User talk:Liz

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions:

1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users.

2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom.

3. Sign your comments to facilitate contact tracing.

'tis summer!

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57

Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{You've got mail}} template to this page.
I check my Wikipedia email account infrequently.

Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount
and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position.
Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 4 August 2013
Well said!Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

No matter how cute you are, expect no quarter in the cruel world of Wikipedia.

While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused.
Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies.
If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them.
Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures.
Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)

Recommended reading for editors who are upset RIGHT NOW!:
Tips for the angry new user - Gamaliel
Staying cool when the editing gets hot!

If you came here just to insult me, I will delete your comments without a reply.
And if I wasn't involved, personal attacks clearly warrant a block.

Endrid Bookling Notability Issue

Hello so I saw you wrote "Hello, Tgec17, If you want Endrid Bookling in the main space, could you clean it up and make it less likely to be subject to deletion?"

My Reply: I'm sorry but I don't really understand what the notability issue is, no one ever made an attempt to explain it and I'm not seeing any issue with the article. It sites a solid source with page numbers and provides plenty of information about Endrid. In my opinion the worst you could call the article is a stub but there is not lack of notability. Endrid is part of an important period in Norwegian history which is quite appallingly covered on Wikipedia and the article adds a good amount of reliable knowledge about an important person in this under-covered time period.

A cup of tea for you!

You wrote, "If you'd like, I could userfy this article or restore it and put it in Draft space where you could work on it and submit it to AFC. Articles that are put directly into main space of the project are judged by different standards than drafts. Liz Read! Talk! 05:08, 27 June 2021 (UTC)"

My reply: Thank you Liz, if we could do something to keep the door open ajar to the room for improvement. :D It doesn't have to be submitted right away. I just don't want to give up all hope. :) Right now I'm practicing editing other articles. I know creating a first article (especially of a living person) is not recommended right away, so I can put it on the backburner. Or someone else could write it better, perhaps. I don't know what to do. :O Could creating a page about the book itself be an alternative?Follow.your.inner.heroes.2.the.work.you.love.2021 (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Follow.your.inner.heroes.2.the.work.you.love.2021,

First, thank you for the tea! Second, just know that this offer as good as long as I'm around. Different admins have different approaches to these matters.

But I think it might be wise for you to get more experience first. And know that there are places you can go for support, I was a frequent visitor to the Teahouse when I first started editing regularly and there are hundreds of WikiProjects if you have a particular area of interest you'd like to work in. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. I'm interested in the Children's Literature categories. :-) p.s. can anyone still help edit this page here, even though it's kinda tucked away within my page, and was originally "rejected"? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_talk:Travis_Ruskus:_The_Rock_Balancer%27s_Guide) They thought it had too many of his own quotes and stuff. I like that part personally, but I'm new here so I'm not used to how things work. It seems like a lot of Wikipedia articles that are already officially posted are asking for improvement in essential elements, for example, citations. At least mine isn't using plagiarism. :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by Follow.your.inner.heroes.2.the.work.you.love.2021 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing civility issues with AdhiOK

I just noticed this personal attack by AdhiOK (talk · contribs) against Zsukiman (talk · contribs). I was going to go warn them, and then saw that the most recent thread on their talk page is a block you made a few weeks ago for a now-revdelled comment at User talk:14.1.217.198, which from context I infer was similarly incivil. They also seem to have reverted at least 12 edits by Zsukiman without summary. Zsukiman has some apparent competence issues, and it's true that Zsukiman's most recent edit was a false statement, so that perhaps slightly mitigates AdhiOK's conduct... But I figured, this close to the last block, better to bring to you than to just warn. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 05:34, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamzin,

I'm logging off for the night but I left a warning. Thanks for removing that comment. I'll keep an eye on AdhiOK from now on. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I went and restored most of the 12 Zsukiman edits, and left AdhiOK a follow-up warning about using summaries when reverting. Now off to go warn Zsukiman about misusing protection templates. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 05:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Ragusea

Hi Liz—I noticed you deleted Adam Ragusea and the associated redirects after an expired PROD. The PROD nominator claimed he's non-notable, but a very quick WP:BEFORE turns up plenty of notability-qualifying sources: [1][2][3][4]. Would you mind undeleting the page and redirects? Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:11, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sdkb,

Done. Contested PRODs are restored upon editor request. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:18, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! The redirects to the page are Ragusea, Adam and The Pub (podcast). As a broader question, is there anything we could change about process to make it easier to restore redirects? I feel like this sort of situation happens all the time, where a page is deleted, then restored, and unless someone is paying close attention, all the redirects to it get lost in the process. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:35, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't know of an easy way to track down redirects unless the deleting admin (me) goes to my Deletion log and sees what redirects Twinkle deleted when I deleted the page. But not all (or even many) admins use Twinkle for page deletions so in those cases the broken redirects would show up at User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects and a different admin (or the AnomieBOT III) would take care of them.

If I can ask, how did you come to know these pages were redirects? Did you look through the Deletion log? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:46, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I knew about The Pub (podcast) since I created it and it showed up on my watchlist; the other I found by looking through your deletion log. Thanks for the explanation; I think I'll bring this up at WP:BOTN and see if we can get a bot going that restores redirects to recreated pages. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:24, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I rerfrained from speedy deleting Joan Ferrés Curós which you had listed for A7 after checking the sidebar and seeing the very extensive article on the deWP. I marked it for expansion/translation. DGG ( talk ) 05:45, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for putting in the extra time to uncover what I didn't see, DGG. This is an example of why there should be two sets of eyes reviewing most speedy deletion requests. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:55, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Administrator changes

Trialpears

AGK • Eliz81 • Mulad • ThaddeusB • Vianello • Who

Lacrimosus → Ikuzaf

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

CheckUser changes

AGK • DGG

Oversighter changes

AGK

Guideline and policy news

Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox G8

Mind restoring User:Tamzin/sandbox? I was testing out some redirect stuff, and must have left it pointed to a nonexistent page by accident. Thanks. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 17:53, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamzin,

Done. Yes, broken redirects appear on a list and either an admin or bot will delete the page if we can't find an obvious solution like the correct page for the redirect to point to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Adams in searches

Thank you for removing references to newly deleted articles from the Eric Adams disambiguation page. However, now when I type Eric Adams into the Wikipedia search bar, no page autofills as it has done in the past. It seems like there would be at least three pages that show up: the disambiguation page, the politician's page, and the musician's page. I thought I'd mention this in case you had any insight into what might have caused the issue. Thank you! Shoestringnomad (talk) 21:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Shoestringnomad,

First, I have no idea how the Wikipedia search function works. But when I typed in "Eric Adam" in the search bar, all three pages are in the drop down list of what is shown to me, along with Eric Adam Avery and the talk pages of the Eric Adams articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. They're still not showing in my drop down list, but if they are for you, that's good enough! Must be some quirk of Wikipedia that will iron itself out. Shoestringnomad (talk) 01:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you on a mobile device? I'm on a laptop and the results might differ. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:47, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

July corner

June continued ... last year's flowers match the image on the user page nicely, see? - DYK that her last reply to me was in a thread Green for hope? - The DYK set in honour of Yoninah appeared yesterday, including Psalm 85, with the kiss of justice and peace - we wrote that together.

Fourth of July: Brian's birthday, remembered in gratitude for his unfailing inspiration and support - remember the Chapel - the missed - the music? - Can I interest you in a user's first FAC, Carillon? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:12, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More music: 2 songs, the morning song - about rising from being down, in more than one sense - is a GA, - there should be more given my initials, but I also want to care for articles of those who recently died (now Esther Béjarano). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article instead of template

Thank you for deleting the article 'Railway stations in Hambleton'. Truly an awful mistake on my part, perfectly remedied by you. I bet you don't get many "thank you for deleting my article" notifications? Regards. The joy of all things (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, The joy of all things,

Well, it's easy when the author requests deletion of a page they created and no other editors contributed to it. You can always get it restored as a redirect should you wish to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks; twas embarrassing enough the first time around. The joy of all things (talk) 22:02, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Qwerfjkl

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Qwerfjkl's talk page.
Message added 15:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

―Qwerfjkl talk 15:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated recreations by COI editor

Hi, Liz. Could you please have a word with RedX8? I've moved their article twice today into draftspace (here and here) due to their admitted (to their credit) conflict of interest with the article's subject. COI editors are meant to go through the AfC process, as I've explained on their talk page. They've ignored that and have recreated the page at Abdullah Sulaiman Al Rajhi.

Yours, Sdrqaz (talk) 19:25, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Now taken to the dramaboard by Laplorfill, so by the time you see this message it may have been resolved). Sdrqaz (talk) 19:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Sulaiman Al Rajhi

How can a page of an influential figure in the field of money exchange in the Arab world be unwanted on Wikipedia on the pretext that it is not neutral Although it does not contain any glorification of the person, only the tasks and functions that are included in it throughout his career with some activities on the human and social level. I do not know where the error is. Will you allow me some time and tell me where the error lies? Is there a paragraph or a title that is not natural? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_Sulaiman_Al_Rajhi — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedX8 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, RedX8,

It all comes down to the sourcing. If you have reliable secondary sources to back up your claim that he is influential, you be able to persuade people that this is accurate. If you don't have a strong caliber of independent sources, the page might be deleted. I encourage you to submit a draft to Articles for Creation for an experienced reviewers to give you their opinion, they are kind of the experts on this subject. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for unprotecting that old page.

