about the princess from Tonga who was born a couple of years ago was deleted and redirected to her dad and that's a princess we are talking about!
Inexplicably, it seems that no one wants to put Aadam for deletion or on a redirect discussion here. i went to read the deletion page but there are so many things to read and i really don't read them too much because all the rules are so long to read and everything it takes about 10 minutes to read all that and to me that's too much. i used to be an administrator and decided to step down precisely because of that. Ok, now I know I'm here doing the same thing, writing too much , lol so yeah. It's too much for me to read, all the Wikipedia protocols and rules, and etc. I tried to put the page on AFD but for some reason it was not showing up when I clicked on the preview button. Maybe we should put it on AFR discussion but I dont know how to do that.
I think that a redirection to his dad's article, until he himself becomes ranked in the top ten someday, should be the adequate measure to take, but I want to take it to a discussion before i do that. I just dont know how to do that, because when i attempted to make a deletion discussion, it was not showing up on the AFD page.
Well, thanks for chatting with me about Hamed and God bless! Happy holidays (if you celebrate them)
Yours truly, Jeanette Ann Martin is on fire (que me dijiste tu?) 08:34, Nov. 30, 2923 (UTC)
Restoration Request
Hi Liz, good day to you. I am requesting for Constant Okello-Obura page to be restored so that more work can be done on it! Thank You in advance. Micheal Kaluba (talk) 09:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Liz, I am following on this. Thank You! Micheal Kaluba (talk) 10:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Growth team newsletter #29
Welcome to the twenty-ninth newsletter from the Growth team! Help with translations
Community Conversations
The Growth team will host its first community conversation Monday, 4 December (19:00 - 20:30 UTC). The topic for this meeting will be Mentorship.
This first meeting language will be English, but we plan to host conversations in other languages, and about other topics. Please visit the conversation page on-wiki for the details on how to join. You can also watch the page, or suggest ideas for upcoming conversations there.
Impact Module
At the beginning of November 2023, the Growth team deployed the New Impact Module to all Wikipedias. We recently released a follow up improvement to how edit data was displayed based on editor feedback. [18]
Add a Link
We released “add a link” to 35 more Wikipedias. [19] [20]
We have a few Wikipedias remaining:
- German and English Wikipedia will be contacted at the beginning of January 2024.
- There are a few small wikis that will not receive the task until they have enough articles for the algorithm to work properly.
Community Configuration
- We shared Community Configuration 2.0 plans with technical stakeholders. [21] 🖂
- Initial Community Configuration design ideas have been shared and discussed with community members.
- A basic Community Configuration 2.0 demo is released on ToolForge.
- Developers can find some initial proof of concept code shared on gitlab.
Mentorship
When a mentor marked themselves as "Away", they were not getting their name assigned to new accounts when they returned. This has been fixed. [22]
We improved the message received by newcomers when their mentor quits, to reduce confusion. [23]
We worked on ensuring that all mentees are assigned to an active mentor. This required reassigning mentees with no mentors to a new mentor. We paused this as the clean-up script confused some editors. We will resume it when the identified blockers are resolved. [24]
It is now possible to create an Abuse Filter to prevent one user from signing up as a mentor. [25]
Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Question Re Deleted Draft:SOTI
Hello Liz, I hope you are well. My name is Connor, I work at SOTI and am looking to submit a new version of the Draft: SOTI. I have done extensive research on Wikipedia guidelines for and taken your advice from the previous talk page to make refinements and create a new draft with reliable sources to be submitted through the AFC. Before submitting the new draft I am uncertain whether I can submit under the same draft name, I wanted to reach out to you In hopes you would be able to please help confirm how I am able to submit this new draft through AFC with the old one deleted due to abandonment? CKMarket (talk) 18:35 December 1, 2023 (UTC) Hi Liz, I just wanted to reach out again on this question hoping you could please help? 8:11 December 11, 2023 CKMarket (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:12, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Totally random Admin outreach.
Greetings - I usually go under the name of BeingObjective - I recently decided better to stop any further efforts to contribute to this initiative, I am a US based physician - I hit bumps from the get go - why am I telling you this? I did contribute a lot in a short time - but likely just a handful of attacks from a few individuals have been persistent - user WikiLinuz seemed to go on the attack before I even understood a single policy - I will not return to the platform, it is not worth the grief - perhaps indeed it is a temperament issue - I do think an objective review of how I was chased off the platform is worth an effort - I might simply not be a good fit, but wow the overt hostility and games played in this environment - simply staggering.
