Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 칼빈500 (talk | contribs) at 23:49, 14 October 2021 (→Youn Chul-ho). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Edit Count

Hi! You might find these handy:

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

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

I just don't understand your comments

What type of citations are you talking about? I already indicated that I was an unpaid volunteer for ACI Alliance in my disclosures from 2018. I just looked at the American College of Surgeons wiki entry and don't see any significant difference. If anything, their entry is both out of date and more advertising. Most of their citations are from their own website or publications. Please clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregorybarry (talk • contribs) 21:03, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what you're talking about. Onel5969 TT me 00:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Ricardo Estarriol

Hello Onel5969. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ricardo Estarriol, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: An obituary in El País is a manifest indication of notability. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:37, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Use of non-free material in Blanche Bernstein entry

Having reviewed the Wikipedia guidelines for use of non-free content and use of said content in the Blanche Bernstein entry, I do not see a violation. In my judgment, the uses are a mix of excerpted quotes and paraphrases of factual material, all cited by source and within fair use. BTV55 (talk) 17:43, 2 July 2021 (UTC) BTV55[reply]

Sorry, quite a bit of the article is taken verbatim from 2 sources, so there is a copyvio issue. Not enough to ask for the article to be deleted, but enough that it needs to be cleaned up. Onel5969 TT me 18:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Presidential Task Force

I've submitted my then-draft or what you considered at the time to be a draft of the Presidential Task Force article as it was unsourced for review. Just letting you know since you moved the article to draft space. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:50, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:55, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stay constructive

I notice if you don’t like an article you move it to draft space without proper communicating. This is not a good practice for people who invested a lot of time in the article.

You are also moving article to draft space by blaming editors to be paid editors; for instance here and here. When asking questions, for instance User talk:Blackariteam and User talk:PopMusicFan123 . You’re not answering my questions, but instead starting more nominating more articles of me for deletion. It’s even feels becoming personal.

You moved the article American Cochlear Implant Alliance to draft space see here with the reason that the editor would be a paid editor. When the user Gregorybarry asks you for clarification; your only reply is “ I have no idea what you're talking about”.

When not moving to draft you nominator article for AfD without doing a WP:BEFORE.

Please stay constructive and communicate when you don’t like things. SportsOlympic (talk) 18:11, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SportsOlympic, I think you ought to be more concerned about fixing your own poor articles, than worrying about others. Every article I send to AfD has a BEFORE done. I suggest that you start working on improving the poor articles you pump out. You've been communicated with DOZENS of times, and, if anything, are getting worse. If this continues, I see an ANI in your future. When you hound me on other pages, I don't respond, choosing to ignore your bad behavior, When the above user queried me, they provided no link to what they were talking about. I would ask you also to please stay constructive, but I think a better phrase would be to ask you to return to being constructive, rather than simply creating a lot of work for other editors. Onel5969 TT me 18:27, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to see you communicating. It’s always better to communicate instead the opposite. If you make personal attacks I would have appriciated if you came to my talk page instead of the one-sentence when moving to draft or one-sentence AfD nomination, especially because it’s becoming personal. Good you are doing WP:BEFORE, it’s a pitty you’re not very good in it. In my opinion it’s strange you didn’t know anymore you blamed someone of being a paid editor. Happy editing SportsOlympic (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SportsOlympic, it's a shame you seem ignorant of WP:VERIFY, WP:GNG, and WP:DISRUPTIVE. As I said above, you've been communicated with dozens of times, without any improvement. And if you feel there is a personal attack, rather than a truthful observation, feel free to point it out. The only personal attacks on the AfD's, has has been pointed out by other editors, are coming from you.
That being said, I'm not sure what the issue you are having lately is about. Last year it was a joy to review your articles, they were well-written, well-formatted and well-sourced. In the past 5 or 6 months you've seemingly lost interest in doing any of that. Onel5969 TT me 21:39, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Deprodding of Laurie Michelle Bridges

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Laurie Michelle Bridges, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! --Tautomers(T C) 22:52, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Majid Norouzi

We are both strongly against undisclosed paid editing. (I don't think that either of us is in favor of paid editing at all, but the rules permit disclosed paid editing.) However, do you have any specific reason for thinking that article is UPE, or does it smell? Robert McClenon (talk) 21:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McClenon, the pic in the article was taken by the article's creator. The other editor who moved it into mainspace may be a puppet, but I haven't researched that. Onel5969 TT me 23:53, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. That answers that. The provenance of the images is often informative. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:18, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Derrick Milano

Before proceeding with the body of my message, I wanted to note that I accidentally created a new page for Derrick Milano (at Derrick Milano) with what I thought was contesting the speedy deletion. (Before today, I hadn't tried to contest a speedy deletion on mobile.) I apologize for the error.

I would like to contest the speedy deletion, though, because as far as I can tell, the article subject is notable (in my opinion, unambiguously so) under WP:COMPOSER. The article subject has several notable compositions, and won a Grammy. The article appears to have been deleted previously in 2017; since then, the article subject both earned a Grammy and received writing credit on notable compositions.

To summarize, the article subject fulfills both points 1 and 4 under WP:COMPOSER (and maybe additional components).

  • Point 1 (Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.): Article subject is credited for writing "Savage Remix" (among other notable compositions).

Please let me know what to do to (1) revert my edits to the current Derrick Milano page that I made in an erroneous effort to contest the speedy deletion and (2) contest the speedy deletion.

Thanks for your help with this! palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 03:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since the article was already deleted, I left a message on the talk page of the deleting editor (User:Materialscientist) as instructed in the speedy deletion instructions you left on my talk page, so you can probably disregard the messages I've left here. palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 03:26, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As an update, the article is now restored! palindrome§ǝɯoɹpuᴉןɐd 22:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting discussion for John Gielgud, roles and awards

An article that you have been involved with (John Gielgud, roles and awards ) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (List of awards and nominations received by John Gielgud). Notice of this proposal has not been circulated by the nominator to contributors. If you are interested, please visit the discussion.

The article List of awards and nominations received by John Gielgud already exists and has been created duplicating material in the article John Gielgud, roles and awards: it has therefore been nominated for deletion, and the disucssion can be found here. Contributions to either or both discussions are welcomed.

Thank you. Smerus (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Deprodding of Music and the United States' suffragettes

I am leaving this message to let you know that the article Music and the United States' suffragettes that you tagged for Proposed Deletion was removed by another user, and they failed to leave a note on your talk page about it. They also appear to not have given any reason for doing so. This can be seen in the articles edit history. As you were not informed, I have taken it upon myself to leave this here so you may consider either perusing Articles for Deletion, or improving and tagging the article with Edit Templates as adding a new PROD is not permitted. Kind regards, --Tautomers(T C) 20:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As some additional notes because I have interacted with you before on this topic. I actually brought this up several days ago with this user and it fell on deaf ears and I am quite convinced he operates in bad faith on this based on the responses, petty behavior elsewhere, and ultimately deleting my message of his talk page. The important bit is I am countering this (hence this message). Also he removed several WP:Template index tags from the article which you may want to consider adding back as well. --Tautomers(T C) 20:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tautomers, hi. Yes, that's a pretty problematic editor, and thanks for the heads up. I saw they deprodded it, and am waiting for another NPP to take a look at it. I missed they had removed the tags, so I've now restored them. You can also restore tags if you think it's appropriate. Again, thanks. Onel5969 TT me 23:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken copyvio

You placed a G12 tag on my page, Solar eclipse of June 16, 2178, stating it to be a copyvio of this website. Actually, I copied IN Wikipedia, not from other websites.🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 21:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kepler-1229b, Okay, then you didn't provide that attribution in the edit summary, so I had no way of knowing. Could be that the other site also copied from WP. You can ask the deleting admin to restore the page, with the above explanation, but in the future you must provide attribution, so as to comply with copyright laws, even when copying from WP. See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. I thought it was unusual for you, since I've reviewed quite a few of your articles. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 23:16, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I remember attributing it in my sandbox.🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 17:13, 5 July 2021 (UTC):[reply]

Javad Daraei

Dear Onel5969 Javad Daraei article was not made for any money Javad Daraei is an independent director in exile who was tortured and arrested by the Iranian government for the content of his films.


And he received a grant from the Artist Protection Fund to study in the USA. And Aid For Artists In Exile, a human rights organization, helped him finish his film, And wrote about him on this site https://aid-a.com/artists-projects/

With love, AMIRNAGHSHI (talk) 04:36, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Sen Brahmana

According to the logs, you draftified this as not ready - however from my reading it appears to meet the presumed notability for a populated place - I'm inclined to accept with that presumption of notability, but I figured I'd check with you first since you draftified it. If you could ping me with any comments you have on it I can take another look, but I'm leaving it for now until I hear from you. Regards -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 05:20, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Berchanhimez, thanks for the ping. Accuweather is not a reliable source for terms of showing whether or not a play exists as a populated place, same thing for sites like Google Maps. You'd need something from an official government source (e.g. the census bureau). Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. It may just be me being crazy about not declining things that don't need declining, but a google search turns up a few sources (two of which are on the blacklist, but seem to be semi-reliable reproductions of census results and also [1]) that show that it's a legitimate place - at least from what I can see. Sure, they aren't the most reliable of sources, but from what I can see, the place exists and is a census recognized place. Given GEOLAND, I don't see any reason to decline it at this point - as much as I may disagree with towns of only a couple hundred people being notable, GEOLAND says that any "Populated, legally recognized place" is presumed to be notable. Personally, I have no problem with accepting it and it being sent to AFD for a more full discussion - but given GEOLAND I am leaning towards accepting - but again I'll be more than open to your opinion on the matter given the less-than-fully-reliable-ness of the available sources and that you draftified it. If you'd prefer I accept and you can send to AFD, again I have no problem with such even if the result is to delete - that would at least prevent accept-draftify-accept-draftify over and over as there'd be an AfD result for it. Regards -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 07:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just another link - official government this time - [2] (page 84 in the PDF). Regards -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 07:30, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Berchanhimez, blacklisted sites should never be considered. Sites which appear to reproduce government info, but are not government info, are not eligible either to show that it actually is a legally recognized place. This is especially true for Indian sites, which show pincodes, climate info, etc. There's a site like that for US places, which when I was first active on WP, I used to use all the time, before I learned that it was not reliable. Sometimes even government sources are not 100% reliable (like the US GNIS source). So if I was simply answering your first statement above, I would not approve the article. Just because a place exists (or existed) does not mean it passes WP:GEOLAND. That being said, your second comment, with a census pdf clearly shows that this is an officially recognized populated place, so that's the trump card. Onel5969 TT me 11:50, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BRC member redirects