I was a bit confused by the message also. I tried to use Twinkle to CSD the main article (which was a redirect), but since it was protected, Twinkle posted the message to the talk page then posted a message in my voice saying that I wanted that. I get why it did that but I guess I have never tried to delete a protected page before. Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle sometimes does strange things. I just discovered that if I want to notify a page creator that I'm deleting a page they blanked, even if I check the box saying to notify them, they won't get a notification because Twinkle assumes if they blanked the page, they know it will be deleted. I asked on the Twinkle talk page if they could change that but, well, we'll see. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:00, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) I find Twinkle's ideas concerning informing page creators of deletions are counterintuitive in several ways, and since I can't always be sure what will happen I have disabled automatic informing of page creators in my Twinkle preferences, and if I think a message would be helpful I do it manually. I confess, though, that like Twinkle I tend to assume that an editor who has blanked a page doesn't want it, and so I usually don't inform them. Maybe that's a mistake. I don't know. JBW (talk) 11:17, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Murda Bizness

The article Murda Biznes needs to be deleted the page Murda Bizness already exists and is a redirect as well. Having that article as well is just redundant, also it’s an orphan article it’s not linked to any other pages on Wiki. No one is trying to “edit war” with you though. I do not know how to propose it at WP:RFD so if you think that’s the better option you should do it than.1Sire (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed.

Appreciated; I was at a loss for how to respond. Shibbolethink has a massive, disclosed, conflict of interest regarding this alleged hoax. That wasn't reasonable, but IIRC, he can be. He has linked to Gain of Function research publications about, IIUC, his own GoF work. I fear there will be more drama and could use some help talking about this while avoiding harassing or being a victim of harassment. He has recently voluntarily posted this information / links to this information, on English Wikipedia.

Also, I'm still having a hard time understanding how speaking about a specific person's alleged lack of competence and derangedness is not ad hominem merely because that person's writings are a source. I think I've been told that 4 times, by 2 users, approximately. Clarification invited. Doesn't speak to the action not the person apply?

Also, can you move it? It should be in user, not user talk space, e.g. to User:50.201.195.170/Essays/Lab_Leak_Theory_Reasonable but I can't move it.

--50.201.195.170 (talk) 22:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi IP, it's usually customary to tag users when talking about them on talk pages. You can do so with this template. I would appreciate if you did so in the future when discussing whether I have a conflict of interest.

I do not believe being a PhD-trained virologist or having an informed expert opinion about the likelihood of the lab leak is a valid COI. I stand to gain nothing from the lab leak theory being proven wrong. I stand to lose nothing from it being proven right, except that my assessment of likelihoods would have been shown incorrect. I love it when I'm shown an error in my own reasoning. it means my reasoning abilities are able to become stronger as a result, when I incorporate that feedback. I would urge you to adopt this same attitude about being proven wrong. It's much healthier in my experience.

I also do not edit in such a way that I push that POV in exclusion of other valid POVs. I am interested only in editing articles to show DUE content in a NPOV fashion, based on RSes. Most editors usually have an opinion one way or another about the content they edit. The key to being a good wiki editor is not letting it affect you in heated discussions. I don't profess to be perfect at this, as I believe no one is. But I do profess to be someone who tries awfully hard to do it.

I do not work in high security biosafety viruses any longer, I've moved on to doing more work with viruses/vaccines as putative treatments of other disorders, namely cancer. So again, I do not stand to gain or lose anything monetarily from this. Having an educated opinion based on years of study is valuable, I'm not sure why you would want to attribute a COI to me except that you appear to disagree with my edits. I would urge you to criticize those edits, rather than attempt to pin a COI where many other users have agreed there is none.

I have not linked to publications about my own work in reference to gain-of-function in article space, so I'm not quite sure what you're referencing there. I have not used my own work to cite anything on wikipedia except, I believe, once where it was appropriate in the COVID-19 misinformation article in a section about Antibody-dependent enhancement (a topic which formed 1/3 of my dissertation and about which I have published several peer-reviewed manuscripts in scientific journals).

I do sincerely believe your user space essay does not belong on wikipedia, but I don't really have the energy or motivation to put it to MfD, so I'm really just going to move on with my life, and I suggest you do the same. Good luck. I hope you find what you're looking for here.--Shibbolethink ^(♔ ^♕) 23:41, 7 July 2021 (UTC)(edited 00:05, 8 July 2021 (UTC))[reply]

50.201.195.170, I have moved your essay to your User page at your request. But I wouldn't be surprised if it was tagged for deletion since this has been such a controversial subject on Wikipedia over the past year. At least at a MFD discussion, you'll be able to present your opinion of why it should be kept.

I think Shibbolethink has offered you a very thoughtful and considered response. If you have evidence of any activity you believe is editorial misconduct, the Wikipedia standard is to present evidence of this in the form of edits, or "diffs", so an admin can see examples of the exact behavior you find problematic. Often, the collaborative response is to try to talk this out rather than rush to sanctions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See my comments at 50.201.195.170's talkpage, also see WP:ANI#Enforcement of actual policies - apropos ivermectin, lab leak theory etc., started by 50.201.195.170,. Note especially Alexbrn's comments to follow up - these aspersions by 50.201.195.170 are not a new phenomenon or a one-off. I didn't realize it was the same editor as the one I encountered in February until I looked deeper and realized that not much has changed. Acroterion (talk) 02:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the details, Acroterion. Once I went over to their talk page to respond, I could see from the messages there that this situation was more complicated than what they presented to me here. And you clearly know more about their history than I did. In hindsight, I should have looked at their contribution history before responding. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand why you were startled by my response, it definitely appears abrupt in the context of the above conversation. Once I investigated and went through the ANI discussion, I realized that we were seeing a bigger problem. Acroterion (talk) 03:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Qwerfjkl

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Qwerfjkl's talk page.
Message added 20:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

―Qwerfjkl talk 20:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

Hi Liz, I just created a page, Killing of Muawanatul Chasanah. Another user, Celestina007, tagged it because she believes it contains significant copyright violations of one of the article's sources. I checked with the Earwig Detector and it said that the only significant material was a short quote from a lawyer involved in the case-- I gave proper attribution to the lawyer and cited my source. I didn't want to bring this up with Celestina for fear of sounding ungrateful; I know all she wants is to make the article better. But I felt as if I needed to tell someone, since I don't feel as if the revdel template is warranted. Thanks for hearing me out. Helen(💬📖) 00:03, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Helen,

The Earwig copyright tool shows the quote you used but in its report, it doesn't indicated that it's been cited which it has been. But I rev'deleted the versions before your change just to be safe and removed the copyright tag. Most of the Rev deletion I do have to do with BLP violating material, not copyright issues.

Asking questions of other editors doesn't have to be confrontational along as you are just asking for clarification and not hurling accusations (which you are not). I hope this resolves your problem. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:24, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Institute for Latin American Studies

Hello and thank you for your work for improving Wikipedia. Unfortunately, you have deleted the article that I started for Institute for Latin American Studies just one day after it was tagged as unsuitable. There was no time for me to improve the page with required secondary references. I regret that you have made this decision and would like to hear what was your reasoning behind your decision to delete the article without letting anyone time to improve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morewilling (talk • contribs) 00:29, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, unidentified person,

I didn't delete an article, I just deleted a redirect. You can find the article at Draft:Institute for Latin American Studies. Wikipedia doesn't permit redirects from the main space of the project to Draft space so it was deleted. If you looked at the deleted page, you would have seen all of this information. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:28, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Liz, thanks for your response. It's nice that you decided not to delete this article before it was completed. Have you ever, though, thought that your arrogance is - while so helpful to Wikipedia readers - quite offputting to many of us who have just began to add information to Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morewilling (talk • contribs) 00:33, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to butt in here, because Liz is probably too polite to respond. Morewilling, you need to look at the history of your page and see who moved the page into draftspace: Liz didn't do that. Before accusing others of "arrogance", please read our policy on personal attacks. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:42, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand the policy and I am not here to argue, but I do think that the tone of you Wikipedia masters could probably be nicer and maybe a bit more explanatory. Not all of us have been around for a long time or know the technical details. For me it seemed like the page has been removed - and I have noticed that I was wrong, as I could edit the draft. Thank you for that and Liz, I do apologize for my false accusation. I will continue to improve the draft, but unfortunately it will not be easy to use many secondary references for a publicly funded research institution which is not very popular in media etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morewilling (talk • contribs) 01:02, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Morewilling,

You were informed of all of this on your user talk page, User talk:Morewilling#Institute for Latin American Studies moved to draftspace. This should not have been a surprise. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:16, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this information. I did not even know that this kind of page existed. I have been (anonymously mostly) updating Wikipedia in other languages and it seems like here in English-speaking Wikipedia you have quite strict rules for creating and publishing articles. Maybe a bit too strict. I think I'm returning to other language versions but thanks for your responses.

A revdel request

Hi Liz, I saw your name on a list of admins willing to assist with revision deletion. Wondering if you could help out with one. On the page Gary Rogers the IP editor 84.203.101.68 made an edit that contained some very degrading accusations against a BLP. It is the most recent edit they made to the page, and it is the one that Philipnelson99 reverted. I was wondering if you could redact it, since it falls firmly under Criterion 2. Thank you. Helen(💬📖) 19:53, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Helen,

Done I deleted all of their contributions to the article. Thanks for catching that and bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DYK cleanup request

Liz, thanks for all of your deletions of my nominations of leftover DYK template pages that weren't really templates, etc.