Cheers - 172.220.81.119 (talk) 05:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
- Liz, I've mentioned you at WP:ANI#User:BeingObjective.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:38, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Editor experience invitation
Hi Liz :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:00, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanked you here for the cleanup help. As always, much appreciated. Hope you're doing well. Star Mississippi 14:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Quick question
Hello Liz, are the sub-catagories enough to create a main category? For an example, we have Category:Amapiano songs, Category:Amapiano albums, and Category:Amapiano musicians. Can I create Category:Amapiano or the sub-cats are not enough yet? dxneo (talk) 22:31, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, dxneo,
- Yes, you can have a parent category that contains child categories and there are some that only contain categories and no articles. Liz Read! Talk! 22:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- That was fast, thank you so so much you've been helpful since day one. dxneo (talk) 22:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I either respond right away or it otherwise takes me awhile. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
- That was fast, thank you so so much you've been helpful since day one. dxneo (talk) 22:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 December 2023
- In the media: Turmoil on Hebrew Wikipedia, grave dancing, Olga's impact and inspiring Bhutanese nuns
- Disinformation report: "Wikipedia and the assault on history"
- Comix: Bold comics for a new age
- Essay: I am going to die
- Featured content: Real gangsters move in silence
- Traffic report: And it's hard to watch some cricket, in the cold November Rain
- Humour: Mandy Rice-Davies Applies
How do I report a user?
I would like to report User:Jyotira Aditya for their recent edit on my talk page - [26]. I reversed a couple of their unhelpful edits and declined their draft, which clearly seemed like self-promotion, as seen here -> [27]. This action led to them accusing me of racism. I want to clarify that my stance was never against white people as a whole, but specifically against white supremacists. Despite this, User:Jyotira Aditya made inappropriate remarks on my talk page, which they might have inferred from my userpage. QuantumRealm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 14:22, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @QuantumRealm: You're probably looking for a Wikipedia noticeboard. I think you might want to see the Administrator's Incidents noticeboard as well. Rusty4321 talk contribs 01:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I believe that's also what you were told on another talkpage. Rusty4321 talk contribs 01:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I indeed provided the warning (as instructed on the other talkpage). I appreciate your prompt response to my inquiry. <3 QuantumRealm (meow🦁 • pawtrack🐾) 06:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- I believe that's also what you were told on another talkpage. Rusty4321 talk contribs 01:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
File:Savez izviđača Hrvatske.svg
Hi Liz. Could you restore the older version of File:Savez izviđača Hrvatske.svg that you just deleted. The file's non-free licensing was under discussion at WP:MCQ#File:Savez izviđača Hrvatske.svg and I have converted it to {{PD-ineligible-USonly}} per that discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, User:Marchjuly,
- I tried to restore the version but it looks like you asked someone else for help because the editing system said it had already been done. Liz Read! Talk! 02:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Strange. I only asked you. Perhaps someone else found it on their own. Anyway, my apologies for mixup. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Marchjuly,
- Well, maybe it was me! I was working on my phone and sometimes the edits go through with incorrect notification. I did one page move the other day and it turns out the move went on 5 times, all with the same time stamp, than ended up deleting the page completely. Just let me know whether you have access to the version you need. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 02:45, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- It was Minorax. They also do lots of work in the file namespace and probably just found it either on their own or via MCQ. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
- Strange. I only asked you. Perhaps someone else found it on their own. Anyway, my apologies for mixup. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
Hi Liz, I'm reaching out to inquire about the possibility of restoring an article on my User Page. It was deleted due to insufficient sources and content. During that period, my activity on Wikipedia was limited, leading to a lack of attention to the article's improvement. I want to highlight my increased involvement now and draw your attention to a similar article I've created, titled Works of Zakariyya Kandhlawi. Inspired by this, I am eager to dedicate time to enhancing Abdul Majid Daryabadi's bibliography. I kindly request your assistance in restoring the deleted article to my user page. Thanks.–MinisterOfReligion (Talk) 01:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Hello Liz: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Patient Zerotalk 05:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Patient Zerotalk 05:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).
- Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.
- Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
- The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
- Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
Swaddled infant votive page
I have attempted to address the issues for which you put the tag on the page. If I have done it satisfactorily will you remove the tag, if not will you pleaase, leave me a message in the talk? thank you WikiTikiTavi63 (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Sudan–Yugoslavia relations-removal of successor states categories
Hi Liz, you invited me to discuss the issue of additional categories in the article Sudan–Yugoslavia relations stating that you disagree (here). I must admit that I was a bit surprised so I created a new section at the talk page (HERE) at 17:39, 8 December 2023 (or corresponding time zone). I mentioned you there so you should have received the notification, but I just saw now that you had a couple of edits since my post on the talk page. So, just in case you missed the notification for any reason I wanted to let you know here as well so that you can also share the reason you removed mentioned categories and invited me to discuss it on the talk page. Best wishes. MirkoS18 (talk) 18:47, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, MirkoS18,
- I don't look at my "pings", for a variety of reasons, so I appreciate you informing me of this discussion. I will look at it later tonight. Liz Read! Talk! 01:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Liz, just wanted to check if you are still interested in the topic and intend to participate in discussion on the talk page? I understand that at least on surface it might seem as an edit of marginal importance, yet it may have some effects beyond the article in question. I would of course like to reinstate deleted categories before they themselves are removed for being empty, but I am not sure what was the core of your disagreement and I want to avoid any disruptive editing. It's primarily not clear for me what is the meritum of disagreement as you left the category of one successor state, while at the same time you removed some categories which are not nominated for deletion. Therefore it is a bit unclear as you don't necessarily disagree with the basis on which I reinstated categories and you didn't remove just those nominated for deletion. Previous editor removed them as an action of trol actor without evaluating each contribution on its own. I can understand that, but later on I as a long term editor figured that some actions of the unregistered contributor were in fact useful.--MirkoS18 (talk) 12:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Restore article history behind redirect?
Hi Liz! Hope you are well. I have evaluated coverage for Special:History/Hera Agathon and believe there is sufficient SIGCOV across academic/educational books to support an article (for help referencing I've started Bibliography of Battlestar Galactica). I intend to write such an article and would benefit from the prior contributions of other editors.
You appropriately closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hera Agathon (2nd nomination) as "delete and redirect". There was also an editor in support for a pure redirect (and one neutral). Given what I have found, I was hoping you could restore the history behind the redirect. I promise not to restore the article over the redirect without adding and citing sources that demonstrate notability. Thanks for reading. —siroχo 00:11, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- This is what WP:deletion review is for, no? Admins can't unilaterally reverse AfD consensus. Mach61 (talk) 00:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, siro,
- No, we can't revert AFD decisions, Mach61. Deletion review is if an editor thinks an AFD closure was done inappropiately and wants the article restored to main space or the AFD relisted. But admin closers can restore a deleted article to Draft space if it's understood that the draft can not be moved to main space and it must go through AFC for review. Let me think about this, siro, review the AFD and look at the deleted article. I'll get back to you tonight or tomorrow. Liz Read! Talk! 01:00, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yes draft would be perfectly fine. I am indeed hoping to avoid putting editors through DRV for something that needn't be contentious. Before going to REFUND for a draft, I figured I'd reach out to the closing admin. (I also figured restoring under the redirect would be simpler than a draft, but I am fine with a draft) Much thanks for reviewing. —siroχo 03:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Well if that isn't the smallest surprise ever. I spent .02 seconds looking for other boloney as I couldn't remember who the likely master was. Glad someone found it. Star Mississippi 02:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Star Mississippi,
- What is the surprise, that I relisted that discussion or that another new editor at AFD was found to be a sockpuppet? They don't seem to be a sockpuppet of the supposed sockmaster though. We'll see what the friendly folks at SPI find out on that issue.
- Have a good weekend! More rain and rain here. Liz Read! Talk! 02:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- I've probably become a little too jaded as we know there are experienced IPs who ultimately create accounts but someone who finds AfD on their 3rd day? Always pinging my sock radar.
- Rain here too. Unseasonable weather, but I'll take it. Star Mississippi 02:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, Star Mississippi,
- Since we're on the subject, what do you think of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hashem Al-Ghaili? The new editor provide an explanation for why they created an account and headed straight to AFD. Am I gullible for accepting this rationale? Or just extending good faith? Liz Read! Talk! 02:22, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
- I don't buy it one bit. It seems plausible, but a little too contrived. On the other hand, they're right. Al-Ghaili does not appear to be notable in science or other aspects of N:BIO and there's a lot of ref spam (also at the AfD) to plump up where there isn't substance. Star Mississippi 02:42, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Regarding Vandalism at the article 'Bangladesh Genocide.'
Hello Liz, I hope this message finds you well. I am reaching out to you because I observed that you have previously engaged in editing and contributing to Bangladesh Genocide. Unfortunately, the article has been recently vandalized. As a newcomer to Wikipedia, I am seeking guidance on the appropriate tools and methods to address this issue. Despite initiating several discussions on the talk page, I (and a couple of other editors) couldn't resolve this issue. Your assistance in navigating this situation would be greatly appreciated.