Hi, when creating the BRC article I was minded Emanuel Admassu seemed to have less claims for Wikipedia notability compared to most or not all of the other members. Sekou Cooke's case seemed much stronger, there's a book also and connection to Hip-hop architecture may be stronger than that to the BRC redirect. I've chosen to undo your redirect. I've added a notability concern tag and unsure what way it would go, or even what way I would !vote at an AfD. Not investigated J. Yolande Daniels case ... and I don't have the bandwidth ... but I hope to pull back an earlier G13'd draft of same to check for copyright/attribution issues or socking.Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:54, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Djm-leighpark, thanks for the note. You could be right, but when I reviewed the article, the current sourcing did not show notability. A WP:BEFORE, does indeed show some coverage, but I did not see enough to pass WP:GNG. The three best articles were an interview (doesn't go to notability), a press release (not-independent), and a short article in Archinect. The last piece, however, has a long quote from the employer, and bears a resemblance to the type of article where it's really a press release, simply re-worded by the author. I also considered laying a notability tag on it, but it had been tagged for a few weeks already, for needing citations, without improvement, so I felt a stronger action was needed. Yet, I felt there was a chance they could be shown to be notable, so did not feel PROD/AfD was appropriate. Therefore the choices were Draftify or Redirect. Hope this helps you to understand the review process. Onel5969 TT me 12:54, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@onel5969: What is your view of the FEMMEpissoire at Draft:J. Yolande Daniels? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Djm-leighpark, hi. Not sure exactly what you're asking here. I'm pretty sure it's not for my personal opinion of that piece. So, if it's whether or not that piece goes to notability, I'd have to say no. There's not nearly enough coverage of it to make the piece notable, and it's not in the permanent collection of a major museum. Hope that's what you're looking for, Onel5969 TT me 13:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand if you think I am taking the piss, but per [3] I'd have to disagree. To add to the issues the FEMMEpissoire was on the recovered earlier G13 deleted incarnation; and while that incarnation has nothing on BRC stuff the existing redirect history has BRC stuff but no FEMMEpissoire. 'Tis a bit of mess all round, and may need wider eyes .... with new information seems a DRV candidate. (NB: I regard you in good faith in all of this). Forcing an AfD would also be an option. Any thoughts? Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Djm-leighpark, not sure what the term "taking the piss" means, but contextually I think I understand you. And no, I don't think that. I think you're trying to communicate and not make a big issue of somethin and create a lot of work for other editors. Which is highly commendable. Unfortunately your link above is not a valid link, so unsure what you're attempting to say with that. There are two articles about female urination devices (not sure why, but that's another issue), and neither mentions FEMMEpissoire. I haven't evaluated all the folks mentioned in your BRC article, just the few I've come across in NPP, but the best of them have questionable notability. Despite what it appears, I actually hate sending articles to AfD, has that can be such a time suck. Not saying I'm afraid to (certainly no one could claim that), just that I don't like to. Unfortunately sometimes it's the only way to get articles improved. I'm seeing a lot of primary sourcing here, and not the type of in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable refs which would indicate a GNG pass. And btw, I always consider other's editing in AGF, unless they prove otherwise. Which is definitely not an issue in your case, you are always careful and thoughtful. Onel5969 TT me 15:11, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I initially used a {{u}} instead of a {{Diff}} but I think its now fixed. The notability key point revolves around Alex Schweder's 2016 claim regarding the 1996 FEMMEpissoire,[1] namely that "Daniels’swas the first female urinal to allow its user to observe her body evacuating itself of urine." I am minded with that additional information any article would likely survive AfD in my estimation. If an article were to go forward I would prefer to see a merge of the two existing articles ... with appropriate attribution. ... (sorry have to dash) .... Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been mulling this over and I apologise for raising this matter poorly. I personally remain strongly minded Daniels is worthy of a mainspace article with addition information from the FEMMEpissoire supplemented by Schweder's piece would likely survive AfD if you or anyone felt that appropriate. I am mindful of your comment and I am inclined to think DRV may unnecessarily pull in too many experienced editors too soon ... better to have an AfD first if anyone can go though the BEFORE process. I'll probably do this today or the day after when I hope (repeat hope) to have some contiguous time space. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Schweder, Alex (2016). "A Piss Poor Performance" (PDF). Dirty Furniture. Vol. 3: Toilet. pp. 104–107. ISBN 9780993351129. OCLC 962802913.

The Key of Avalon

This page has sources from IGN, Gamespot, Dengeki, Sega itself etc. why can't it have a page??

I made pages like Dragon Treasure and Sega Network Taisen Mahjong MJ as well, and they are no problem?

Pinging @Red Phoenix to phone in please. OtopNr.3 (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@OtopNr.3: (and apologies to Onel5969 if I'm intruding) - There is a difference in this one, and that has to do with the Manual of Style for video game articles. WP:VG/CONTENT requires development and reception sections, reliably sourced. Sega Network Taisen Mahjong MJ only really gets away without just because it's a stub at the moment, but the sections that give notability to video games are development/history and reception. Coverage of gameplay or that the game was released, even by reliable sources, can be deemed "routine coverage" and therefore not notability-conferring. I would consider draftifying your work and researching to find development or at a very minimum critical reception, as that will go a long way toward meeting WP:GNG. Red Phoenix talk 02:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
, not intruding at all, thanks for explaining it for me. Onel5969 TT me 02:49, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply Red Phoenix, I'll rewrite it in the sandbox and let you see it again.OtopNr.3 (talk) 03:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Red Phoenix:@Onel5969: Expanded it a bit. What do you guys think? I searched high and low for critical reception and development info, this is all I could find sadly. There was a good interview on the SEGAVoice Interview archives (Interview Number 20), which sadly is not archived by the WayBack Archive.OtopNr.3 (talk) 22:55, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OtopNr.3, it's definitely better, but still not enough in-depth sourcing, imho. Onel5969 TT me 00:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not much more I can do sadly in terms of sourcing. Can I add a stub or "need more sources" tag on this article (as well as future ones with similar subject matter a.k.a. rather obscure Japanese arcade/console games from Sega.), and be done with it? OtopNr.3 (talk) 04:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OtopNr.3, I think this is a perfect case of why some of these games don't have articles, but instead are left as redirects. If there's not enough sourcing, then it doesn't pass GNG. I'm sorry. Onel5969 TT me 13:03, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Onel5969: OK, managed to find an interview that discusses the game's version 2. And also added a source that explains the game's rules from an official Japanese gaming site rather than from an english fanblog. Wonder if that helps? EDIT: Managed to find one more thing about the producer's role of this game.OtopNr.3EDIT#2@Red Phoenix: Once again pinging Red Phoenix to weigh on this matter...(talk) 18:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For Ivan Yastrebov

I have added new articles now. I think these references are sufficient. and I remove the template. Thanks for your contributions. Jescfan2000 (talk) 15:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New message from GreaterPonce665

Hello, Onel5969. You have new messages at Talk:Guthrie S. Birkhead Jr..
Message added 15:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

GreaterPonce665 (TALK) 15:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tarakote parganah

Hi ! Greetings from India. I noticed recently that you haved added "unclear citation" tag to the above mentioned article. I'm trying to improve that article, could you please tell me what exactly is unclear in the citation and how can I correct it ? Thank you ! Jonas7798 (talk) 20:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas7798, greetings from the US. If you take a look at WP:CIT, you'll see the type of information you need in references/footnotes, in order for stuff to pass WP:VERIFY . In short, you need to provide enough information in the sourcing so that if someone was researching, they could easily look it up and find the info in the source. For example, simply listing a publication isn't enough, give as much info as you can, title, author, page number, etc. The above link is very useful for this. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 00:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Onel5969:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1500 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.[reply]

CSD of Empower Work

Hi Onel5969, you recently CSDed Empower Work what issues do you see in the article? (I'm not that experienced in writing articles, so please give me any feedback you have)

-- Justiyaya 14:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Justiyaya, it's already been deleted, so I can't look at it to refresh my memory, but if it's the article I think it was directly copy-pasted from a website, and therefore was a copyright violation. When you write on WP, you have to write in your own words, and then source it with outside references. See WP:COPYVIO for more in-depth explanations. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:34, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was an unambiguous advertising tag. Justiyaya 14:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Draft restored at Draft:Empower Work Justiyaya 15:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Justiyaya, oh, okay, than it read more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia article. This can be an issue for new editors, as they attempt show notability, and in doing so come off as promotional. And not just new editors. If I were you, I'd ask the admin who deleted it to restore it in draftspace, and then go through AfC, where more experienced editors can give you advice as you develop the article. Onel5969 TT me 15:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can you be my "experianced editor"? Justiyaya 15:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Justiyaya, I don't normally do that, as I'm pretty busy in gnomish crap here on WP (way too much to my liking, but it's got to get done), but sure. I've already left a message on the draft's talk page. Don't expect too much activity from me, however, but I'll look at it once or twice a day. Onel5969 TT me 15:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait also... You should really archive your talk page (had to scroll like a second just to get to the end of the table of contents) Justiyaya 15:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and reference

Most of the independent news sources are in print media... I'm not sure if they are allowed, because they are epaper in PDF FORMAT Ponnerro (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ponnerro, hi. I'm not really sure what you're talking about. Onel5969 TT me 19:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cerrone discography

Hi, I've gone through WP:SPLIT and found my issue still wanting. You've assumed that there is a need for attribution, as when I 'created' the Cerrone discography page, I had sourced the information online and had not used the information found at Cerrone's Wikipedia page. So surely there is no need for attribution as I am therefore the sole attributor? However, in order that this doesn't turn into an edit war, I will follow the ‘licensing requirements' and add the attribution. DPUH (talk) 21:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DPUH, hi, and thanks for the conversation. I do not disagree with your assessment of the need for attribution. That being said, several times over the last 3 years virtually the same issue has come up, and even though you didn't do a simple cut and paste, the ptb's have argued that there is still a need for attribution. Been a busy day for me, or else I probably would have explained it better prior to this thread. Regardless, my apologies for not being more explicit in my edit summary. Thanks for all you do on the project. Onel5969 TT me 01:50, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for letting me know about the need for attribution, will remember to do it properly in future. Have added attribution to the Cerrone pages, let me know if I haven't done right. Thanks, DPUH (talk) 08:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undisclosed payments

Hi Onel. No payments were taken to create the Phil De Luna article. I'm almost flattered! It's hard to prove a negative, of course, but I am just volunteer with a bit of Wiki familiarity. I was going to create a couple of other nominee articles but this whole process is discouraging.

If a tag is necessary can we just revert to the ones that were initially there? Or simply the general POV tag? My concern now is that anyone happening across the page will encounter an insinuation that the subject has acted unethically when he hasn't had anything to do with the creation of the article. (He may have edited as anon -- I am not sure.) I only removed the tags as I'd hoped Somej's editing would allay the POV concerns. Thanks. Greenbound (talk) 14:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greenbound, I took a look at your userpage and talkpage before applying the tag to see if you had declared as per WP:UPE. While not clearly defined at that link, payment, imho, does not have to only take the form of monetary remuneration. Therefore volunteers might be deemed as receiving some non-monetary benefit. At the very least, if you remove the upe tag, you need to add a COI tag. Am pinging an admin for their viewpoint, Barkeep49. Don't want to dissuade you from editing, but you shouldn't edit articles about subjects you have a connection to. AGF, I've removed the UPE and replaced it with the COI tag. Onel5969 TT me 14:39, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I am unfamiliar with these things so if you prefer the COI tag that's fine. I wouldn't mind being mentored in how to ultimately get the tags removed. Until Somej yesterday no one had helped me edit the article. As for being connected, I have met De Luna at a park clean-up and on Zoom calls but there's no big backroom deal here! This may work against his purposes by downplaying notability, but there is virtually no chance he wins this election.
I can understand that Wiki needs to be careful about COI but there is a contradiction at work. Vast swathes of edits are done by people connected to the subject, right? 44th Canadian federal election. I would be willing to wager that almost every blue link on this has been created by a staffer or volunteer. How do we square that circle in terms of COI? I'm not trying to be tendentious. I am genuinely curious. It's an important question for a project like Wiki. Greenbound (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A close connection is different than a connection. The idea is that we want editors who can write with a neutral point of view. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:02, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Barkeep. I had hoped the article had become neutral but I am not in the best position to judge having written most of it. If it helps, I can avoid editing it directly and post suggestions on its talk page. Although that would require someone to babysit. Greenbound (talk) 15:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Santhosh Damodharan

Hey, I accepted the article which clearly has COI/UPE concerns. I also noticed that you had notified the user on this and asked them to address/declare their COI. They haven't done that so far but I accepted it already. If this is a wrong move, please undo my accept. This is also a question that I always had in mind (still learning) - if a page clearly has COI but is notable, do we not accept it unless the COI has been addressed? Or, do we put a tag of COI/UPE and then accept it? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 03:24, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomadicghumakkad, thanks for reaching out. The purpose of draftifying COI/UPE articles is so that they can go through the AfC vetting process. You're a fine AfC reviewer, and if you vetted it, then moving it back is perfectly fine. Personally, I wouldn't until they've declared, but that's just me, I feel pretty strongly about UPE and think they should never be encouraged, but others feel fine. COI is slightly different, but same philosophy. Regarding the tag, if they have not addressed the issue, then the UPE tag should remain until they do. If it's a COI issue, and the AfC reviewer feels the article is neutral in tone, they can by all means remove it. And regarding approving COI articles which are clearly notable, I wouldn't until the article is written neutrally. But again, that's me. Keep up your good work over at AfC, it's important, and mostly goes unrewarded. Onel5969 TT me 03:31, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969, humbled and delighted to have your positive opinion on my AFC reviews so far!!! Such pockets of motivation really keep me going. I was a tad disappointed when my temporary NPP rights were not continued since I had made some mistakes with tagging pages which had COI concerns that automatically marked them as reviewed. But this is just great. You have made my day. Duly noted all your points. Neutrality is a major one for me as well. In fact, I get even more conservative on sources and absolutely hate people using primary sources to cite information - no matter notability is already proven or not. I still feel resistant to put UPE tags and prefer to put COI tags first until and unless it is absolutely obvious. Have been taught some COI nabbing skills by an editor I really admire so making progress with those. I might bother you more with my COI/UPE doubts case to case basis! Thank you and good night! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 15:51, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI mention

Hi Onel5969 - hope you are well. For info, and incase you didn't get the ping, I mentioned you in this thread with regards to the aricle patrolling you have done in relation to articles I've created. I'd be grateful for your input. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:14, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Choujin X

Hi Onel5969, hope you're doing well. Before some months, I created an article about a manga named Choujin X. But it got moved to draft, I guess because of lack of citations? That's why I added more citations to the article. Though this manga is completely new, that's why I don't have enough information. But I tried my best to add many sources as possible. Can you please review my article and see if it's eligible for being published or not.