I'm writing to see whether you can combine two pages into one and leave the proper template in the correct place. Here's how things stand:

The actual nomination template is at the wrong name: Template:Did you know nominations/1984 All-Big Ten Conference football team: Revision history. Yes, ": Revision history" was somehow made part of the nomination page's name, and it was nominated, approved, and promoted at that name
There is a single edit at the expected (and desired) template page name, which is Template:Did you know nominations/1984 All-Big Ten Conference football team: this is the actual approval review by Wikicology
Subsequent to the approval review, MichaelQSchmidt copied Wikicology's review into the main nomination template with this edit.

Is there a way for you to merge the two pages so that Wikicology's edit appears in the history before MichaelQSchmidt's, and make sure that the only surviving page is Template:Did you know nominations/1984 All-Big Ten Conference football team? (I don't think leaving a redirect at the wrong name, Template:Did you know nominations/1984 All-Big Ten Conference football team: Revision history, would be useful, but I'll let you decide that.)

Thank you very much for anything you can do on this one. Please let me know when you're done (or if a merge isn't possible). BlueMoonset (talk) 20:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, BlueMoonset,

Ay, yah yah! I've only done two history merges and they were very simple, short and straightforward pages (they might even have been drafts). I get nervous about merging pages because I don't want any information to be deleted. And templates make me hesitate even more because any changes on one can affect so many other pages.

I'd recommend you posting your request at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge where some of the admins who patrol there can handle the nuances of your request. I'll ping Anthony Appleyard and Primefac who I know help out there.

Sorry not to help you here but the first rule in these things is "Do no harm" and I can't guarantee that would happen if I tried this out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:42, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, that's fine. I'm always very cautious in areas I'm not familiar with. I'll wait to see whether Anthony Appleyard or Primefac respond to the ping and if they can help. If they're busy, I'll go to the requests page in a few days and post there. Thanks for the quick response. (I've just made what should be my last deletion requests from those old DYK template pages: a few G6s and a G12.) BlueMoonset (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So... the short answer is "not really", at least from a continuity perspective.

If I were to merge these two pages, here is what you'd see in the edit history: This diff, followed by this diff, followed by this diff. Basically, it would look like Wikicology blanked the page and then MichaelQSchmidt restored all of the other content. I suppose in a way that's kind of what happened, but it would be a bit confusing.

Personally, I would swap the page's locations, redirect the "...history" page to the other page and tag it with {{r from merge}}; keeps all of the relevant bits of information without messing about with the timelines too much.

Happy to do that if that's the preference, will be temporarily watching this page for replies and will go with whatever you think works best. Primefac (talk) 22:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Primefac, it sounds like that's the best choice—the swap and then the redirect with tag—so please do that. I suppose, if anyone objects, we could do the merge later on down the line. Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:57, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Primefac (talk) 18:49, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueMoonset, Liz, and Primefac: After all that confusion, what needs to be done to which pages? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:24, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing any more. Primefac (talk) 18:49, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Md. Abdul Halim

Hello Liz, I am not sure Md. Abdul Halim qualified under A7. It was an article on a member of the first parliament of Bangladesh (elected in 1973) and met WP:NPOL. There is the chance it might have been hijacked by a non-notable person which happens often in South Asian articles.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 02:06, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Vinegarymass911,

I apologize for the delay in responding to you. You were right, the article had been hijacked and I should have looked more deeply in the edit history but it resembled jumk articles that we see every day. I'm glad you were persistent and the article has been restored. Sometimes, admins make mistakes and it's important that editors feel comfortable calling us on decisions that seem questionable to them. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:15, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Víctor Jara (album)

The article about the 1967 album has no notable, that is the main reason why I redirected it to the article of the homonymous Chilean singer-songwriter, also the same thing happens with the article Canciones folklóricas de América.

See: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (A9).--Germanico5468504 (talk) 03:28, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Germanico5468504,

For the third time, I was just asking that you nominate it for deletion at WP:AFD or WP:PROD it. I don't believe it is a suitable candidate for speedy deletion. It is not an uncontroversial deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:LGBT Roman Catholic cardinals and Category:LGBT Roman Catholic bishops

Hi - The above two cats appeared on the 10 July 2021 version of Special:WantedCategories. I saw that you deleted cardinals as vandalism, so am wondering if bishops might also be vandalism? Thanks! Gjs238 (talk) 02:57, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gjs238,

I have deleted both categories but I guess the bishops one was recreated. I've now nominated it for deletion at WP:CFD. I appreciate you letting me know. My Watchlist is so enormous that I don't check it very often. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Sakura-tai Chiru

Hello Liz, maybe you can help again in this case :-) A user questioned the notability of mentioned film/article. This film by renowned director Kaneto Shindo has been listed not only by serious online source/film magazine Kinema Junpo, but even more so in printed form – among others – in Critical Handbook of Japanese Film Directors by renowned film scholar Alexander Jacoby, and an essay by renowned critic Jasper Sharp for the British Film Institute (plus two others). All this can be checked in the Ref section. I think this notability questioning happened speedily and is unjustified. Can you check and help? Thanks, Robert Kerber (talk) 21:56, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert,

From reading your message, I thought there was a problem with this article being deleted or tagged for deletion but it just received a notability tag. That can be removed with more work on the article. I'm no expert on writing articles but I think a problem with this article is that you might have sources, but you're not using them in the article other than to confirm facts that, yes, this film exists. What do secondary sources have to say about this film, anything about its production, its reception by audiences or critics, any awards, anything about the significance of this film? Just having sources that mention this film isn't enough if you're not incorporating what they have to say about the article subject. I think that is what the editor who tagged this article was thinking when they questions its notability...it's not enough that you can verify a subject exists, you need to establish why the film is important enough to merit a Wikipedia article and that's what reliable secondary sources are used for. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll think of something. Thanks for your kind response. Best, Robert Kerber (talk) 08:30, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	I come to you for literally everything, whether it be begging for help because someone's going on a vandalism spree, requesting revision deletion, or maybe I'm just asking questions. You always find a way to help me out. Thank you for being great. Helen(💬📖) 23:32, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you, Helen, this makes my day. I'm not always speedy at responding to talk page messages so I'm glad I could help you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:13, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REFUND

Hello, SilkTork,

Just a reminder that if you are assisting at WP:REFUND, you have to make an edit to the restored drafts or they will be tagged for deletion. I just restored several you restored that had reappeared on the G13 lists and were deleted again last night. Editors and admins should check the page logs but many don't.

There is a tool that makes this easy for admins that you can get at User:SD0001/RFUD-helper...it'll take care of most of the restoration steps for you to prevent this from happening and about half of the admins who patrol REFUND make use of it. Thanks for your help! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Liz! I wasn't aware of that. This is probably not an area I'm going to get involved in, but if I do do any more refunds, I shall certainly make use of the tool you recommend. Best wishes, SilkTork (talk) 00:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SilkTork,

I think REFUND is one of the more pleasant admin tasks because you're restoring drafts to editors who want to work on them. But as someone who does a lot of deletions, I think it's better that a different admin responds to requests that they be restored rather than the admin who deleted the page. When I move on from doing deletions one day soon, I hope to help out at REFUND more. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:11, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another refund

Hi Liz. could you refund the old deleted (june 16?) version of Draft:Vivian Suter seen here? I've created Vivian Suter and am curious about the deleted draft. If it's junk or not worth it in your opinion, don't bother. Thanks! --- Possibly ☎ 02:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Possibly,

Done Happy to! It was tagged as a Promising Draft but there is no follow-up to these designations. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:27, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You can delete it now, I got a source from it, but otherwise it sounds like a long close paraphrase of multiple sources. --- Possibly ☎ 02:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rapper T.E.C. page deleted

Hello Liz I included major sources including links to court documents and other online outlets, such as all hiphop interview. He has sold millions in streams and records and also been signed to multiple major companies throughout his career No limit records Empire Dist etc. If something else is needed please advise

Hello?

Can you provide me with a link to the page you are talking about? Then I can investigate why it was deleted.

Also, please sign your talk page comments with four tildes (~~~~) so I can see who is commenting here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:21, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matholela Moloi (July 15)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Goldsztajn was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Unreliable sourcing, press-releases and texts from before the birth of the subject. No evidence of notability.

Goldsztajn (talk) 05:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Liz! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Goldsztajn (talk) 05:00, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

redirect

hi. i want to create List of 2020 Summer Olympics medal winners but with redirect how i can ? you must remove redirect with no path to free it. thanks --Miha2020 (talk) 18:58, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Miha2020,

I don't understand your request. You can start an article in Draft space and it can be moved into the main space of the project once it gets approval from an AFC reviewer. A page doesn't have to be deleted for this to happen. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:20, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

my request is clear! that redirect is for 2018 and not needed anymore! i want to create above page directly not draft! see List of 2016 Summer Olympics medal winners (is it have redirect?)...why you tagged this category? CSD C1 is for categories that have been unpopulated for at least seven days.it is created today! and by the way it is needed few days later when olympic 2020 starts--Miha2020 (talk) 19:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstand CSD C1, Miha2020. Empty categories are tagged and, if 7 days after tagging, they are still empty, then they are deleted. If, during that week long period, they have pages placed in these categories, then the tag is removed. Without tagging categories, we have no way of knowing how many days they have been empty. The CSD tagging keeps track of that. Read the content on Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion which is where tagged categories are placed for 7 days, it explains this.