Ongoing Discussion: Disruptive edits Arfaz (chat) | 10:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Requesting the restoration of Ōmagatoki article
I was searching for the Ōmagatoki article and after a hard time trying to know why it had been deleted (had to go to French article on this where a link for the deleted English page had not been deleted, so I could see who deleted and why). You said it had to be deleted because "it was just dusk", but Ōmagatoki isn't merely the dusk phenomenon, but also a japanese folklore (that was the whole point of the article). It was a very short article so I understand if you decide to not restore it, but I just wanted to point out that your reason to delete it was somewhat mistaken. Thank you for your time and I'm sorry for any inconvenience. Pethblake (talk) 10:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. at any time by removing the Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
King of Wales AfD
Hi Liz, I posted a reply at the AfD but realised you may not see it (per your comments) so here it is:
- Oh, I was not suggesting the relisting comments are unhelpful. Indeed, when you ask editors to focus on, e.g., the appropriate redirect target, or you focus on where the lack of consensus lies (e.g. between deletion or merge) the comments are very helpful. You asked for editors familiar with GEOLAND to comment once which was also very helpful. I was merely pointing out that in this comment, you say
about the same numbers
. Thus my comment. In any case the relist has precipitated A.D.Hope's comments, which are useful to the discussion, inasmuch as regardless of outcome, they indicate how discussion should proceed on Titles in medieval Wales.
Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:46, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Barnstar
Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. Thanks for your work on drafts! Ikipedia2 (talk) 13:27, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors December 2023 Newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors December 2023 Newsletter
Hello, and welcome to the December 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since September. Don't forget that you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. Election news: The Guild needs coordinators! If you'd like to help out, you may nominate yourself or any suitable editor—with their permission—for the Election of Coordinators for the first half of 2024. Nominations will close at 23:59 on 15 December (UTC). Voting begins immediately after the close of nominations and closes at 23:59 on 31 December. All editors in good standing (not under current sanctions) are eligible, and self-nominations are welcome. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term that ends at 23:59 on 30 June. Drive: Of the 69 editors who signed up for the September Backlog Elimination Drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 661,214 words in 290 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here. Blitz: Of the 22 editors who signed up for the October Copy Editing Blitz, 13 copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 109,327 words in 52 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here. Drive: During the November Backlog Elimination Drive, 38 of the 58 editors who signed up copy-edited at least one article. Between them, they copy-edited 458,620 words in 234 articles. Barnstars awarded are listed here. Blitz: Our December Copy Editing Blitz will run from 10 to 16 December. Barnstars awarded will be posted here. Progress report: As of 20:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 344 requests since 1 January, and the backlog stands at 2,191 articles. Other news: Our Annual Report for 2023 is planned for release in the new year. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
|
Message sent by Baffle gab1978 using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz. Just wondering why you did this? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, MSGJ,
- Because a few of your edits and Cewbot's edits, ended up putting some talk pages in category redirect pages that were broken redirects. Categories like Category:Start-Class vital articles in Biological and health sciences, Category:Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Biological and health sciences and Category:Stub-Class vital articles in Biological and health sciences. Category redirects should not contain any pages in them, they have to be empty categories. And because they were redirects pointing to target categories that had been deleted, category redirects that point to deleted categories are also deleted as broken redirects. So, I did what I did to remove any of the pages from them before deleting these broken category redirects. If you want to figure out an alternative solution, feel free to revert my edits. I admittedly don't know much about the tagging of talk pages so I just reverted the most recent edit to the page which seemed to cause the problem. Sorry for the inconvenience. Liz Read! Talk! 08:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
- Ah I see. This should all be sorted now, hopefully! In future, if you could give an edit summary like "revert because it populates a non-existent category" or similar, that would be very helpful. Best wishes — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
- Update: it turns out this is not fixed yet! So you have found an inconsistency that needs to be resolved. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
COIN
As you were the admin who originally deleted Jishnu Raghavan based on my G5 request, just wanted to give you a heads up about this COIN filing. CNMall41 (talk) 09:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey Liz, I wanted to seek some further guidance before making any more moves on the articles bundled at the Carl Tatz deletion discussion. Am I correct in reading Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people § Background that All improperly sourced articles about living people may be subject to deletion per the standard deletion processes, but in addition, biographies that do not contain at least one source directly supporting the material may also be proposed for deletion under this process means that I could simultaneously tag the BLPs with {{BLPPROD}} even as the... umm, messy AfD discussion continues above? Would that have been a better way to handle the process than my comment for closing admin on the AfD page? Further, is there any other suggestions or comments you have in regard to that process? I ask here so as to not further derail the discussion but feel free to point me back to the AfD page if you think that anyone reviewing the whole process would benefit from seeing your response. Kindly, microbiologyMarcus (petri dish·growths) 15:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Why?
I just wanna know why you have been deleting so much articles? AQuebecBoy (talk) 23:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)