Here's the article: Draft:Choujin X SenseiArunava (talk) 14:01, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Athena Salman controversy

I did some checking and the source in the article makes no mention of "blood libel." I also found this source that mentions it and quotes another senator making the blood libel claim. That section seems to be WP:UNDUE as it doesn't seem to get enough coverage to be a controversy, and certainly it's written with a very strong POV, especially for a BLP. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:39, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ScottishFinnishRadish, I actually agree with you. I was AGF on the part of the editor who added it, but now see that it was slanted. I also agree that simply including that would fall under undue. Onel5969 TT me 18:43, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Glad that was resolved so smoothly. Happy editing! ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar

Thanks for being so willing to share your knowledge. For a complex area such as NPP, this is essential. Thanks for all the answered questions :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Novem Linguae. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 22:42, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ondipudur Flyover

Hi I was thinking of redirecting this to Coimbatore but I see you already reverted an attempt to do this back in May. I just wondered what your objection was? Thanks Mccapra (talk) 20:26, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra, I actually have no objection. My revert wasn't of it being redirected, but the redirection was malformed. They had simply added a redirect template to the top of the article, and left the body of the article intact. Onel5969 TT me 22:41, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see thanks. Mccapra (talk) 04:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A favour

Hi Onel... It's been awhile. How are you keeping during COVID-19? Hope your well! I'm sending you this message because I believe this article should be redirected due to its lack of content. Is there anything you can do to help out? Thanks! The Optimistic One (talk) 00:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Optimistic One, hi. Yeah, had Covid around last Thanksgiving, was much worse with the flu in Paris in 2019. Hope you've weathered the storm. I agree regarding that character, have redirected it to the series cast list. Onel5969 TT me 02:10, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really, well I'm awaiting test results right now due to showing symptoms. Let's hope its negative. Thanks for that btw, I would do it often but I'm not using a PC. The Optimistic One (talk) 08:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. On further readings through The Office-related articles, I found that the articles Darryl Philbin, Phyllis Vance, and Creed Bratton (The Office) all show no indication of real-world notability.

Dawn Tinsley, from the British version; also has zero references. I noticed as well that the season articles are listed as American season #. I don't think that this is relevent information. The British version only had two, and are referred to as series's and it should be rare now for someone to get confused with the two. The Optimistic One (talk) 21:50, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Optimistic One, while I absolutely love the show (one of the few tv shows I've actually watched), I agree that not every character meets notability criteria. In addition, all 3 of these consist entirely of plot, without any of the elements which would allow a fictional character to have an article (development of the character, reception, etc.). Dawn Tinsley is even easier to redirect, with zero sourcing. Regarding the titles, I think that's due to titling conventions. Although I'm not sure. You might ask a question over at the television project. I think they are simply being consistent. Pleasure as always. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 13:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Appreciate the help! The Optimistic One (talk) 16:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NBOOKs

I don't agree here. The book meets #1 criteria of WP:BOOKCRIT having been used as a source by a number of scholarly publications,[4][5][6][7][8] and it has been also catalogued by Princeton Univeristy,[9] National Library of Australia[10] and others. It is fine to keep standalone article of this book. LearnIndology (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LearnIndology, then add them to the article. Onel5969 TT me 16:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPP school

Hi Onel5969. I was interested in joining the NPP school and I was wondering if you would be willing to take me on as a student. I have been a Wikipedian since 2018 and I've written a few articles, but the NPP process looks pretty complicated and nuanced, so I think that the NPP school would be a useful learning experience. I've graudated CVUA, so I know about a bit about the speedy deletion criteria (although I don't know how important that would be in new page reviewing - maybe G11s?) Clovermoss (talk) 01:01, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, I'd be honored to help you through the process. This morning, I'll set up your NPP school page and ping you when I do. Welcome aboard. Onel5969 TT me 12:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's created, Clovermoss. You can find it at User:Onel5969/Clovermoss/NPP. Looking forward to it. Onel5969 TT me 21:20, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Measure of presortedness

Hi,

You moved a page I wrote to draft. I had some question about what to do, it seemed not clear to me. Can you please answer on the draft's discussion page? Arthur MILCHIOR (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur MILCHIOR, responded there. Onel5969 TT me 12:58, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Army (International Military-Technical Forum)

Hi, Dear Onel5969.

You have moved an article to the draft because of official sources.

There is only official site as sources, cause all journalists was in lockdown. And there was only guests and customers from different countries on this forum. --Kirill Borisenko (talk) 10:05, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kirill Borisenko, then it probably won't meet notability criteria. Just because folks were in lockdown, doesn't mean that no news was reported. Onel5969 TT me 12:59, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How about: Goverment site, Military journal, Kremlin site, Rostech site, Army technolohy site, TASS site? --Kirill Borisenko (talk) 02:29, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Could you check the article? --Kirill Borisenko (talk) 23:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Spiritual science"

Hi Onel5969

I have made an article to explain the concept "spiritual science", and it has been deleted by you. I don´t understand that. The term "spiritual science" (in this specific meaning) is not only used by Rudolf Steiner. It is also used by for example Martinus (Martinus Thomsen). And there are reliable sources for that, as you can see in the references. "Spiritual science" is neither limited to nor identical with Anthroposophy. To redirect it to Anthroposophy also makes other internal links meaningless (for example in the article "Martinus Thomsen"). Please don´t redirect "spiritual science" to Anthroposophy again. It is unneccessary, because I´ve made a clear cross-reference to the article "Anthroposophy" under the section "Rudolf Steiner" in my article. Alexandramander (talk) 17:46, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Finnegan (The Bold and the Beautiful) - Notability Tag

Hello!

I hope all is well! I have noticed that you have added a notability tag within the following article I just heavily worked on: John Finnegan (The Bold and the Beautiful). I am highly confused about why this was added and pondering how I could remedy this issue? Can I gain some guidelines in order that I can remove the tag? As you can see, excessive research has been done using a profuse amount of secondary sources. The character's full name is John Finnegan, but he is referred to as "Finn" on the series, so the google search may vary on his name if that is the confusion (however, he is credited in closing credits as John Finnegan). The character has been on the series for a year and is already very notable within the canvas, and recognized especially due to the character's romantic relationship with one of soap opera's female leads and fathering her child. Essentially, in soap opera lingo, we call this the character linked to a "legacy" character and has fathered a "legacy" child. This alone warrants him an article and the casting, expansion and introduction of his family members. This soap opera character is a major player and is portrayed by a contracted actor. Once again, I am just highly confused about how this article does not meet the notability criteria when there has been significant coverage of the character, references are reliable, sources are all secondary, it is very independent of the subject and once again deeply presumed for reasons cited above.

Thank you! Best,  — AwardShowFan123 (talk) 16:00, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AwardShowFan123, the coverage needs to be in-depth, and not solely "in-universe". While he is a notable character on the show, that does not translate into notability outside the show. When you take all the fan stuff away regarding the character on the show, there is very little left. Onel5969 TT me 17:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
onel5969; No offence, but I could not disagree with you more and your assessment. I am highly confused because there are so many soap opera fictional character pages out there, who does not have half the research, sources and references I have and there is no "notability" tag. I literally do not understand how this character does not merit his own page when I have done excessive research and have proven especially in the casting, characterization, relationship and critical reception sections the character's impact and romantic pairing this past year. Therefore, I want to fight this in any way I can to remove this tag so how do I contest this? Furthermore, the coverage is IN-DEPTH. The character's introduction as well was done when Bold and Beautiful, was the first United States scripted production to return taping during the COVID-19 restrictions, and his character (even his first airdate) was discussed in those secondary sources announcing the series' return. So, the impact was beyond the "in-universe" you speak of. Again, please let me know what I can do to remove the tag. Thank you.  — AwardShowFan123 (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AwardShowFan123, only way is to improve the sourcing in regards to real world notability. As I said, most of the stuff in the article is in-universe. Onel5969 TT me 20:55, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
onel5969;"Real-world notability"? I am truly stuck on this because I have no idea the significance of that. Like what is it you looking for; what type of sources? It is a soap opera fictional character page. I have followed the same structure of that a bunch of other similar soap pages has done, and yet those pages have not been targeted for "notability".  — AwardShowFan123 (talk, contribs) 21:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AwardShowFan123, so how is that character, not the actor, not the show, the character, show any real world notability. You have in there how fans received the actor who portrays the character, how certain plot lines...yada yada yada. That's all in-universe. Onel5969 TT me 21:16, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
onel5969; It is NOT just fans; it is actually reliable critics of soap operas who have written columns about the character and their reception on his notability. Also, the way fans have received the actor is the exact same thing as how fans received the character. They work together simultaneously, so again, I am not sure what your point is. Are you familiar with soap opera fictional characters pages because they ALL follow the same structure. What I did wasn't out of the ordinary. So again, this is confusing, and I think you made an error of judgment and the tag should be removed.  — AwardShowFan123 (talk, contribs) 21:34, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
JJakathestrength, it's still all in-universe. And I really don't care about weak WP:OSE arguments. Onel5969 TT me 21:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
onel5969; Okay, well I didn't really care about your notability tag, but I want to improve the article, so here am I but you are not giving me anything to work with. I would appreciate of an example of what you are looking for. Because this still makes no sense to me, and I believe the article is in good shape.  — AwardShowFan123 (talk, contribs) 21:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Laurie Michelle Bridges

Hi! ,I left my answer in the proposal of speedy deletion on Laurie Michelle Bridges, but I did not have answer.
Here I copy it:
In the previous proposal for deletion, I was late to participate in the debate. Please, this biography is very valuable to the library community, I believe that it should not be deleted.
  • Keep
This librarian is a very important woman to the international library community, regardless of the traditional publishing circuit. The concept of notability should not be tied to the article indexing ranking when, ultimately, she is a person with various academic publications.
Having her biography allows many people to know the impact of women librarians of the 21st century. I also believe that the fact that her article in the Spanish edition of wikipedia remains alive, shows the relevance of her existence. Thanks in advance!
I have also located several interviews that this important woman for the library community has given and could help improve the article, if you would allow me to include them:
https://www.archivozmagazine.org/en/freedom-access-can-be-hindered-in-many-ways/ https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/October_2019/Contents/Wikipedia_Library_report https://blogs.ifla.org/lpa/2020/04/20/wikipedia-and-academic-libraries-what-are-the-needs-and-issues-an-interview-with-laura-bridge-raymond-pun-and-roberto-arteaga/ https://journal.code4lib.org/articles/10424 https://fjerezsocialmedia.com/2015/05/22/entrevista-con-laurie-bridges/
I will be attentive, thanks for your support

Virc587 (talk) 14:55, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Virc587, hi. I see you've already left a message on Explicit's talk page, so I'll let them address the issue. Onel5969 TT me 15:08, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Onel5969 TT me
Having your answer would also be very helpful. I still cannot find support on this issue to understand what I am doing wrong and the answers evade my argument: I was late to the debate, which did not take my argument into account and the biography meets at least two criteria of general notability.
Thanks for your support! Virc587 (talk) 16:04, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Virc587, while you were late to the discussion (since you added your comment after the discussion was already closed, something which should not be done), your comments do not show how how she passes either WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC. And there has been no evasion on answering your questions. Explicit told you the same thing I just did, the subject currently does not meet either of those guidelines. Onel5969 TT me 16:20, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't know how to do it. The truth is that I am quite new, and I realized afterwards that I should not have intervened. He didn't know what else to do either. The biography does meet the guidelines, but I will leave these arguments for another opportunity, I already have it documented. I will do the draft, as explained to me in other comments, and I will try to learn how to improve this experience. Hugs! Virc587 (talk) 14:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jaiden Animations draft

So is this ready to pass notability? Please see Draft talk:Jaiden Animations and chime in on whether this is now ready to pass notability. If enough of the objectors in AFC and AFDs are on board, we can push to remove the salt. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AngusWOOF, commented there. Thanks for the ping. Onel5969 TT me 18:23, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hurun