As for this redirect, I urge you to develop articles in Draft space, that's where articles are created. If you insist on working & developing an article with this title in main space, then just remove the redirect & create the article. I won't delete this page, it should contain the entire page history. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

which history? look at this! if i deleted the content of page and put my own content, I will not considered as an article's creator!--Miha2020 (talk) 20:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't care about being the author's creator, you should care about the integrity of the article and retaining the edit history of the page. It's about the content, not you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:53, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

to read : here and here..--Miha2020 (talk) 12:48, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

I found out you reverted by edits on Third Oli cabinet. I respect your decision. You know this article is article of national interest of Nepal. Still Third Oli cabinet never existed officially. Please be clear help deleting Third Oli cabinet and merge with Second Oli cabinet making a separate section if required. Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021 mentions it's preceded by Second Oli cabinet. Second Oli cabinet says it's succeeded by Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021. Isn't it? It's true I don't know much on wiki policies. Padon if you think I made disruptive edits. For your reference:-^[1]

Hello, editor,

I stated in my edit summary that you needed to stop tagging this page for speedy deletion. WP:PROD or WP:AFD are more appropriate, where you can put forth your argument why it should be deleted. If you have questions about the deletion processes on Wikipedia, visit the Teahouse and they can address your questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:51, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for response. I had added AFD and discussion is available in Talk:Third Oli cabinet with clear concensus. Still, the add was removed by User:Yeti Dai. Please help merging Second Oli cabinet with Third Oli cabinet as Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021 mentions it's preceded by Second Oli cabinet. Second Oli cabinet says it's succeeded by Fifth Deuba Cabinet, 2021. Isn't it? Where does Third Oli cabinet lie? It's non existent. I don't know much but articles like Third Oli cabinet make Wikipedia a mess.110.44.124.164 (talk) 05:57, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://theprint.in/world/k-p-sharma-oli-sworn-in-as-nepal-pm-for-3rd-time-retains-previous-cabinet/658349/

Deletion of draft:Vaush on april

Saw that you deleted a draft article about the popular twitch/youtuber Vaush. I was wondering what the reason was for its deletion as I would like to make an article about him due to him being a very prominent online figure with a lot of independent media coverage about his online influence. WikiRavaen (talk) 23:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikiRavaen,

The page I deleted was Draft:Vaush which was just a redirect, that is a page that consists of a link to another page, in this case an article, Vaush. When this other page is deleted, the redirect becomes a "broken redirect" and those pages are deleted as part of the maintenance of the encyclopedia. The page you need to be looking at is Vaush which was deleted after a deletion discussion. I had nothing to do with that page so you need to review the deletion discussion which is linked to at Vaush.

If you have questions about deletion processes on Wikipedia or redirects, please visit the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bubble Bobble 4 Friends - tag removed (no problem)

Dear Liz. In the future, I intend to request for autopatrolled user right because I want to create articles without having to submit them for validation by a reviewer. I believe I have enough experience, as I created more than 70 articles on enwiki (18 here), simplewiki and ptwiki without ever having problems with deletions. However WP:APAT has a minimum recommendation of 25 valid articles. The problem is that there are two articles I created, Bubble Bobble 4 Friends and Yu-Gi-Oh! GX Tag Force 2, which were redirect pages. I don't know if those articles will serve in my favor for the recommendation.

I have two questions:

Is the 25 valid articles rule binding or can be flexible in certain cases?
Will my two aforementioned articles count toward the 25 valid articles?

Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 21:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ✍A.WagnerC,

Administrators tend to work in specific areas although most change these areas every few months or every few years. So, my guess is that there are 4 or 5 admins that regularly patrol WP:PERM and make decisions about awarding additional permissions to editors. I think it would be worth your time to look at the autopatrol page, go into the page history and look over the past month and find out which admins are evaluating editors' work and ask them these questions because that is the person who will make the decision.

My guess, because I don't work in this area, is that the 25 articles is pretty firm unless an editor has articles that are outstanding, like ones that have achieved GA, Good Article, status. I don't think redirects count but, again, ask one of the admins who does these evaluations what they think.

One thing I can tell you is that if there is an existing redirect, and you write a draft article which is moved to that page, the redirect and any previous history of that page is deleted so whoever created the draft would be seen as the "creator" of the article.

Sorry I couldn't help with more specific advice about gaining this additional permission. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so muck for answer. The your idea is very good. I will ask here. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 23:39, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Marjan Shirmohammadi

Hello dear colleague. Why did you delete Marjan Shir Mohammadi's page? [5] He is one of the prominent Iranian [6] actors and writers. You may explain. Thankfulخاچی (talk) 08:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @خاچی, the page Marjan Shirmohammadi was deleted because it was created by banned/blocked User:ArmanAfifeh in violation of their ban or block. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 17:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

@FormalDude hi. I understood. What should I do now?خاچی (talk) 18:15, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@خاچی: If you're interested in creating an article for Marjan Shirmohammadi, I would recommend that you create a draft in your userspace where you can develop the article without risk of it being deleted. You can then submit the draft article for creation. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 18:25, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FormalDude Thank youخاچی (talk) 18:48, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, خاچی,

Yes, what FormalDude said (thanks for answering). Feel free to start a new draft on this individual, either in your user sandbox or in Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz thank you خاچی (talk) 11:35, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz,@FormalDude hi. [7] Please do not check.خاچی (talk) 13:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from User:Diomedes050465

Hi Liz Why did you delete my page "The Pike And Shot Society". The Society is in its 50th year, still going strong. I am loathe to simply recreate since it would be helpful yo know what you felt was wrong Diomedes050465

Hello, @Diomedes050465! After reviewing the proposed deletion at The Pike & Shot Society, it appears the page was deleted due to a lack of significant coverage in reliable sources as well as no indication of notability in reliable sources. I hope this answers your question. ––FORMALDUDE^(talk) 17:49, 22 July 2021 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Hello, Diomedes050465

The Pike & Shot Society was deleted through what we call Proposed deletion. The reason given was "sources turn up exactly no indication of notability or significant coverage". With this form of deletion, an article can be restored if the deletion is contested so that is what I have done. This doesn't mean that the article can't be tagged for a future deletion discussion (what we call AFD) but for now the article is back. It would help if you could improve it so that it doesn't merit deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:39, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sahnil Bhatnagar

Hi Liz, I noticed you salted Sahnil Bhatnagar; it's been recreated here Sahnil Bhatnagar (Indian Tv Actor). I can't find a deletion discussion so not sure what to tag it with. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 20:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rubbish computer,

I actually salted 9 different titles about this individual. Thanks for letting me know about this deletion discussion, I shared this information there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries and it's insane the length people will go to write these spam articles. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 22:36, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not great at detecting paid editing but I think either that is the case here or, because he is an actor, it's a persistent fan. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And it looks like the page has now been deleted because it was created by a sockpuppet. Well, I think it's good that other people know about this person because if someone cared enough to create 10 different versions of an article about him, they aren't going to stop and we can't salt every possible title. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More information about this persistent sockpuppet at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sahil9610/Archive. It looks like creating articles about Sahnil Bhatnagar is his "tell" so he gets blocked fairly quickly. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey sorry just saw this. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 16:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see you doing lots of useful admin maintenance, thank you for that. It can often attract more criticism than thanks so it's important to acknowledge. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks, what I do these days is true janitorial work. Maybe one day I'll get inspired and decide to do some writing but I kind of had my fill of that during years of graduate school. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please reninstate

You proded this article, of an athlete who has now competed in the Olympics. Can you therefore please reinstate it? Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoav_Cohen --2603:7000:2143:8500:8FA:F0E:1857:7777 (talk) 05:36, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done, 2603:7000:2143:8500:8FA:F0E:1857:7777. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:38, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- wonderful. thank you. 2603:7000:2143:8500:8FA:F0E:1857:7777 (talk) 06:40, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:40, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, CAPTAIN RAJU, a lot has happened on Wikipedia over the past 8 years. Liz ^{Read! Talk!}

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

News and notes: Wikimania and a million other news stories

Special report: Hardball in Hong Kong

In the media: Larry is at it again

Board of Trustees candidates: See the candidates

Recent research: Gender bias and statistical fallacies, disinformation and mutual intelligibility

Traffic report: Football, tennis and marveling at Loki

News from the WMF: Uncapping our growth potential – interview with James Baldwin, Finance and Administration Department

Humour: A little verse

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ok

Linkthehero1234 (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Linkthehero1234,

Good. Visit the Teahouse. Very helpful people there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Lakshmi Ghar Aayi

I want to recreate a draft article Draft:Lakshmi Ghar Aayi which you have deleted on 19 June 2021. I think the article will be definitely similar to the one you deleted as it is basically about a tv show. Will there be any issue if I recreate Draft:Lakshmi Ghar Aayi?--Creativitylove (talk) 08:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCleanerMan

Hi Liz, I've been spending some time looking at this user's editing history, and I'm considering blocking him. He's been blocked twice before, the most recent in March for two weeks by El C. As you know, the user was unusually aggressive on my Talk page, which surprised me, but that has nothing to do with the bases for a block - it just triggered my attention.

It's a bit hard to follow his history of warnings because he deletes everything from his Talk page. However, you have warned him, I believe twice, about failing to notify the authors of pages he nominates for deletion (using whatever process). Most recently, he has been on a tear nominating election templates for deletion. The count is staggering. As far as I can tell, he has not informed any of the authors of the nominations. Moreover, take a look at the discussion between him and Number 57 on the latter's Talk page. Not only is WCM lying when he says that the templates are single-use, but in at least two cases I've found he has deleted the templates from articles so that it looks like they're used less.

He has also tagged categories as WP:C1 without notifying the authors. My guess is there too he may have emptied the cats themselves, but I got tired of trudging through his contributions.

I suppose I could take him to ANI instead of blocking him myelf (he's been there before, and I believe that's what provoked the two-week block), but talking to you, as well as pinging the other admins, is kind of a compromise between the two.

As for the length of the block, it should be at least one month in my view. What are your thoughts on all of this?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'm unable to immediately parse this user's contribs right now without specific diffs being cited. There's just too many of them. If, for example, the prod edit warring continued after the warning, that'd be an indef. But, the obvious tautology is that, if it was heeded, then it was heeded. There may be enduring CIR (possibly even outright PACT) issues with the election templates, but the extent of that disruption in the context of the totality of recent edits, and in the view of these issues not being repeated in the future — all that remains unclear.

About blanking as a form of archiving: it's a rough approach, which is fine to gently point out as such, but ultimately, it's a personal choice and should have little if any bearing on anything (which I'm not saying is easy for an uninvolved admin to pull off, but they should definitely try). Sorry, I no longer possess a firm recollection of the March block, which really is on me for not including diffs of the violations in my block notice. El_C 13:22, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some diffs:

removing {{Malaysian general election, 2018}} from an article;
No notification of User talk:*angys*, the author of the template, which is one of the many nominated by WCM;
tagging category as C1 - this is a special cat, and not being well-versed in cats, I'm not completely sure how it works;
No notification of User talk:Woohookitty, the author of the cat;
Another example of removing a nominated template from an article.
Liz's first warning - about notifications of authors
Liz's second warning - about replacing PRODS after they were removed by another editor - and about blanking of warnings.

As for the Talk page business, I wasn't saying that WCM's removal of warnings was necessarily a basis for a block, only that it makes it hard to follow things. That said, removal of warnings, in combination with other disruptive activity is additional evidence of the user's misconduct. As for "heeding" Liz's warnings, he clearly did not.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Bbb23. In light of that, I'm just gonna take these concerns to them directly and see how it goes from there. El_C 19:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding, Bbb23 & El C, but I had a late start here and, to be honest, I wasn't sure exactly how to respond. I've gone to their talk page to make clear that my "reminder" was more than a suggestion. Unless there is clear bad intent involved, I try to post reminders because I find that scolding an editor usually provokes a defensive response and isn't effective at changing behavior but I can see that my words are seen by equivocal by some. It's only recently that I looked over WikiCleanerMan's user page and saw that they believe a "massive cleanup" is necessary on Wikipedia which sounds like deletionism on overdrive. Now that I've posted that user talk page notices are not an option but part of the deletion process, I feel comfortable with a block if this continues to be ignored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for your help. I'm afraid I'm less satisfied with WCM's responses and believe the user has already exhausted our good faith through a significant amount of manipulative pretense. However, given that I'm in a minority of three, I will just hope I'm wrong and the user will surprise me by amending his behavior.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki links and A3

Hi, Liz. I noticed you deleted Septopus as an A3. I had seen that nomination and was keeping an eye on it (I was considering contesting it). If I remember correctly (obviously I don't have access to deleted edits), it was an interwiki redirect to a Wiktionary page. Do links to other projects count as "external links" under the criterion? I'm considering asking at WT:CSD because I don't think it's sufficiently clear. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:11, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sdrqaz,

I thought that this CSD criteria was appropriate at the time I reviewed this but your query has lead me to reread Wikipedia:Redirect which states

Note that redirects to other Wikimedia projects, other websites, or special pages do not work. These should be avoided or replaced with a {{soft redirect}} template.

So, I have restored this page. Template:Wiktionary redirect is an acceptable substitute for {{soft redirect}} so you were correct here. Thank you for teaching me something new today. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Liz. After leaving you that message, I saw at WP:ACSD that the 'A' criteria "do not apply to redirects" – there's a little ambiguity there as to whether it was referring to a "proper" redirect or all redirects, but I think we've ended up in the right place.

Sdrqaz (talk) 01:36, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm glad you brought it to my attention so I don't make this mistake again. I know that this was the first cross-wiki redirect I've encountered looking over CSD-tagged pages. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. M. I. Wright (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Walkabout Travel Gear edit

Hi Liz. I compiled and added that list because of the notation below that's found on the top of the page. I'm confused why demonstrating coverage is removed when that notation specifically asks for it. I got all the references from clicking on the books link. I have no idea how many sources are needed.

Thanks.

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be shown, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Walkabout Travel Gear" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) KazakDexter (talk) 00:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KazakDexter,

It's appropriate to add a few titles that establish notability but you added dozens and dozens of listings, your list was larger than the entire article! It was disproportionate and considering that this list of titles has been deleted several times from your sandbox, that's another sign that this was an inappropriate addition.

This revert was my decision as an editor, but if you have more general questions about content creation on Wikipedia, I encourage you to bring them to the Teahouse where you'll receive replies from editors who have a stronger background in article creation than I have. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:14, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Still confused how an article can not meet notability guidelines yet have too much notability. But I'll bring that up in the Teahouse. KazakDexter (talk) 01:27, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refund-o-matic

Hi Liz. I am going through the Museum of Fine Arts Houston's collection, looking for women artists without articles. For Jammie Holmes it looks like there was some draft action, possibly by a blocked editor, and an expired draft. Could you refund anything that looks promising to Draft:Jammie Holmes 2 or similar? I've finished up with Jammie Holmes.

I do have to say that these refunds almost always yield nothing, but it's a little like The Mystery of Al Capone's Vaults. Thanks. --- Possibly ☎ 01:35, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Possibly,

Done at Draft:Jammie Holmes 2. This was tricky, first to find the deleted version, restore it, move it and go back into the edit history for the last good version. There were a lot of edits that were revision deleted. It's an unusual use of revision deleted, the edits were revision deleted but the actual content added by the sockpuppet was not removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I actually got some material out of that. I am done with it if you want to delete it again. Thank you kindly for your troubles. --- Possibly ☎ 02:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly, are you finished with it? I think it would be confusing to keep a draft and article on a subject when the content is different. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am done with it, please feel free to delete Draft:Jammie Holmes 2. I attributed the copied text to Draft:Jammie Holmes 2, but I guess if anyone was devoted enough to track the attribution, they could confirm that via an admin! Thanks again. --- Possibly ☎ 02:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think it's a good day when deleted content can be repurposed into an existing article. Thanks for the attribution, I meant to mention that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:07, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

	Complex Refund Award for Deleted Content
	You are the inaugural winner of the Complex refund award for deleted content (CRADC). Thanks! --- Possibly ☎ 03:11, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, Possibly, it's an award I will cherish! Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shorter signature

Why don't you change your signature to this one, which is twelve characters shorter than your current signature?

<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400">'''''[[Special:Contributions/Liz|Read!]] [[User talk:Liz|Talk!]]'''''</sup>

Kleinpecan (talk) 15:09, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hip Hop Movement / Six elements of the Hip Hop Movement

Hi Liz

Piotr Jr. did help and edit part of the Ronald Savage article with the Child Victims Act today rather than just deleting it, that was a good sign.

Now with the Hip Hop Article with the Six Elements Of The Hip Hop Movement, he never removed it from the Ronald Savage article but went all the way over to the Hip Hop article and removed it when no one else did because it is a hip hop history fact, his claim was it doesn't need to be in the lead, something that noble and respected worldwide about the elements of the hip hop movement truly is that's why nobody touched it, in fact, a user put it in the lead, years later it was removed by mistake and I put it back and it was all good. This is even in books two written by a well respected hip hop Arthur

The History of Hip Hop vol #2 –Eric Reese - 2019 https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_History_of_Hip_Hop/NMSKDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=six+elements+of+the+hip+hop+movement&pg=PT5&printsec=frontcover

The History of Hip Hop Collectionbooks.google.com › books Eric Reese • 2020 https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_History_of_Hip_Hop_Collection/D232DwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=six+elements+of+the+hip+hop+movement&pg=PT88&printsec=frontcover

and co-signed my Hip Hop Pioneer Busy Bee who is one of the first solo mc's of hip hop history in an interview with Sway in the morning along with Ronald Savage - BUSY BEE IS HIP HOP

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6Xz50h-u78&t=546s (Time stamps 0000-02:18) so you know who busy bee is,

(Time Stamp 7:25-10:20) talking about the hip hop movement as you can see Sway in the morning who has been in hip hop for decades even says hip hop movement as if it's new, because all these people new to hip hop and not from the 1st generation knows hip hop and hip hop movement are two different things, hip hop movement was never ever used in an official capacity it was just a word to describe people wanting to be apart of this thing called hip hop until 1990 when Ron "Bee-Stinger" Savage came up with the meaning he also is from the 1st generation and helped to build hip hop, and we all know why he left as he says in 2016 but he's back now from the looks of things and people giving him lots of love because of who he is from back in the days.

(Time Stamp) 13:39- 17:04 Busy bee breaks it down how Hip Hop had its own elements and why they gave elements to Hip Hop Movement, that is history, and Ronald Savage trademark it as well to protect the hip hop movement from being stolen like hip hop was from the pioneers. That's all I was trying to say, people are kinda really not confused now about the two which ALWAYS been different meanings in one.