Hi, hope all is well with you, can a have a look at this one. Thanks. --John B123 (talk) 19:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John B123, I did this morning. This was put back into mainspace by one of those half-dozen or so poor editors I mentioned at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers#Editors who continue to produce really poor stubs. Normally I would move it to draft, but that would simply be an exercise in futility. And it may or may not pass an AfD, since the sourcing is so incredibly poor. When we had that editor who was doing something similar regarding Canadian rivers, I'm beginning to remove information which is either unsourced or does not have enough sourcing to pass WP:VERIFY, which is what I just did at that article, after looking at it again. I'm not sure either source clearly shows that this is a legally recognized place. But the only two options are draftify or AfD. Onel5969 TT me 20:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks for having a look. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 20:29, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC for Vaush

I recently created a draft for an article on Vaush. However, upon seeing that an article on him was recently deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vaush, I decided to put the article through the AfC process instead of moving it straight to mainspace. If you have any comments feel free to discuss the draft page at its talk page Draft talk:Vaush. Thanks. Alduin2000 (talk) 20:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruben Garfias

What should be done with this article? A user decided upon themself that the page is fine to be article/wikified, with barely any changes since originally being changed into a draft. Just taking a quick look at the references, it's clearly not ready to be an article: 15/18 of the *sources* are from IMDb (which is a no-no, WP:RS/IMDb and WP:Citing IMDb), 2 of the sources are from TV Maze, which I am quite familiar with and is a WP:USERG site, and one source is from something called 'Xwhos', of which, I am not quite sure what its WP:RS status is, but to me, appears to be WP:NOTRS. It's clear this article is not ready for the mainspace... Magitroopa (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also seems like you had a similar situation like this with the same editor doing the same thing regarding Draft:David Michery... Magitroopa (talk) 21:47, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Magitroopa, I removed all the uncited material or material cited by unreliable sources. Which is basically the entire article. I moved it back into draftspace. I'm not sure it passes notability criteria, but clearly doesn't pass WP:NACTOR, he's a working actor, but has had no significant roles. Onel5969 TT me 22:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chukwuemeka Fred Agbata

Please can you enlightened me more about the revisions you made to the above named article. Please can you give more explanation about the reason for reverting the added information and citations. I'll be happy to learn. Ptinphusmia (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ptinphusmia, please read WP:UPE and WP:COI, and follow the instructions there. Onel5969 TT me 13:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Guacolda (mapuche mythology)

@Onel5969, could you explain better which criteria you used to consider the article does not meet WP:VER? Which kind of references should be enough as she is mentioned in La Araucana? Thanks. Amitie 10g (talk) 19:30, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Amitie 10g, almost the entire article is unsourced. Onel5969 TT me 23:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfD revert

Apologies. Slip of the finger, Cheers. -- Longhair\talk 02:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Longhair, lmao... no worries. And btw, thanks for all your work here on the project. I don't think we've ever interacted before, but who knows after all this time. Onel5969 TT me 02:47, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we've interacted now, even if it was due to the cat walking across the keyboard, 'cept I don't own a cat. All the best :D -- Longhair\talk 02:51, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Longhair, it's funny you mention a cat walking across the keyboard. When my daughter moved to Tokyo, we inherited her cat. Which means I inherited it, and it has become quite attached to me. I've I'm not paying enough attention to him, he will sit on my desk and keep swatting my hands as I attempt to type, sometimes causing some interesting typos. Once, I was in the middle of editing a page for copyvio issue, and left the edit window open while I went and grabbed a cup of coffee, When I returned, he had obviously been pacing back and forth on my desk, as the page was now unintelligible. My first thought was, "wow, glad he didn't hit enter.". Onel5969 TT me 16:26, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification regarding Padma Rao Sundarji article moved to draftspace

My article Draft: Padma Rao Sundarji has been moved to the draft space. I would like to clarify a few points here-

1. I have already declared paid contribution on User:ShravanthiRK as well as on the talk page of the draft. So I am unable to figure out what UPE/COI issue I have to sort out?
2. I have provided independent sources which significantly covers the subject (the person) and it is not a passing mention. It is print media which talks about the writer, her work, her professional associations with news organisations, her interviews of notable people along with the review of her book. This was published by a Srilankan daily newspaper, which in my opinion, is independent of the subject, published by a third party with no direct connection to the subject and is a reliable source.
3. I have cited the details of her published books which in itself are primary reliable sources. Also cited as references are book reviews by leading newspapers, which are acceptable according to wiki guidelines.
4. I am unable to figure out what part of the article needs more sources or needs to be removed? Please point out the same as I dont seem to understand this.
5. I have cited news articles written by third party and published by leading newspapers, which cover news about her as a journalist.
So what more are we looking for? Please help me understand the same. I have had my article reviewed multiple times and have made many changes after receiving feedback from each reviewer. It is only after confirming that my references are good enough to be cited that I moved the draft to the mainspace. Request you to explain exactly where I have gone wrong? Thanks in advance! ShravanthiRK (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ShravanthiRK, that's great that you admitted your connection. Doesn't mean the article meets notability criteria. And COI editors should not directly edit articles, they should be reviewed first. Your article has been reviewed, and declined, half a dozen times. She's a working journalist, but not a notable one. You need to go through AfC to get the draft approved. Onel5969 TT me 16:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the reply, Onel5969. I will go through the AfD process. However, I request you to clarify regarding the sources as I do not wish to get my submission declined again. Requesting you to point out to me exactly which part needs correction, which are the sources to be removed and what part of the article needs more references. Please advise. Thanks again! ShravanthiRK (talk) 16:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ShravanthiRK, please read WP:GNG, you need several in-depth coverage pieces about her, from independent, reliable sources in order to show notability. Onel5969 TT me 16:38, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now all the sources I have which have a significant direct and detailed coverage of the subject are in print media. I have read wiki guidelines and understand that the sources need not be available online. However, I wish to understand if they would still be considered as significant coverage to establish notability. The reason I ask is because I am trying my hardest for my submission not to be declined again for referencing reasons. Request you to help me understand please! Thank you! ShravanthiRK (talk) 17:02, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

St. Marys Bay French

Hi! I added another source to Draft:St. Marys Bay French, which you moved to draftspace and marked as not ready for mainspace. I was wondering if you could give it another look, and perhaps make specific suggestions for what else is needed. Specifically, I do recognise that it's not a very full article, but I've run into many much sparser articles in mainspace, so I'm not sure I understand what the exact criteria are. Any guidance would be appreciated! —Firespeaker (talk) 19:04, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firespeaker, nice job. Moved it into mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 17:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wonderful, good to see! Thanks! —Firespeaker (talk) 22:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for moving pages in draftspace

Hi, I saw that you moved some pages I created in the draftspace, including Sicilian Spring, which had elected a deputy in the Sicilian Assembly with its own symbol. In this specific case, is it a matter of notability or of sources? Because I've seen so many pages of much more irrelevant Italian parties than this ...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 08:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scia Della Cometa, hi. As I said in my note on your talk page, "While most likely notable, the single reference provided does not provide WP:VERIFY for the information in the article. I could have left it in mainspace, but that would have meant gutting the article, so I felt it was better moved to draft to give you a chance to add the appropriate references." If you have sources to support the information in the article, that would be ideal. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:51, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll try to find more sources on the subject.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:29, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alapini Vina

Hi Alapini Vina is essentially a cut and paste copy of Eka-tantri Vina (which I reviewed) by the same creator. I’ve asked them on their talk page why we have effectively one article under two titles and not got a very coherent answer. If there’s no further editing in the next few days I think we should just redirect one to another - as they’re identical it doesn’t matter which way. Mccapra (talk) 13:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra, first, how did you know that? Second I agree that we should give it some time to see if the editor follows through on their statement they intend to better differentiate the two instruments. Onel5969 TT me 13:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was grazing my way through the South Asia sorted feed, reviewed Eka-tantri Vina which looked surprisingly well put together. Then saw a slightly odd talk page message about material being moved around. I skipped the next article in the queue and the one after that was Alapini Vina, which was basically identical. If they weren’t almost next to each other I might not have spotted it. Mccapra (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mccapra, thanks. Couldn't figure out how I missed it. Onel5969 TT me 14:08, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:JosephineWhittell.jpg

⚠
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:JosephineWhittell.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedily deleted article

Hello Onel5969 You and another editor were part of the speedy deletion process that resulted in a deletion referenced HERE.

After conversation, it was realized that this was a good faith effort and a draft version restored. I re-submitted the article, Chalk paint after I and another editor revised it. It was recently accepted. Should you like to do so, please take a look at it and I'd appreciate any advice or thoughts on the article. It is an article I'd like to follow up on as time passes. I would like to find further information about the material and keep my eye out for such. I understand the article is probably start class, but it is a start. I'm also working on the New Albion article to attempt FA status and following up on an my first list article about Francis Drake's circumnavigation. Kind regards, Hu Nhu (talk) 02:00, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gresham Life

Hello Onel5969, I wrote an answer below your comment in my talk page. Regards --Ricercastorica (talk) 09:32, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be so kind as to grant my wish?

Hi Onel5969, may I please ask for a reply concerning the request on my user talk. Best wishes, --15:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OS, hi. There was no question posed. Onel5969 TT me 16:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a question, but as said a request, namely ″I'd like to ask you to please delete the drafts″, which you haven't replied yet. --OS (talk) 17:13, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OS, oh. Well, I'm not an admin, so I cannot. If you would like them deleted place a {{Db-g7}} tag at the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 18:17, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you're no admin and cannot. Then why can you move the articles to draftspace? If anybody can do what you did, then why can't I simply move them back to mainspace? --OS (talk) 20:40, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OS, because while not an admin, I am a New Page Patroller. And you cannot add information which is not properly cited, so as to pass WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 TT me 22:28, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please tell me which sources are missing and need to be supplemented? --OS (talk) 09:33, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OS, every assertion made in the article needs a reference. Any uncited material can be removed at any time. That satisfies WP:VERIFY. In addition, there need to be at least 3 references from independent sources which go into the article's subject in-depth to show that they meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 12:21, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarification. However, what I do not understand is: When you're unable to delete the total articles, as you told me, why do you then deletete nearly everything? Why do you not instead add the needed references? Do you think, Wikipedia articles are becoming better just by massive deletion? --OS (talk) 13:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OS, because that's not my job. That's the job of the person who put the information in without citing it. Instead of wasting other editor's time, why do you not simply add the references needed. And yes, I think removing uncited information vastly improves WP. And if you understood the concept and need of WP:VERIFY, you'd understand that. Onel5969 TT me 13:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

blocking accurate information

I have tried to update information on a LPTV station only to have it blocked for unknown reasons.It is not connected to no other station,but the redirect link remains,which is not correct.My information came directly from the rabbitears database. This is not acceptable for a community based service!!!! Othelum (talk) 22:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pranav Vatsa

Hello onel5969 Sir, Please review the Pranav Vatsa's article, your review will encourage me to create more article. Thanks and regards. Sams321 (talk) 21:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks:) onel5969 Sir for reviewed but why did not showing on google search page even it's reviewed? Sams321 (talk)
That I don't know. Don't know Google's parameters. Onel5969 TT me 02:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Phoenix, Arizona Reassessment

Phoenix, Arizona, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 10:39, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Allie X split

Thanks for pointing out the attribution issue with this split. Though in the future, it might be simpler (for everyone involved) to just repair the missing attribution yourself by adding a dummy edit, rather than undoing the whole split. Colin M (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Colin M, hi. And I agree wholeheartedly, and if I agree with the split, or it meets WP:SPLIT, then I would normally do that. However, I don't agree with the split, so felt it was better for the actual split with attribution come from you. Also, you're an experienced editor, so I felt the need to point it out to you. Onel5969 TT me 21:14, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, though if we're being pedantic, the only edit in which I copy-pasted any material from one article to another was this one, which did link back to the source article in the edit summary. The majority of the copying was done by Gagaluv1 in their original split in April, so it might make more sense to take it up with them. Colin M (talk) 21:17, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Colin M, actually, if you really want to be pedantic, and obnoxious, the edit I reverted was yours. So you were responsible for the current unattributed split. Now please stop. You're a good editor, and this is silly. Onel5969 TT me 01:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No way I'm letting you have the last word on this — I say the bikeshed should be fuchsia! Colin M (talk) 02:20, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Colin M, so you're the bicycle shed, and I'm nuclear safety. Got it. . Onel5969 TT me 02:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
Thanks for reviewing all the articles and redirects I created that hadn't already been reviewed at once! Link20XX (talk) 03:19, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa DeAngelis