No disrespect but even Jay Z knows hip hop movement included 6 elements - as you see in this written article. https://www.birthofhiphop.com/jay-z-with-dean-baquet/

This is all I was trying to say because I'm from Bronx River in NYC where Hip Hop Started, I never got a chance to meet bee-stinger real name Ronald Savage but even I know he gave meaning and elements to hip hop movement. I just thought user Piotr Jr. was one of the people still upset with Ron Savage because of 2016, but no one is thinking about that with him no more in hip hop, he gets real love now, that's over the way it looks on youtube. Piotr even took this legend picture down off of the Hip Hop Page, you have to admit that is disrespect to the man who coined the elements for hip hop movement, it just looks funny to a lot of people I showed in hip hop last night. Can you look at the video and Jazy Z also stating what hip hop movement is please then you will see what I was talking about him removing a lead peace of hip hop culture. Piotr if you reading this also It would be grateful of you to undo what you did and his picture until I can write something longer or better, I have to read through all this stuff, I did this 5 - 6 years ago in college. Hopefully, Piotr is ok with me now and we can work together, I liked how he made a great edit on the Ronald Savage -aka- Bee-Stinger Article. --Street sting (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for guiding me regarding my new article named 'Obhyesh'. Please keep on giving the good advice to edit it better and eventually moving it into livespace. Thanks once again. Bsrthereal (talk) 22:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Hello Liz, I understand your point, however most of the tagged sandboxes belong to single-purpose accounts with promotionals/corporatives usernames or spambots, which have been reported for blocking, and I think that sandboxes must be tagged; if I find a new editor without inapropiated username or COI (spambot), I don't will tagged that sandboxes. Regards Valdemar2018 (talk) 07:22, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category Merge

Hello, you deleted a category after a merge discussion at Cfd. Could you also rename Category:Disney+ movie ID same as Wikidata to Category:Disney+ ID same as Wikidata as part of that merge, thanks. Terasail ^[✉️] 14:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Terasail,

I would only delete a category if it was empty (CSD C1) or tagged for uncontroversial deletion (CSD G6) which means that the category has been emptied by the CFD closer, in this case, Marcocapelle. Category:Disney+ movie ID same as Wikidata, Category:Disney+ series ID same as Wikidata and Category:Disney+ ID same as Wikidata are all empty so I'm not sure that anything needs to be moved. Or maybe I'm just unclear on what you are asking me to do here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Terasail: it was not clear to me yesterday that this was intended as a batch nomination. Let me have a look at it once more. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free revisions

I don't know if you'd noticed by Legoktm's script wasn't working properly on pages where the {{Orphaned non-free revisions}} was preceded by {{Valid SVG}}. It was rev-deling the orphan revision but not removing the template - example File:Bank of Estonia new logo.svg. Anyway I've mentioned it to Legotkm and he's modified the script, so you might want to bypass your cache before you next use the script. Nthep (talk) 18:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nthep,

Yes, I've seen the process skip removing the template a few times but I didn't know what the problem was. I know that a couple of times, I manually removed the template but I don't work much with files so I wasn't sure if there was another step that needed to be taken. As far as I can see, the bot typically places files in that CSD category once a day. Thanks for letting me know what was going on. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:14, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Olakira

Hello Liz, I see that you deleted the page Olakira now due to the G4 CSD tag placed on it. As I understand that you acted in good faith but the G4 doesn't entirely mean an automatic delete to pages that was recreated after they were deleted previously via discussions but “It excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies” according to the documentation page. Before creating the article again, I ensured this was met as the content isn't identical to the deleted version and the subject has gathered more significant coverage hence the reason for deletion no longer applies. Lastly, I also contested the CSD tag on the article talk page and hoping discussion will have been made rather than outright deletion. Please take a look at this and have it reviewed. Thanks Kaizenify (talk) 02:21, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kaizenify,

Just a question, how did you compare it to the deleted version? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the response. Just before creating the article, I saw that it has been previously created and deleted, followed the thread, and then checked the previous creator last contributions and was able to see the page in their sandbox here. So that was how I was able to compare, thanks. Kaizenify (talk) 02:31, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Kaizenify, how about this...I restore the page as a draft and you submit it to AFC? This is the main way I know of to get around an AFD deletion decision. I also think that if it is just restored to main space, it will likely be tagged for speedy deletion again by our eager CSD taggers. If it passes review at AFC, I think it is unlikely to be deleted. What do you think? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:55, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough Liz, please restore to draft and will definitely submit to AFC. Thank you once again. Kaizenify (talk) 09:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Liz; just following up on this as you said you were going to restore to draft. Regards Kaizenify (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 45

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021

Library design improvements continue
New partnerships
1Lib1Ref update

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A big sockpuppet problem

Hi Liz, I needed to talk to an admin because something just cropped up that I need immediate help with. There's been a vandal that's attacked pages for months, writing about his testicles going up and down. He's back tonight with a new sock: "I pee in swimming pools". AIV is backlogged and I need an admin on this ASAP... he won't stop until he's blocked. Please help. Helen(💬📖) 01:54, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. As soon as I hit "publish" on this message, the guy was blocked. Sorry for the inconvenience. Helen(💬📖) 01:55, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HelenDegenerate,

No need for apologies! Yes, Mr. Testacles, admins are aware of him and he usually gets blocked pretty quickly. If this happens again though, you need to leave me his username or I can't do anything about it.

Have a good weekend! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The name of the sock was "I pee in swimming pools". Guy's feeling festive and changing his modus operandi for the Olympics. Helen(💬📖) 02:03, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, you said that. Yes, I think there are filters preventing his usual vandalism so he's changing subjects. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much

Thank you so much for understanding that I'm not a sockpuppet. I had myself asked for undeletion of the articles of Shubhashish Jha, Lakshmi Ghar Aayi and Priyanka Choudhary: Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Shubhashish Jha, Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Lakshmi Ghar Aayi and Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion#Priyanka Choudhary as I find it easier to work on the deleted versions. I actually don't have time and want to be inactive otherwise if I had enough experience and confidence I would have created on my own. Still, thank you so much once again for understanding.--Creativitylove (talk) 05:33, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4RR edit war

Hello, hope everything is Okay this new User entered in edit war with others [[8]] on this page [[9]] with 4 RR under 24 hours. Can something be done? Thank you. Theonewithreason (talk) 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Theonewithreason,

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Since this is a very new editor, the first step is to inform them about the edit-warring policy which I have done. They haven't edited in many hours so if they resume edit warring when they return, let me know and I can take further action. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Liz, I am not that interested in the page where edit war is on, just noticed when I was looking some Olympic winners lists and I am not that much on Wikipedia because of my work, the thing here that concerned me was the way they were discussing with the other editor in a quite aggressive manner, that is why I wanted the bring attention to admins. Have a nice day/night. Theonewithreason (talk) 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Query

You declined a G5 on Verse of Brotherhood. My question is what were the "substantial edits by others"? Before nominating I reviewed this diff (8 September 2015 - 12 November 2019 in which I see:

Dubious title tag
formatting of the title and transliteration of the Arabic name
Citation formatting, but all references were present in the article at the end of the sock's edits.
A center tag around Arabic text replaced with lang|ar formatting around the same text.
minor ce ("these massages" to "this message")
Some category changes (some by the sock in two edits from 2019: [10][11])

Which one of these is substantial? I am asking so that I become better at this CSD type.--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 22:06, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eostrix,

I look at hundreds, maybe thousands, of pages a day. I didn't evaluate the value of each edit made to this page but just looked to see if other editors had contributed and worked on an article that had been tagged CSD G5. As you can see by looking at your CSD log, I deleted the majority of pages you tagged for deletion but a handful of articles appeared to have other editors contributing to them. I look at the general participation and whether or not the blocked editor was the sole contributor to the page.

If you are asking for an evaluation of your tagging, I'd say it's solid but to me, there is not the urgency to CSD G5s that there is to copyright violations, BLP violations and vandalism. We don't need to rush to delete every evidence of a sockpuppet as soon as they are identified as one. As you probably know, admins have varying approaches and attitudes towards speedy deletion but, in this case, you had me reviewing the pages and this was my decision. I hope this helps address your concerns. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:27, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am not challenging your decision, I am way way too new to G5s to do that (I've done G5s before, but almost all on LTAs (like Arya) I know very well and where the application was obvious (freshly made articles, not ones with accumulated minor edits and edits by bots over a period of time)), I am trying to learn - to calibrate my own G5 tagging process (just I've learnt on other criteria, I've certainly varied my thresholds on A7 and G11 over time). Certainly G5 results (just as any CSD tag) vary by admin, when I'm better calibrated in my own process I try to shoot for the strict side of judgement calls when tagging.

(Adding: part of what I'm doing on this G5 run, is not so much for the sake of G5s but because I'm trying to study the active sock puppet cases. Going over contributions of recently blocked socks is part of that)

So from your reply, I learn you mostly look at the number of contributors (and I'd assume diff size, minor edits, etc.) in the article's history? And if that number is large enough, you decline?