How is someone who is a member of the National Academy of Medicine possibly failing our notability requirements? HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 13:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please use articles for deletion when creating redirects

I noticed that plenty of times, you have turned pages into redirects with no discussion, not even an AfD. Wouldn't it be better to notify people who frequently edit those pages to find sources for those pages instead of turning them into redirects without discussion? I feel like what you're doing falls under disruptive editing. I'd be fine if you put a tag saying those pages need sources, and if they aren't added in a while then start an AfD, and then delete them, instead of going straight to step 3. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:41, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnamed anon, redirecting is not deleting. Not every article needs to go to AfD. Most redirects I create are on articles which have either been tagged for improvement for months, or are an article which had been redirected in the past, and was recreated without appropriate sourcing. There is no reason to clog up a lot of editors' time over AfD on such articles. In the 4 examples you give above, the articles had been tagged without improvement for over a year, 7 weeks, was completely uncited (which falls under WP:BURDEN, and the fourth one was of a reality show contestant, where AfD's virtually always result in redirecting to the show, when that is their only claim to fame. Onel5969 TT me 20:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution

Hello @Onel5969, why did you merged the Fastboot article because it "lacks attribution"? I've added quite a lot of sources, it meets WP:GNG now. PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PhotographyEdits, did you see my edit summary? And my subsequent edit? Onel5969 TT me 13:59, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see it now, it makes sense! Thanks, will do it that way next time when I split some article. PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PhotographyEdits, hi. No worries. I do it that way so the other editor can see what needs to be in the edit summary when they do a split. There was nothing wrong with your split (although it might not meet the requirements as per WP:SPLIT), it simply needed attribution. Onel5969 TT me 14:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my recent RFA

I appreciate your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 18:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BusterD, you're welcome. I'm sure you'll do great. Onel5969 TT me 20:52, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft

Hi Onel, Could you move Draft:Nu-Venture back to User:Davey2010/Nu-Venture and delete the draft redirect please?, The article in question was deleted at AFD and I asked for it to be moved to my userpage however up until now I was unaware someone had moved it and had fiddled around with everything, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:52, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Davey2010, okay, I think I did it correctly. Let me know. Onel5969 TT me 22:50, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Onel, Many thanks for moving - Could you move it to User:Davey2010/Nu-Venture please as that's where it was before it was moved, I did say at the AFD I'd go through draft first however at present no better sources are available and it being at draft just invites peoples to mess around with it, Many thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 11:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Davey2010, Okay, finally figured out what I was doing wrong. It's there now. My apologies. Onel5969 TT me 12:18, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I've made that mistake plenty of times :), Thanks for your help it's very much appreciated :), Take care and stay safe, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 12:36, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Roland Habersetzer notability

Hi, I'm the guy who mainly worked on the Roland Habersetzer article. I would like to have a explanation for the "lack of notability". It's quite a claim to say that a notable mover of Karate in France and a writer that has been awarded the Marie-Thérèse Eyquem Prize by French government for his works lacks significance. And I know there is lack of citations - namely because I'm not French and the French language entry is suffering from serious case of link rot. Is it because Habersetzer is most relevant in continental Europe or what? TrickShotFinn (talk) 14:42, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

TrickShotFinn, no, it's because there is not nearly enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show they meet WP:GNG. Being successful, accomplished and well-known is not the same as pass GNG. Onel5969 TT me 14:46, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, this problem needs to be addressed. Thanks for your time.TrickShotFinn (talk) 14:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tornado Twins

DONT put the Tornado Twins in with Legion, put em with Flash characters. JosephWC (talk) 16:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sunny Hinduja

Hello. I want to edit the page on actor Sunny Hinduja, which currently redirects to Mardaani 2. The page was deleted in 2019 due to lack of notability. However, since then, the actor has appeared in major shows and have seen significant media coverage. I would like to know if there is any issue? Karan1311 (talk)

Olympiacos B deletion

Hello, this page is notable and very useful. This is the first season B teams in Greece have been permitted and it is constantly in the Greek press the exact same way PAOK B, AEK Athens B F.C., Panathinaikos B etc are. Most big teams in Europe have B team pages also: S.L. Benfica B, Villarreal CF B etc etc. I have reinstated the page as many new players are joining the squad from across europe. Reaper7 (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reaper7, That's all very nice and lovely. Also completely irrelevant. You need to provide in-depth sourcing from independent sites to show that the teams passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 21:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is simply untrue, there are independent sources explaining the team on the page - all independent as with every other Super League 2 team on Wikipedia. I think you have made a clear mistake here. All Super League 2 teams are relevant and well sourced. Reaper7 (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reaper7, A single source isn't lovely, It's lazy when it doesn't show how the subject passes notability. This single source simply shows the team's existence, not notability. No, it is not I who have made the mistake. Onel5969 TT me 21:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This page is in development as it should be - the term lazy displays an emotional response that is never a positive sign. I have added another 3 independent sources on top of the single independent source that was there, including a source from A Bola - the biggest Portuguese sports news site. I am afraid you are on a losing wicket here.. however it could turn into a useful learning experience I think - from reading through you talk topics, it seems rare your original deletion is challenged properly. Reaper7 (talk) 21:22, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reaper7, no, you simply don't care to understand. And on top of that, outright lying. The page was not "in development". You created it over a month and half ago. At which point it was tagged, letting you know it needed improvement in its sourcing. You chose to ignore that. So stop with the BS. Even now you do the lazy thing and simply add raw links, rather than properly formatting the references, creating yet more work for other editors. Onel5969 TT me 00:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eternal Champion (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Eternal Champion (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adrenaline page

hello sir the refs should be fine as I did not enter any information I did not get from a referenced source, I have 28 references on there and have already tried a great degree to edit it to what people have asked me to like taking out the phrase "would go on to win the TKO championship" and making it "he won the TKO championship" I also removed the accolades of all the fighters, I had all there title fights and stuff like that listed at the bottom. I have stated in there has a reference as I said are 28 references the earlier parts about the life of the gym's precursor can all basically be found in the single reference as it is a massive article about the man's life. However when it comes to the guidelines I will admit I seem to struggle could I ask you to maybe edit apart for me to what you would be considering acceptable cuz I don't feel that I am advertising I have just stated facts I have given information on the Gym's history and what they have done in the sport, have to show that it is notable. And I understand the part where I was talking about the new training facility but that is in the reference. (Someone else asked me to edit it too but they did not even mention that part). Anyway I am fairly confused as different editors seem to have different standards. Any Assistance you can offer me would be appreciated Tsims23 (talk) 18:32, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tsims23, I have no idea what you are talking about. Onel5969 TT me 22:11, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You put my page into drafts and said that I was writing it like an ad but I have already made corrections to it.Tsims23 (talk) 03:59, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tsims23, still don't know what you're talking about. What page? Please provide a link. Onel5969 TT me 12:06, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir sorry about the late reply work has been super busy I tagged you on my talk page and I will send you the link https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Adrenaline_MMA_Training_%26_Fitness As I mentioned above the refs should be fine as I did not enter any information I did not get from a referenced source, I have 28 references on there and have already tried a great degree to edit it to what people have asked me to like taking out the phrase "would go on to win the TKO championship" and making it "he won the TKO championship" I also removed the accolades of all the fighters, I had all there title fights and stuff like that listed at the bottom. I have stated in there has a reference as I said are 28 references the earlier parts about the life of the gym's precursor can all basically be found in the single reference as it is a massive article about the man's life. However when it comes to the guidelines I will admit I seem to struggle could I ask you to maybe edit apart for me to what you would be considering acceptable cuz I don't feel that I am advertising I have just stated facts I have given information on the Gym's history and what they have done in the sport, have to show that it is notable. And I understand the part where I was talking about the new training facility but that is in the reference. (Someone else asked me to edit it too but they did not even mention that part). Anyway I am fairly confused as different editors seem to have different standards. Any Assistance you can offer me would be appreciated. Please also view the discussion on my talk pageTsims23 (talk) 03:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A-ha - Greatest Hits - Japanese Single Collection

Why was the article deleted ? Mortyman (talk) 23:00, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mortyman, as I said in the edit summary, it does not meet WP:NALBUM. Onel5969 TT me 00:22, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of my sandbox article "Latest Article"

This was not a draft of any proposed article. I was only learning some features of wikipedia in my sandbox. So deletion is not a problem, but i think it is not warranted as it is in my sand box. BTW i dont see the button for contesting the speedy deletion on the page concerned. LoveAll (talk). 04:46, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Loveallwiki, hi. The issue was that it wasn't in your sandbox. You moved it into mainspace. I think it's already been deleted, but that doesn't mean you don't have a sandbox. Simply click on the sandbox link, and it will be recreated. Onel5969 TT me 12:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher)Loveallwiki Onel is correct - you moved it to the address Loveallwiki/sandbox/Latest Article 1. Since you didn't put 'User:' in the front of it (User:Loveallwiki/sandbox/Latest Article 1), it was no longer in your sandbox - it was in article space, and appeared in the New Articles feed for reviewers to check. Please be more careful when you are testing functionality. Thank you. Girth Summit (blether) 12:48, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you both LoveAll (talk). 04:56, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Youn Chul-Ho

Thank you for your reviewing the article Draft:Youn Chul-Ho. I added to several things to improve that article. 칼빈500 (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

칼빈500, thanks for the ping. An AfC reviewer will take a look at it. Onel5969 TT me 10:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

당신을 위한 반스타!

편집자 반스타
Thank you for your working to all things. 칼빈500 (talk) 03:22, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Onel5969 TT me 10:40, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hallmark mysteries

Hi there - thank you for reviewing the two Hallmark articles I recently created (Crossword Mysteries and Ruby Herring Mysteries). I'm surprised they're not considered to be encyclopaedic material however I understand the reasons that you and other editors have given, and I've marked them for speedy deletion. For consistency, should these articles be reviewed under the same criteria?

pgbrown (talk) 10:23, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pgbrown, in a word, yes. To show notability, you need in-depth coverage from independent sources. Several of the articles you created, I did mark "reviewed", because they did just that, as well as having some primary and unreliable sources. But when only primary/unreliable sourcing is provided, they simply don't meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 10:43, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi Onel5969 - thank you for reviewing Nishant S Mehta Article. 
Kimran999 (talk) 13:17, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute heads of state of Egypt

From what i understand you disagree with the existence the article List of heads of state of Egypt is it possible to discuss it in the talk page of the article if you disagree with my explanation of why is oppose the redirection of this article

That's what I asked you to do before you continued edit-warring. Several editors have disagreed with you, and as per WP:BURDEN you should gain consensus before restoring. Onel5969 TT me 13:52, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

please reinstate Sara Andrews Spencer's page

I'm new here, and worked hard on a page about Sara Andrews Spencer. You marked it for speedy deletion as a copyright infringement. It is not - it is my own work, heavily cited to more than a dozen different sources. If its introduction borrows too heavily from an encyclopedia source about her I can rewrite. Can you please undelete the page so I can do so? Thank you. DailySuffragist (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DailySuffragist, hi. First, it hasn't been deleted yet. Second, huge amounts have been copypasted from the source, entire paragaphs in some cases. If you would like, I can move it back into draft so you can work on it. Onel5969 TT me 15:05, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not move it into draft that's not acceptable for copyright violations. I've opened discussion at the tea house to ascertain why the author thinks it's not a copyright violation. (sorry a lot of x-posting)--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:12, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sphilbrick, yeah, you're right. I know that. Don't know what I was thinking. When I do move something with a copyvio, I remove the copyvio and do a revdel, which wouldn't work in this case. Onel5969 TT me 19:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dang, just like that, it's been deleted again. You can contact either of the deleting admins, and ask them for help.Onel5969 TT me 15:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I temporarily restored it so that I could confirm the copyright violation and then deleted it again. S Philbrick(Talk) 15:09, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sphilbrick, thanks, I saw that (after I wrote my first message above, of course). Onel5969 TT me 15:10, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual fundamental class

Hi, Onel5969,

I'm trying to figure out why you added the "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed." section to the top of Virtual fundamental class. Literally every section has valid (and referreed) citations so I'm confused as to why this is here. Kaptain-k-theory (talk) 15:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kaptain-k-theory, the first sentence of both the 1st and 2nd sections, as well as section 2.1, is footnoted, the rest isn't. Onel5969 TT me 19:36, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969 You may want to double check that assertion. I see a citation in every single section. Kaptain-k-theory (talk) 19:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Kaptain-k-theory, and you may want to re-read my response. Onel5969 TT me 20:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please approve my draft

Hello sir, first of all thank you for approving my article of Micromax IN 1B. Its my request to please approve my this draft Draft:Godrej Anandam as it is one of the most notable and tallest building in my city!!Badassboy 63637 (talk) 18:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meredith Scardino – undisclosed payment tag

Hi Onel5969, I note your concern that Bevelgearsinc may have created the draft of the Meredith Scardino page in return for payment. I have created a discussion on the talk page and your feedback would be very helpful. Regards, Atiru (talk) 06:44, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPP question

Should I wait until you grade the section I finished until I move onto the next one or can I do mutiple sections at once if I have the time? Clovermoss (talk) 23:39, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, hi. No, sorry I haven't graded it yet, will in the morning. But you never have to wait. Once there's stuff there, you can work on it in any order you want. Onel5969 TT me 03:09, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for letting me know, I'll keep that in mind for the future. As for grading, take your time, I'm a very patient person. Clovermoss (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sky Living

I see that you have undone my splitting of the Sky Living and Sky Witness articles and can you please tell me why you have done this.