If so, then perhaps I should not rely on the combined diff before tagging? My process this time was to pre-filter my noms based on the article's history (like if I saw big diffs by editors in good standing or editors doing chains of edits), and then look at the combined diff from the sock's last edit to present. I could base my decisions more on the article's history and use the combined diff only to eliminate noms?--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 22:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ✗plicit 05:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Administrator changes

BusterD

Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94

CheckUser changes

TheresNoTime

Oversighter changes

TheresNoTime

ST47

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Liz, it would be a good idea to comment at ANI. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:23, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cullen328,

Thank you for the message, I hadn't seen the notice (above). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:54, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring Draft Nuhu Muzaata Batte

Bellow is the Page Chronology UNDELETING Nuhu Muzaata Batte

Hello Comrade Liz, i am kindly requesting that you undelete Nuhu Muzaata Batte, it had been recommended and tagged for deleting citing copyright infringement which i had immediately corrected and cleaned. I therefore Kindly request that you undelete.Thank you very much. Ibitukirire (talk) 21:34, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ibitukirire,

Since there were questions about the content, I have restored this page, moved it into Draft space and submitted it to Articles for Creation for review. You can still work on the page and can find it at Draft:Nuhu Muzaata Batte. Please do not move it to the main space of the project without being reviewed or it is likely to be deleted again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much @ Liz, but I will not make any edits on that draft, I know other people will do so and modify it further. This is because I have realised my edits are being mistaken by some editors non disclosed paid edits when I reality I do not have any penny received nor in any way connected to the subjects. I have already been warned by NJD-DE that I will be blocked from further editing given the nature of my edits, hence the my decision to first hold on, observe and learn before any serious edits. Thank you very much Ibitukirire (talk) 22:18, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello admin, I was trying to create a new page for deceased Nuhu Muzaata Batte and realised it had earlier been created and deleted. However, you restored it and draftfied it at Draft:Nuhu Muzaata Batte but the draft is nowhere to be seen, Is there any posibility of you restoring this draft so that i procceed with edits on the same? Ugmatrix (talk) 00:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ugmatrix

I can't restore Draft:Nuhu Muzaata Batte. If you go to the page, you'll see that admin MER-C deleted the page because it was the creation of a sockpuppet, Ibitukirire so you'll need to start from scratch. Since you registered your account right after Ibitukirire was blocked, if you are also a sockpuppet of Izaaqnewton, please stop editing before you are blocked as well. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Inspirations (Saxon album)

Have added the link to the draft article Draft:Inspirations (Saxon album). Dan arndt (talk) 02:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dan,

Done. That's all I needed to see! There is a way in Twinkle that you can tag a page and the admin can delete the target page and do the move in one step. If you could move the page now, that would be the next step. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Female characters in animated films

I've got an unregistered user adding a sequence of articles to the redlinked Category:Female characters in animated films. I saw you G5 speedy deleted that category in February since it was created by a ban evader. Is this at all related? Firefangledfeathers (talk) 06:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Firefangledfeathers,

Thanks for noticing this. The previous editor was a sockpuppet of CensoredScribe whose primary focus was creating categories on different aspects of fictional characters. I'm not sure this is the same editor as they tend to create user accounts rather than doing IP editing but I'll keep an eye on them. Let me know if you think they are being disruptive. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:47, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A deletion of a draft

Why delete a draft? One of your censors moved it to drafts and I supplied everything they asked , and they ignored my messages, just time and again. And now of course you want to delete the remainings of that corruption??? No! You should not. Please bring it back if your biased wikipedia worth anything just keep it so people can see and judge for themselves! Or you are biased and corrupted!!!

Hello,

Before I can look into this, you'll have to tell me what page you are talking about. Pages are deleted for a variety of reasons and so policy varies on whether or not they can be restored depending on why they were deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for the note about moving to draft space and marking for speedy deletion it was my first time doing it and happy to know the proper procedure. Thanks for taking the time! Cheers! Jamie-NAL (talk) 13:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jamie-NAL,

Don't worry about it. I posted three other messages about this yesterday so it is not uncommon. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Graham 'Abo' Henry

In regards of Wikipedia policy, I agree and I’m okay about it. I never got around to editing it.

Best regards, Kyle KyleDJF34 (talk) 14:34, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kyle,

Drafts that are not edited for six months are deleted through speedy deletion, CSD G13. But should you want to return to working on Draft:Graham 'Abo' Henry, just let me or any admin know or go to WP:REFUND and ask and the page will be restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:38, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover category

Hello, Jc37,

It looks like you closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 July 8#Category:Professional wrestlingvenues but there was a tagged category that should have been included on the nomination but wasn't listed, Category:Professional wrestling venues in the United States by state. Do you want to deleted it as part of that discussion or should I just tag it as an empty category? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Liz, thanks for the note.

Oh I see, tagged, but not listed in the discussion.

I think either way it can probably be speedied, either C1 (empty) or G8 (now not needed container cat). - jc37 17:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, jc37,

Okay, thanks for letting me know. I've tagged it for deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:35, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hello! Could you please reactivate the page for Brent M. Longnecker? I noticed today that it had been deleted on 04/12/2021 when I needed to make edits to his work history. This is an authentic individual and the information on the page was accurate as to the date it was posted. Please let me know if you need any further information for verification and I will be happy to assist. Thank you and have a great day!

Done, restored as a contested Proposed deletion. Also, please sign your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~) so that your signature, along with the day & time is appended to your message and I know who I'm talking to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for restoring!!!Brittnytillman (talk) 19:00, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Troom Troom - redirect?

Hello, Liz. I saw that two days ago you deleted this article on Troom Troom which received a PROD on it. I asked the person who PRODed the article if a redirect/merge to 5 Minute Crafts, the article which Troom Troom is based off of, would be more appropriate. He said he was okay with it, but by the time I saw his message the article got deleted. So I would like to ask if I could redirect the article to 5 Minute Crafts? Thanks in advance, PantheonRadiance (talk) 19:33, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PantheonRadiance,

You don't need my permission to create a redirect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay, thanks, just wanted to make sure it was fine. Just went ahead and did it. PantheonRadiance (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's fine. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:03, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Workingepskeiskxkke

Hi Liz,

I'm frustrated with Workingepskeiskxkke and their editing pattern on Coaster (commuter rail), where they have been repeatedly added unsourced trivia despite my reverts and warnings. (I'm coming to you because you've also previously warned them and might be familiar with their behavior.) It seems like a CIR issue, given the poor quality of their edits and refusal to communicate. I'm not sure what the best option is - it seems like a relatively trivial issue to go to ANI for, but it's frustrating and disruptive. Thanks, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pi.1415926535,

I've posted a message asking them to start talking with other editors on the article talk page. If they ignore this and continue to be disruptive, I can give them a block from editing this particular page. Keep me posted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:53, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sudhars823

Hi Liz this user seems to be an SPA who is on a mission to get a single promotional BLP into the encyclopaedia. Some admin action may be appropriate. Thanks Mccapra (talk) 06:03, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mccapra,

I'm not inclined to block at this moment since they don't seem to be that active any more, not as they were last year. I can't protect a page from being recreated as last year they created the page under a lot of different titles. I'll keep tabs on them and if they persist, I'll take action. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:23, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Community Tech bot

I'd be grateful if you could explain why you deleted User talk:Community Tech bot? --David Biddulph (talk) 06:32, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, David,

That was a mistake on my part. I was deleting orphaned talk pages and this page was on this list page. I really appreciate you telling me about my blunder so I could fix it. My apologies. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please do an easy favour for me? Thank you!

So, Materialscientist deleted my page because it contained content that I created. And no, I'm not asking you to restore it or anything: I understand and accept the deletion. But please can you or another mod of the page before deletion (because I can't view it despite creating it), and I can't remember the exact details as I wrote it a while ago; then I can simply put it somewhere else (don't worry, I won't spam articles about stuff I made up). Thank you! Binary198 (talk) 09:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Binary198[reply]

Hello,

I can't help you until you tell me what page was deleted so I can see why it was deleted. Also, please sign your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~) so I can see who you are. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:40, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Binary198 (talk) 09:52, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Binary198[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Liz a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, CAPTAIN RAJU. Much appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion request

Since you deleted Template:Friendly search suggestions, requesting its undeletion. The template is listed for merging at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Holding cell#Other, as per the consensus at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 October 4#Reference search tools talk page templates. A merge will be difficult to perform if users cannot access the content. Since the consensus was to merge, the page should not have deleted at all. Rather, after the merge (which has yet to occur), a redirect would be most appropriate. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, North America1000,

Done. I usually only delete templates if they've been tagged for speedy deletion which means they've been processed over at TFD. I've removed the CSD & TFD tags but if this was incorrect, please undo my edit. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:38, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. The closer of the TfD discussion keeps trying to circumvent the consensus of the discussion for their own reasons (diff). Consensus was to merge, not delete without merging. See the hatted extended discussion at the TfD holding area (linked above). As I stated to them before, if they had a strong opinion about what should occur, they should have !voted, and should have left the close to an uninvolved user. I would perform the merge myself, but it involves use of Template:Invoke and Lua, which I am not versed in. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is why I usually leave templates to the experts except for the rare occasions when completely unused templates end up being tagged for speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I find it disturbing that the closer of the TfD later tagged the template for speedy deletion (diff), particularly when the speedy tag states that consensus at the discussion was for deletion, when it clearly was not. The discussion was closed as merge. After all, consensus needs to be followed, not ignored in favor of one's own point of view. Yet another example of the supervote, where consensus is ignored in favor of unilateral decision making. This is not how Wikipedia is supposed to work. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:41, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There seems to be a lot of purging going on of unwanted templates right now. Not being adept with templates, all I've done is brought it to the attention of a few other people. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello friend, could you check if the improvements to this article Draw My Life are good or something is wrong. Thanks --Nasty bits (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rio Grande Valley

Hi Liz! I just undid your move of Rio Grande Valley. There was an RM which did not move this page pending further consensus (see the closing admin's comment here). The nominator then posted the speedy delete request that prompted the move you made asking for the change to be done. Sorry for any confusion here!--Yaksar (let's chat) 14:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yaksar,

Typically pages aren't tagging for move/deletion prematurely. I'm sorry this created extra work for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:53, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Hi, Liz!