I split the articles because the two channels are very different and the only thing close to any replacement was that Witness replaced Living on EPGs. therefore both should have separate articles and there are sufficient independent references for both to further justify the separate articles.

I had asked for comment on the Sky Witness talk page and also started a redirection discussion and there were no objections on either. Rillington (talk) 13:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded - the separation was made by consensus and because the two topics are unrelated and should never have been in a single article to begin with, their only being linked by a coincidental factor. It is correcting a past error rather than creating unnecessary splits. Bonusballs (talk) 14:06, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, can't read minds, especially through the computer. You never mentioned in your edit summaries on either page that this was a split based on a consensus discussion. In addition, when you did the split, you did not follow the guidelines and requirements of WP:SPLIT, which you can also find at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. In the future, please mention the discussion in your edit summary, and when splitting, you are required to provide attribution. Feel free to revert my two edits which were based on policy, and please provide correct attribution. Onel5969 TT me 15:18, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your reply, and I have reverted the two edits, thereby reinstating the separate Sky Living article and the revamped Sky Witness article.
Also thank you for your guidance on this in case this occurs in the future. Rillington (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rillington, no worries. Thanks for your efforts on the project. Take care. Onel5969 TT me 18:58, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Gaillard

You've added a "more citations needed" tag on this article, although it makes use of more than 20 sources. Can you please specify which citations are needed? Branlory (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Branlory, every assertion in the article needs a source. There is quite a bit which is unsourced. Onel5969 TT me 02:04, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969 The assertions in the article (whether or not they are accompanied by an inline citation) are backed by the sources listed in the Notes section. Therefore I believe this article meets the Verifiability standards. If you disagree please specify which assertions in the article aren't backed up by sources in the article's Notes section. Branlory (talk) 09:21, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Branlory, then please provide footnotes. Or feel free to change the tag from the current "more references" to "more footnotes". Onel5969 TT me 13:27, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969 Providing a footnote for every single assertion made in an article isn't required by the Verifiability standards (except for "quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged"). That's also reflected in most Featured articles. I'm therefore going to remove the "more citations needed tag". If you want to discuss this further, we can continue on the article's Talk page. Branlory (talk) 15:04, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eito Yuminami page

How is the subject not notable? Point out specifically and put it on the talk page. Heyaisa (talk) 02:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heyaisa, he meets neither WP:COLLATH or WP:NBASKET, and the news articles are routine sports coverage. Onel5969 TT me 02:03, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He meets the general notability guideline, regardless of not being able to meet the college athlete and basketball guidelines. Plus, he has a Wikipedia page in his native Japanese language. Heyaisa (talk) 02:15, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heyaisa, not in my opinion. Nothing but routine coverage, and the fact that he has a Japanese WP article is completely irrelevant. Onel5969 TT me 02:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion. That's why put it on the talk page so a consensus will be reached. And which specific general notability guideline he did not meet? Please enlighten me. Heyaisa (talk) 02:24, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heyaisa, I've explained it to you already. If you can't understand by this point, I can't help you. But that could be the reason your articles need to be reviewed. And I'm not saying he is not notable, I am saying he may not be notable. Others will review the page now. Onel5969 TT me 03:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Chilton

Nice one. Take a look at the other chief constable articles created by the same user - InilanNahklia (talk · contribs). They're all the same low level of notability and could all do with having the same treatment. 10mmsocket (talk) 07:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

10mmsocket, thanks. Yeah, same issue. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 13:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for correcting me on my page! HimuTheEditor (talk) 16:52, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HimuTheEditor - no worries. The album may be notable, but right now it doesn't have the necessary sourcing needed to show that it passes WP:NALBUM, let alone WP:GNG. If you want me to take a look at it after you've worked on it, give me a ping. Onel5969 TT me 16:54, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, If you could help complete that article, you're welcome to do so! Thank you

Hino Nacional Brasileiro

May I ask why you reverted my edits? The G Wikian (talk) 18:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I just found the article on moving a page. That answers my question. Thanks, and have a good day.The G Wikian (talk) 22:48, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A repost of my reply on the removal of the Fang States from my talk page, don't know if you saw this or not.

Hi Onel5969,

While I do see your removal of several of my articles having rather fair precedent, I'd have to offer my stance on this. Many of the obscure topics I do are directly translated from their Chinese and Japanese articles, both of which can be very scant in their citations (many of the Chinese articles I translate from come from Baidu which is worse cite-wise). Should this happen, I try to retrace their sources in good faith, though I'm not going to sift through dozens of pages from keywords for hours as this is ultimately a hobby. The articles you've sent back into the draftspace are ones I either have trouble finding the real sources for, or ones that need me to have access to higher academic sources which I don't have the credentials or funds for.

Additionally, while cruising on lesser viewed parts of Wikipedia for research, I similarly notice that there are quite a lot of articles lacking sources, if any, but aren't taken down by the moderators (with similar niche topics like Mongol tribes and such). It seems the only reason these are "allowed" to stay is because they're older than my articles. Objectively, it seems quite unfair.

I'd imagine this would be responded with how Wikipedia is always strict with its independent and reliable credibility stance and whatnot, and I get that. These articles will likely stay in the draftspace as my life gets busier, and I don't expect this to lead to any reversal of the article's status either. It is simply rather tiring to see articles I've made in hopes of expanding the English academia be removed though I genuinely don't see any fault with myself for the matter.

Thanks

MarsandCadmium (talk) a2306905

Hi MarsandCadmium - yes, I did not see your comments on your talk page. When you "ping" somebody, you have to use the format like I did here when I pinged you. You can't simply type the username. That being said, I understand your frustration, unfortunately English WP has certain criteria which was be met in order for articles to remain in mainspace. The first is that it must pass WP:GNG, the second is that it must pass WP:VERIFY. Articles with only a single source will be difficult to pass those two criteria. I feel that the articles you create may be notable, but they don't pass WP:VERIFY. Remember that uncited information can be removed at any time. Many articles in other wikis would not pass English WP notability criteria, and very many do not come close to passing WP:VERIFY. You might ask for help on a project's talk page in finding sourcing. Onel5969 TT me 12:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for keeping watch over my articles!Joan arden murray (talk) 11:00, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joan arden murray, no worries. As usual, keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 22:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for editing

Hi, I was exploring in WP and I found Women in Red/Missing articles page and there is one small mistake but I don't know how to fix that, there is written Justina who is Iranian rapper, but the page added there is for something else, can you please fix that?ZEP55 (talk) 22:38, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ZEP55, hi. Fixed. Onel5969 TT me 22:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Theory of imperialism undo

Hi, in undoing my cut/paste move from theory of imperialism to theories of imperialism you created a whole lot of double redirects that I'd had to change manually. A cut/paste move was necessary because "theories of imperialism" already redirected to "imperialism" which is actually a very different topic. Can you please not undo this move in future, or if you must and you can justify the decision, then please resolve double redirects.Mirkyton (talk) 02:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mirkyton, sorry, no. Cut and paste moves are never acceptable. Onel5969 TT me 02:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What are you meant to do in a case like this?Mirkyton (talk) 03:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mirkyton, you have to request that the page be moved. This is to preserve the attribution history, thus satisfying copyright concerns. See Wikipedia:Requested moves. Onel5969 TT me 03:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, will do, thank youMirkyton (talk) 03:16, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What to do when a page lacks references

If you see that a page doesn't have any references, you can tag it as {{Unreferenced}}. If it has at least one but needs more, you can tag it as {{Refimprove}}. But you should never tag it for {{prod}} or AfD just because the article lacks references. The criterion for deletion is not whether the article lacks references, but whether the references exist. Anyone who nominates an article for {{prod}} or AfD is expected to have done a WP:BEFORE search, and to have added any good references that they found. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eastmain, correct, and I do. Onel5969 TT me 16:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Thom becomes Ian M. Thom, I hope

In starting Ian Thom, I realized that I should have used this person`s more formal name, Ian M. Thom which appears on all his books. I tried to move the article back to sandbox and I succeeded, I think but wikipedia won`t let me move out of sandbox. Could you please correct what I have done? Thank you, Joan arden murray (talk) 22:31, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joan arden murray, It looks fine, Ian M. Thom. And Ian Thom is a redirect to the page. Doesn't appear to be anything else to be done. Onel5969 TT me 23:21, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhana Khanna

Good Evening Sir!😅 Please why is the page Ruhana Khanna been redirected? Sometime ago, I remember starting an article, but you reverted back to redirect. Please why is this so? Idoghor Melody (talk) 17:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Idoghor Melody, as I said in the edit summary, they meet neither WP:GNG nor WP:NACTOR. Onel5969 TT me 14:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking pages

Hi Onel, please do not blank pages that might be controversial, without reaching a consensus and moreover without sending a message like you did for instance here SportsOlympic (talk) 19:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Army (International Military-Technical Forum)

Hi, Dear Onel5969.

Could you check the article about International Military-Technical Forum?

Presidend of Russia open Army-2021 already. --Kirill Borisenko (talk) 00:35, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kirill Borisenko, nice job. Moved to mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 14:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oggy Oggy

Oggy Oggy is now released, you should be the one who should be stop it. It shouldn't be a redirect anymore. It should be a real page. PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PickleAndPeanutFan, copyvios are taken very seriously by WP. You've been warned twice now. This will lead to you being blocked if you persist. Onel5969 TT me 14:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969, Okay, but how do i make Oggy Oggy a page without using copyright infomation? PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PickleAndPeanutFan, the short answer is, you need to write it in your own words. Help:Your first article this is a good resource. Onel5969 TT me 15:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969, If that's the case, you could've just got rid of the Short Summary in the infobox of the episodes. PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article: Atul Raghav

Hi,Onel5969 (talk · contribs). The article Atul Raghav should not be deleted. I know the fact, this page was made by some other user and was deleted earlier due to lack of independent sources because it's hard and takes a lot to show a 16 year old notable and significant personality. Taekwondo is not much highlighted in India but this boy has achieved a lot and is very well known for his game in our nation. Infact, the result of his matches are there on internet. Instead of deletion, you can site this article to improve it further but this page should not be speedily deleted.--Divineplus (talk) 16:48, 24 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Draft:Turkish Electricity Distribution Corporation

Hello - I had forgotten to add its abbreviation TEDAŞ - which is why you thought it was not in any cite. Have now done so and added more cites. Chidgk1 (talk) 16:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chidgk1, thanks. Have moved it back into mainspace. Did not make the acronym connection. Onel5969 TT me 23:50, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I can't figure out how to edit the GNG column of the table. I don't even see a matching parameter, so I'm very confused. [11] I'd really appreciate figuring out how to do this. Clovermoss (talk) 23:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, yeah, that's tricky. See the change I made on your first answer. The first column is where you put the y or n. The second column is where you put the rationale for your y/n in column 1. The GNG column auto-populates. Let me know if you're still having trouble. Onel5969 TT me 02:42, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for fixing the formatting. I see what you mean now. I meant to try and figure it out earlier, but I've been really busy with work the past few days. Clovermoss (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Clovermoss, no worries. As I've said, this is at your pace. Onel5969 TT me 02:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Joan_arden_murray/sandbox&redirect=no

Help

I started an article, got all the way through it and then in a moment of inattention called the artist by the wrong name, e.g., Fitzgerald instead of Fitzpatrick. Now wikipedia won`t let me change it - it needs an administrator. I`m embarrassed over this. Can you help? And about that Ian Thom mistake, same thing happened with it. I couldn`t replace Ian Thom with Ian M. Thom. Now both articles are on the internet. Can you help with that too? I`m indebted to you.Joan arden murray (talk) 23:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joan arden murray, regarding Thom, there are not two articles about him. There is the article, Ian M. Thom, and a redirect Ian Thom, which takes you to the article. The redirect is appropriate, since someone looking for the curator might search for them without the middle initial. Regarding the Fitzgerald/Fitzpatrick, Blake Fitzpatrick has been blocked from being created, since it was deleted several times for lack of notability. I'm pinging the sysop who closed the last AfD back in 2016, Sandstein for their input. It appears to be about the same individual (I'm basing this on the Ryerson connection). But I can't see the deleted article, so am not sure. And don't be embarrassed, we all make mistakes. Luckily, they can be corrected. Onel5969 TT me 23:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Thank you Thank you. I feel much calmer now. About Fitzpatrick, you are the best judge and I will abide by your decision.Joan arden murray (talk) 23:57, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page review: Domain name spoofing

The article Domain name spoofing (that you reviewed and tagged as needing citations) is formally a disambiguation article which, afik, shouldn't have citations? Am I correct? (I can easily get citations from the cited articles, if appropriate.) I didn't think it merited conversion into a 'normal' article though it couldn't avoid being a fork. Advice welcome. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John Maynard Friedman, if it was truly a dab page, it not only wouldn't need refs, but shouldn't have refs. The issue is it's not a dab page. A dab page is a page which has links to articles with the same name, or articles which an alternate name for them is the same. Yours appears to be an article about the underlying concept. If you want to make it a dab page, I can help with that. Onel5969 TT me 15:34, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I realise that a 'normal' dab page should have nothing more than a list of articles without commentary, which is how I first envisaged it. But I concluded that such a simple list would be helpful only to those already familiar with the topic and confuse everyone else.
Maybe the best solution would be to make it into a normal article? It would be an unusual case, since it is more a pathfinder article (because of frequent sloppy and inconsistent usage in the media). Does WP:SUMMARY apply? (I don't want to open a wp:fork can of worms). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I could (and probably should) move the content into Domain name and make this article a simple redirect to section. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:58, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
John Maynard Friedman, that might be the best idea. Onel5969 TT me 16:06, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I guess it just needed someone to hold up a mirror for me to see the obvious. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 19:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
John Maynard Friedman, nice job. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 20:38, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Alsace-Lorraine A 3

A long time ago I translated this article form German Wikipedia, and you moved it to Draft namespace.

This was the first time that this had happen to one of my submissions, and not knowing the escape route, I tried to “play the game” and lost. So I walked away and stopped translating and creating articles.

Now I know a bit more, and have been reminded of this article, I understand that if I notify you (as mover), that I object to its move (which I do), then you have to move it back.

I realise that new page patrol is a thankless job (I couldn't do it), and sometimes a kernel of wheat gets thrown out with the chaff.

Thanks in advance – Iain Bell (talk) 10:29, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! (I have restored the talk page assesment, and the Wikidata link for you) — Iain Bell (talk) 11:55, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ventoura for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ventoura is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ventoura until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

162 etc. (talk) 15:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Timeline of schools broadcasts in the UK

I see from my talkpage that you have removed my timeline of schools broadcasting from Wikipedia and relegated it to draftspace on the grounds of lack of independent references. I have now added several independent references and resubmitetd it to ask for it to be returned to Wikipedia. Rillington (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rillington, approved through AfC. Please be aware that it still needs more sourcing. Thanks for your efforts. Onel5969 TT me 17:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Noted, but thank you for speedily returning my timeline of schools broadcasting to Wikipedia. Rillington (talk) 15:16, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rillington, no worries, keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 15:29, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Journal of Cultural Economics

I don't agree with your opinion on the article and moving it into draft. It is written exactly in the way other economic journals wikipages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Econometrics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Economic_Theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Economic_Review and many others that you can check on the list https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_economics_journals The request to create this WIkipage comes directly from the Editor of the Journal and he is well aware and agree on everything that is written on the page.

Sorry you disagree. Regardless, the fact that you seem to have a WP:COI concern is even a bigger concern than the current poor sourcing. The issue is not with notability, or with the content, but with sourcing. Now that you've shown you have a COI, the article must go through AfC. Onel5969 TT me 20:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

90 series - sources for dab page(?)

Hello! Sorry, You make a revert of expanding of 90 series redirect with describing a revert as "Zero sourcing", Maybe, You can explain this edit slightly intelligibly, or, maybe, this is a just a Twinkle bot bug? Thanks! 92.252.220.61 (talk) 20:34, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Djer-Kiss

Over the past 14 years, I have created or contributed to hundreds of French or English notices of so-called "dormant brands" (i.e. brands with great legacy but no current commercial activity), mainly Europeans, albeit under different usernames. All the notices that I have created have been enriched or completed by hundreds of helpful users. Few information or English literature exist about those brands. I am sorry if you are not satisfied with the French sources provided, but there are relevant and accurate and the notice certainly did not deserved to be moved to draft mode. Helpful users enrich notices by completing or better sourcing them, I do not see what you add here about a topic you are apparently unfamiliar with.

My familiarity or lack thereof has nothing to do with the draftication. If I cut out everything which was unsourced, a single line would be left. I felt it more beneficial to move it to draft in order for you to provide more sourcing. Onel5969 TT me 16:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About the article "Sherlock: Untold Stories"

Nice to meet you. Thank you for your review of "Sherlock: Untold Stories." You said, "This article needs additional citations for verification," but I don't know which part needs citations. I wanna improve this article for the better. Would you tell me those parts specifically? Murasakihitsuji (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Murasakihitsuji, hi. Every assertion made in the piece needs a citation. The cast and characters needs citations for each character, else it is WP:OR. Same with the episodes. if all of a certain season, you can simply place the citation at the end of the section. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your advice. I'll try it. Murasakihitsuji (talk) 17:29, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, I have a additional question. This Japanese drama Sherlock: Untold Stories is available on DVD. Is it possible to use this DVD as a citation source? Murasakihitsuji (talk) 05:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Murasakihitsuji, it's a primary source, so it can't be used for certain things in the article, but it can be used for others. For example, if the DVD cover lists episode titles, or provides a brief summary of each episode, you could use it for those, as long as you put them in your own words. Onel5969 TT me 12:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your reply. Murasakihitsuji (talk) 13:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

mark weingard page

Hi. Can you pls guide me as to the issue with Mark Weingard page that has been moved from main space to draft. Kindly advise what needs to be done to amend it. thank you. Angie Balzan (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Angie Balzan, hi. The issue is that you appear to have a WP:COI or WP:UPE issue with the article's subject. Please see the correct path to take on those pages. Once you have addressed the concern, submit the article for review. Onel5969 TT me 00:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is rather frustrating

But what do you think about it? From current consensus it appears the community is somewhat sympathetic towards NT. Frustrating I know, but if this ends with no action, I honestly think that bringing/filing an official report was a good move on your part, there is awareness to this, so next time if they hound you, you could always link to this report and propose immediate action be taken. Celestina007 (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Celestina007, hi. It's truly whatever to me. I've decided to stop contributing on NPP so I don't have to deal with any more of their wiki-hounding. Although their latest post on that discussion clearly shows they are still stalking me. If the consensus of the project that they wish to protect sub-standard editors such as him, that's their choice. Onel5969 TT me 22:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to hear that, you'll be missed at NPP, but can fully understand, I get close to jacking it every few weeks. NP patrollers always seem to be the bad guys and unsupported by most admins. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 23:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
John B123, thanks. Been doing it for a long time (at least seems that way!). Just too much negativity from poor editors. Onel5969 TT me 02:54, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just NPP. Dramaboards get project-wide attention. So, most of the time, there are people commenting based on what they just read in some PAGs, essays and supplements or based on their own biases, with no knowledge whatsoever of how things work in actual project work. Sometimes, the outside perspective helps pull the projects back into what's supported by project-wide consensus; sometimes, it's people with no knowledge of the issues leaving valuable contributors frustrated. You can see the same playing out in AFC, copypatrol as you just saw at AN, spam/UPE as you may know from how difficult it is to get obvious UPEs blocked and from how often the core group of UPE and spam fighters end up at ANI for not assuming more good faith, SPI as you may know from fishing debates last year, anti-vandalism work with its BLP/rollback/warning nuances, even FRAM was NPP/autopatrol, . Even in content creation, football editors don't agree with broader community, cricket editors don't agree with broader community, ARS doesn't agree with the broader community, prolific stub creators don't agree with broader community, there's an issue being discussed right now, where content editors are seeking accommodation for an editor who's been shown to fake referencing (it will likely push the burden on to AFC to check their work *smh*). Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Usedtobecool, couldn't agree more. Before I got involved with NPP, I used to do quite a bit of work at AfC, and left for the same reason. And I've seen those other areas as well. It's a shame really. But it looks like I'm going to relegate myself to content creation. Onel5969 TT me 14:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Be careful though, I don't know if anything other than WP:GNG is safe in the medium to long term. Imagine creating thousands of articles based on an SNG, and then it gets deprecated and articles mass deleted. On the dark/bright side, I was recreating Lobin C. Lowe the other day and didn't have anything to resolve the dead end, cos apparently there are no articles for government ministries of Malawi; just one cabinet article and it's a list, and it gets overwritten every time there is a reshuffle. For a moment, I hoped that maybe they edit the French Wikipedia instead, but nope, our article on Malawi says they use English over there, but no French. 2000 articles are tagged with WikiProject Malawi; for comparison, Nepal has 4000 village stubs. One would think there's enough space here for everyone without stepping on anyone's toes.
Anyway (rant mode off), most people are unlikely to know enough to be able to distinguish a deletionist deletionist from an NPPreviewer who must choose between either stamping approval or nominating for deletion. And nothing on this website is worth taking any real stress over (easier said than done, I know), cos at the end of the day, we are still just a bunch of nerds on a website. So, good luck with whatever else you do, Onel; you can come back to NPP if and when you're ready again. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


  • I think Usedtobecool says it best and I’m honestly not sure what to add to what they have said as it nigh all encompassing, but if I may; One1 honestly it’s not worth quitting over. I’ve been in your shoes before(more than once) and it took a lot of “frank” and “fatherly” advice from my superiors @Barkeep49(who happens to be my tutor) , DGG, Beeblebrox, Kudpung & a host of other fine editors to pull me out. Just give it time and you’d see that quitting new page reviewing over entries in notice boards isn’t the answer. Especially when you are particularly good and genuine at what you do, but having said, In the end, your peace of mind comes first above all(general life inclusive) so whilst others and i can only beg you not to leave new page reviewing, please do what gives you joy if it is content creation then by all means do that, we can only hope that you’d return to new page reviewing as loosing a high volume editor contributing to that area would be a huge disservice to the project (as a collective) Celestina007 (talk) 21:00, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Celestina007, yeah, I hear you, however this is the third case of wikihounding which has arisen from my NPP work over the past 4 years. And the lack of support over at ANI was the proverbial straw. Especially when the wikihound is such a weak, subpar editor, and at least two of those who voted oppose are themselves not editors I would consider reaching even average capabilities (for one of them to get on my AfD %, when their % is in the low 40's is pretty ironic). But thanks for your words. Onel5969 TT me 00:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's relatively easy for me to say ignore the wikihounding, but its the only viable approach here. Some of my first articles were deleted. Some of my category work was objected to. I discovered to my chagrin that I was too far out of date in copyright to be helpful--there were some vey unpleasant comments, and they were right. I struggled for a year or two to get a consensus on high schools, and worked on defending them for 10. An ambiguous RfC was interpreted against considering them presumably notable. I was urged to keep fighting, but gave it up as a lost cause--I just couldn't handle yet another round--I now wont even look at drafts, articles, or AfDs in that area to avoid getting tempted. D The basic rule or working at AfC or NPP is particularly easy: nothing we do there actually makes a decision.. It's just a preliminary screen. AfD decides, and there's no point in getting angry at afd because t's notoriously inconsistent. I don't think of WP as a game--I think of it as a place, an environment, a geography. I live in my neighborhood. Some things I like, some I dont't. Some changes I find good, many I do not. If I moved elsewhere, it would be similar. I pay attention to what I like, patronize the stores I find comfortable, and don't even think about people who ignore me because I'm don't have enough money to live the way they do.

ANI isn't a part of the neighborhood I like, so I commented briefly. If it's still open tomorrow, I'll comment again, but its 5 AM here Ping me quietly for future problems.:As I said in my earlier comment there, AfD percent depends on the difficulty of what you work on. If it's too high, you're not working on the hard articles.

and don't think of content creation as if it were something not really worthwhile. It's the only really important thing that is done here. DGG ( talk ) 09:36, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Henry Gunning, 4th Baronet Gunning of Eltham

Dear User:Onel5969,

Hi, I added this page because it connected different pages together, I understand that he in himself wasn't of particular import, however I thought that the connections that he brought through his marriages and children allowed for his page to be created. Therefore, while he doesn't have many citations, his page does still help to connect up other pages. If this isn't enough then of course I understand, however I do think that it is a useful page to have around, small though it may be.

All the best,

User:Angloscottish

Hi, Angloscottish. To quote the essence of WP:USEFUL, "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it should include useful encyclopedic content. But many useful things do not belong in an encyclopedia and are excluded.". I tend to agree with your way of thinking, however WP goes on WP:GNG. But thank you for your contributions. And please don't let this discourage you. Onel5969 TT me 00:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What am I reading?

Re this - I'm reading these, amongst others. What books were you reading? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64, as I said in the edit summary, I'm actually reading the lead in the WP article, from which I quoted directly. So not sure why you were having such an issue with that sd, to leave such an uncivil comment. Onel5969 TT me 13:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About Senran Kagura Estival Versus page

Dear User:Onel5969, the page that I've created for the game Senran Kagura Estival Versus was reverted, was it just for somewhat copied content in a section, or is it due to other reasons? Patiently me :D - Noctisnoviembre (talk) 03:28, 06 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noctisnoviembre, no, as I said in the edit summary, in addition to the copyvio, there was no indication of notability. Onel5969 TT me 02:44, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost interview request - Random Page Patrol

Hello! I'm writing an article for The Signpost about the Random Page Patrol wikiproject. We often do interviews with Wikiproject members, and I saw your name on the list of members. As a member and long-time Wiki contributor, I'd love to ask about the project, why you do it, and why you think it's valuable. I could drop a few questions for you below which you could answer in your own time over the next couple of weeks. Let me know - thank you! Ganesha811 (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ganesha811, sure thing. Glad to help. Onel5969 TT me 20:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's great! I'll drop the questions below - if you could answer them by September 20th, 10 days from now, that would be ideal. If you have any questions or clarifications, just ask. Thank you! Ganesha811 (talk) 12:56, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How did you come across the Random Page Patrol?
I came across it as part of NPP.
  • Why did you decide to become a random page patroller? What do you find valuable about the project?
As part of NPP, it is sometimes a welcome change from reviewing at the back of the queue.
  • How often do you randomly page patrol? Do you use it mostly as a break from other Wikipedia contributions, or is it a major part of how you spend your time here?
As I said above, I definitely used it as a break from my normal NPP routine, while still contributing to reducing the reviewing queue. How often varies from week to week. But I used to review about 50-60 articles a week that way.
  • Are there any articles you have edited as part of the Random Page Patrol that particularly stand out in your memory?
Wow, not that I can remember, but you have to understand I've reviewed a couple of hundred thousand articles or thereabouts in the last 5 years.
  • What would you say to someone considering joining the Patrol?
I'd actually caution them. Virtually all of the headaches I've had on WP have arisen out of patrolling. It's a very necessary function, but you get tons of POV pushing, and folks with special interests who do nothing but argue and complain. You can also develop the unpleasantness of wikihounds who get annoyed when they have articles removed for lack of notability, etc.
  • Is there anything else you'd like to add that I haven't asked you?
Anybody who's interested, I would recommend going through NPP School. While being familiar with the flow chart is great, going through the school with an experienced editor is a great way to learn all of the intricacies. Thanks for writing the article. Onel5969 TT me 02:15, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ganesha811 - Sorry, I guess I should have pinged you! Onel5969 TT me 02:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll take your answers and incorporate them into the article. There shouldn't be much editing, though perhaps not every part of every answer will make it in depending on how many other interviewees end up responding as well. I'll ping you a few days before the article goes live so you can take a look and make sure I haven't misrepresented anything you said. I really appreciate you taking the time. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Onel5969: - the article has been edited. It's at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report - please check it out ahead of publication on Sunday, and if you feel I've changed the meaning of any of your answers through editing, let me know and I'll fix it. Thank you again for participating! Ganesha811 (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ganesha811 - looks fine. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 23:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dang

Really sorry to lose you but understand there’s only so much shit anyone can shovel. All the best Mccapra (talk) 19:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra, thanks. Knew NPP'ers would understand. Stay in touch. Onel5969 TT me 20:26, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

NPP school

I was going through the questions in the new section and after answering some of them realized that it felt familar, so I looked back into earlier sections. There is some overlap. Both questions #4 (before the source accessment) and question #13 (after the source accessment) read "Please explain in your own words why content needs to be verified". There does appear to be one new question among the new batch though, about accesing unfamilar sources to be reliable or not.

Also, I noticed that you have decided to stop patrolling new pages. I can only imagine how exhausting it is to do the amount of patrolling you were doing, and while I don't fully understand the ANI thread and what led to it, I respect your decision to withdraw from participating further. Not that you need my approval or disapproval to do anything. I guess I just wanted to say what I said? Anyways, I was wondering if this will effect the NPP training at all. Are we going to just continue like normal or would you prefer to stop? Also, approximately how far along are we? Am I about halfway, less, more? Clovermoss (talk) 03:07, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clovermoss, man, I am so sorry for the duplication of questions. Will upload the correct set shortly. There are 10 main sections to go through, although of varying degrees of difficulty/time. With this next set you'll finish section 2. Regarding continuing, I spoke with a couple of the other NPP schoolers, and while I'm not active in patrolling any longer, we all felt it was fine for me to continue with training others. Onel5969 TT me 14:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Clovermoss, The ANI in summary was One1 filed a valid report rather than the report itself being accessed it spiraled into something off topic that showed (we) didn't value the input of new page reviewers, One1 decided to give it a break and statistically speaking we are seeing the result of that. Celestina007 (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Hi @Onel5969:, Please review this article Bindu Rawal which was created by me. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 11:03, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fade258, hi and thanks for your contributions. Unfortunately, circumstances have arisen which have led me to back away from actively reviewing articles. Another NPP reviewer will review it as they come across it in the queue. Thanks for reaching out, and good luck. Onel5969 TT me 12:55, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your words. Best regards ! Fade258 (talk) 13:14, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rocky Point, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rocky Point, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rocky Point, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

–dlthewave ☎ 16:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Replica cluster move

You moved Replica cluster move from article space to draft space on 23 August 2021. It has now been moved back to article space, apparently without any changes. I haven't reviewed it in detail, and besides, it is physics and not chemistry, and besides, I won't move an article to draft space twice. I suggest that you take another look at it and decide whether something needs to be done about it. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Robert McClenon - hi! I responded on the talk page, but in a nutshell, I don't review articles any more, and I don't have an opinion on this one. I removed the uncited material, which was the main reason I draftified it in the first place. Onel5969 TT me 12:35, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

For all the work you do. JBchrch talk 02:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sheilah Wilson ReStack

Hi Onel5969, Could you take a look at the article for Sheilah Wilson ReStack? You had tagged it back in July. I worked on it for a bit last night and I think her inclusion in the 2017 Whitney Biennial and her McDowell residency could be considered grounds for notability. Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WomenArtistUpdates - simply being included in an exhibition does not meet NARTIST, neither does the residency.Onel5969 TT me 10:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:ArthurStone1934.jpg

⚠
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:ArthurStone1934.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tyson Walker

I'm just curious, what would be the procedure for moving Draft:Tyson Walker to the mainspace? Is it just a formal "AfC accepted notice"? I think it would meet GNG currently, and the AfD was enough time ago (in my opinion) that it would not necessarily stand. Is there something that I'm missing here? ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 22:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editorofthewiki - It would have to show substantial improvement from the version which was draftified. Which this, imho, does not. Onel5969 TT me 11:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Victoria Arduino

Dear Onel5969, had neglected to post a reply to your 2017 considerate proposal to tag the page created for Victoria Arduino for deletion -- which you justified because you deemed that the article did not clearly state "why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia".

When I belatedly observed the notification I did take action -- yet was far too late. Indeed, as of now, both the page + related 'talk page' have been deleted.

There does not appear to be any archive to revive if the revocation of deletion were to be adjudicated. This is a pity as the original entry had justified the notability (or see wiki article [[12]]) due to the original device (made in 1905) being both a patented invention and an early example of espresso machines using controlled steam pressure to serve coffees to consumers -- and referenced the related marketing efforts. This was not to claim that Pier Teresio Arduino was the first inventor of the steam powered espresso machine, as that accolade is generally bestowed upon Angelo Moriondo, with both Desiderio Pavoni and Luigi Bezerra making significant technical enhancements in the subsequent years. Arduino was perhaps most notable for mix of technical and marketing competency which resulted in his device seeing success outside of Milan and across Europe. The graphic designer Leonetto Cappiello being tasked to create the marketing posters that accelerated the business success. Indeed, this led to Smithsonian Magazine publishing an article in June 2012 'The Long History of the Espresso Machine' that contrasts the respective contributions of each inventor and business person for establishing the European market for drinking espresso coffee.

On the basis that there exists an English language Wikipedia entry for Giovanni Achille Gaggia, then there ought to be equal merit for one for Victoria Arduino. Furthermore, there ought to exist an entry for disambiguation in Arduino_(disambiguation); which I had contributed towards at the time of creating the initial page in June 2017 and yet this too has been subsequently removed - with the referenced Wikipedia article having been deleted.

I observe that since 2012 there has been an entry for 'Victoria Arduino' in the French version of Wikipedia for [[13]].

As outlined above, all five individuals (Moriondo, Pavoni, Bezerra, Arduino, Gaggia) contributed towards what is now a pervasive technology used in the delivery of coffee beverages across the world (see 'History of Espresso Machine: The Ultimate Legacy of 150 Years' by Munshi Md; published 17 September 2020). Although I note that the apparent founders of espresso machines are not equally represented across Wikipedia, with mixed presence across different language versions: La Pavoni entry in Italian Wikipedia [[14]], French [[15]], and Dutch [[16]]. However, only the German Wikipedia has an entry for Bezzera [[17]]. This would seem to depict different community interest in this domain based on different linguistic cultural grouping, either to create and/or to delete content.

Take no issue with volunteer clean-up efforts on Wikipedia. Indeed, I salute you for your efforts that span many years! My quest remains to contribute meaningful content for the broader community. 

lxs (talk) 10:13, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
lxs - whether or not that single contribution would meet the level required to be called a claim of significance is a moot point. As to their notability, that's a different issue, and they would have to pass WP:GNG. The fact that others in similar positions have articles is called an WP:OSE argument, and is virtually meaningless. Similarly, the fact that other wikis have articles about them also doesn't hold much weight, since other wikis do not have the same standards for notability that English wiki does. My suggestion is to create a draft article and go through the WP:AFC process. Onel5969 TT me 11:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Onel5969 TT me 11:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
onel5969 - Thank you for your meaningful response : justifications with resource referenced. Will absorb this guidance prior to any future new page creation. lxs (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pilgrim Playground, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pilgrim Playground, Arizona is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pilgrim Playground, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:48, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

If Im right you were the person who reviewed most of the 16 articles Ive created. I read the guidelines and instructions for a NP reviewer and patrolled some of the unreviewed pages using User:SDZeroBot. If you have some time to spare, would you do a favour by checking my contribution and give a feedback. Im already an AFC reviewer on probation period and wish to become a NPP reviewer in near future. Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 22:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Youn Chul-ho

Thank you for your concening this article. This text has not been paid. Would you clean up this mark?.칼빈500 (talk) 14:18, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, 칼빈500 - it's clear you have a close connection with the subject, and are likely a paid editor. Onel5969 TT me 20:43, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I studied USA about 40 years ago and for 10 years. And I know many teachers there. After returning my country, I have attended many academic societies of theology, so that I know all most korean theologian and theologians of other nations, and they know me. I thank you again.

칼빈500 (talk) 23:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

당신을 위한 반스타!

오리지널 반스타
I appreciate all you helping my editing. 칼빈500 (talk) 15:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=1049969283"