First of all, thanks a lot for reaching out!

I saw your message in my userpage, and I rechecked all stale drafts that I tagged for speedy deletion which were subsequently reverted. Except that stale userpage - which seemed to me that it was indeed to be blanked, given that it was actually inactive -, I was sure I followed the guidelines of WP:G13, i.e. old drafts which were not edited by a human in six months.

Did I miss something? (〃￣ω￣〃ゞ

Thanks a lot in advance!

Kind regards

I-Bin-A-Bibi (talk) 18:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I-Bin-A-Bibi,

Drafts that haven't been edited by a human editor in over six months can be tagged for G13 speedy deletion. But what you were tagging were old User pages. These can only be tagged under certain conditions, six months with no human edits AND either

Userspace with an {{AFC submission}} template or
Userspace with no content except the article wizard placeholder text

These weren't conditions that were met for the User pages you tagged. They were just old User pages. For more guidance on this, please read over Wikipedia:Ragpicking. Going through old User pages for editors who have left Wikipedia years ago isn't a productive activity, they are generally left alone unless there is content that violates copyright rules or BLP guidelines.

If you want to find draft pages nearing the end of their six month fallow period, you can find them at Category:AfC G13 eligible soon submissions. Please be aware if you live in certain places, like the United States, that Wikipedia runs on UTC time, not U.S. time and U.S. time differs depending on the time of the year (Daylight Savings time vs. Standard time). So, right now, if you're in the U.S. and a draft was last edited on 5 pm on February 9, 2021, it would be possible for it to be tagged G13 at 6 pm on August 9, 2021. In a few months, the clock will change again and we'll be one hour behind, not ahead. There is actually a very small window of days when the time zone of six months ago is the same as it is today.

I hope this helps explain my acts. I undid your edits rather quickly because you were doing so much tagging, I wanted you to stop before you did another dozen or two dozen pages that would have to be reverted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Hi Liz,

Thanks a lot for your thorough explanation!

No worries about it, I was really convinced that these pages could be tagged as G13 as well. Normally I wait until my edits are processed by an admin, like the pages which were deleted yesterday evening, before I continue working on such tasks.

Thanks again for pointing me to the right direction - I'm going to check the article you suggested me, before I resume working on abandoned/stale drafts or pages.

Kind regards

I-Bin-A-Bibi (talk) 20:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cregan

What is the point of edits like this?

You could've easily just Googled and added an easy and obvious source, considering the article was about a member of parliament, instead you decided to take the lazy option of tagging it for deletion and leave it for someone else to add that source, someone immediately did it anyway, and you still wind up tagging the talk page with a pointless "Liz wuz here" message. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's even worse. You're rapid-fire tagging for people for deletion, specifically targeting who are an absolutely clear pass for WP:NPOL with zero effort whatsoever to even do a solitary one-page Google search. This is about as close to vandalism as you can get while being notionally excused by a policy, and I'm not sure why one would do it in good faith. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Hello, The Drover's Wife,

Nice to see you. This article was one of about dozen biographies that showed up as unreferenced which I tagged as BLP PRODs. Most of the bios were of retired football players. Twinkle automatically puts a notice on the article talk page when you tag an article, I'm responsible for my edits but I didn't post that myself, the program did. You'll find these tags on the talk page of any article or photo that has been PROD'd to let editors know it has been PROD'd once so that it isn't tagged again in the future. I think that is a helpful feature.

Twinkle also posts a message alerting the article creator that the page was tagged with as a BLP PROD and, personally, I think that editor should find a reference. I'm sorry that you see it as "lazy" but I have other tasks I wanted to get to besides tracking down references for every unreferenced biography. We all have areas that we focus on and that is not mine. I keep busy with other activities that have added up to 205,000 edits on this project. Back to work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:40, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you can't be bothered doing the most basic Google, why don't you find some more productive areas? Demanding that other editors drop everything to frantically clean up your mess (because you are the one dealing with this in the laziest and most destructive way possible) is phenomenally unhelpful. The Drover's Wife (talk) 22:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Dear Liz,

This is Imran, from India. I have been following your work for some time and I really think I can learn a lot from you. If you think I can learn something from you, please let me know. it would be great for me to learn from you.

Thanks Kimran999 (talk) 08:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kimran999,

Thank you for the barnstar. You probably can learn a lot from many editors here. I've been regularly editing since 2013 and I still learn things about Wikipedia every day. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update

So, you probably won't see the edit I made earlier because it has been a few days, so I'm just putting it here again.

So, Materialscientist deleted my page because it contained content that I created. And no, I'm not asking you to restore it or anything: I understand and accept the deletion. But please can you or another mod of the page before deletion (because I can't view it despite creating it), and I can't remember the exact details as I wrote it a while ago; then I can simply put it somewhere else (don't worry, I won't spam articles about stuff I made up). Thank you! Binary198 (talk) 09:59, 10 August 2021 (UTC)Binary198[reply]

Sorry if I come across as impatient, rude or a jerk but why are you answering the questions of everyone above and below me and not me :( Binary198 (talk) 12:27, 12 August 2021 (UTC)Binary198[reply]

Okay I guess I will never get my information, so thank you but no thank you Binary198 (talk) 09:37, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Workingepskeiskxkke, round 2

Hi Liz,

This user has continued adding unsourced material to the page for Coaster, despite warnings from you and others. I've been watching the page at the request of a fellow editor in hopes this user would stop their disruptive edits, but unfortunately they have continued, as shown here: [12] At this point I think a block from editing this article is appropriate. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Trainsandotherthings,

Done I agree. I've given them a page block for one month. Hopefully, they will do productive edits on other articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Al Suleiman (writer): Wikipedia email from user "Sabah Ahmad TR"

I received an email about Ali Al Suleiman (writer) from Sabah Ahmad TR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), and thought that I should pass it on to you.

Hello, this article has been deleted because the admin thought it was promotional , if you interested in it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Al_Suleiman_(writer)
Can you request that the article be returned from the deletion?
A source from BBC Turkish will be available soon

I suspect that even the BBC Turkish coverage will not be enough to demonstrate notability, but you might consider draftifying the deleted article. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or possibly not, since I see that the user's account has been globally locked. * 09:18, 12 August 2021 علاء talk contribs changed status for global account "User:Sabah Ahmad TR@global": set locked; unset (none) (Long-term abuse: علي أبو عمر) Regards, Eastmain (talk • contribs) 09:53, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Eastmain:, this is a globally locked LTA.--Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 09:54, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eastmain & Eostrix,

Yes, this is a sockpuppeteer who is insistent about creating an article on himself. There must be 6 or 7 pages under his name that now have semi- or extended protection so he is asking other editors to write this article. Thanks for letting me know. He is globally blocked but I've blocked him on En Wikipedia so that I could stop him from sending email. Thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy removal

Can you please explain this edit. "please provide a link to the deletion discussion". The link is in the csd tag as is the norm. Where else does it need to be provided. duffbeerforme (talk) 23:23, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, duffbeerforme,

When I've seen a CSD tag such as you used, "deletion discussion" is typically a link to the policy page about deletions. I didn't check to see that in this case, this was a link to the page log. Typically, the CSD tag contains a direct link to an AFD/TFD/CFD/etc. discussion which wasn't the case here. I'm used to editors using Twinkle to tag pages for deletion and that CSD tag looks different and has a direct link to the discussion. Sorry for my mistake. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Clean start

Hi Liz , how are you? hope you are well I apologize for all the inconvenience I've done and I won't bother anyone anymore ! The reason why I asked the editors to create a page about me, is because I think I am a Notable person because My sources are independent and reliable and i have a significant coverage sources and i have anti-turkshgovernment sources talked about me as well , and the sources related to the Turkish government It has doesn't any relation the political news of the Turkish government and is fairly reliable Just FIY , I didn't pay and cent for this news I hope to be given a chance for this article and I think a good experienced editor would agree with me ,all thanks to you Liz and Editors for the Comments and everything Kingsif and Silver seren Let's analyze the sources, please firstly ,Government sources that are owned by the Turkish state and talk about non-political news are reliable, according to Wikipedia Like TRT World Daily Sabah Yeni Şafak Yeni Akit please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, secondly, This is a source Gunboyu gazetesi anti-turkish gov has talked about me thirdly, I have sources independent of the Turkish government talked about me, like İstiklal Akşam Diriliş Postası Fourthly,I had an account with 200 edits and I was creating notable articles, but I was banned because the Arab steward had a personal disputes between me ,this is not fair Can you help me Liz to get my account back? User:Aliaboomar all the respect I hope this is taken into consideration and I hope you sympathize with me on this matter I promise you there will be no inconvenience to anyone in the future Honestly, I want a permanent solution to this problem

what is your opinion about my explain to this matter Liz

can you help please

Hello,

According to this WikiMedia report, you have created over 200 sockpuppets so I'm not sure what to call you. If you can go without socking for 6-12 months, there is a small chance you could make an appeal and get one of your accounts reinstated. But it is a small chance. You have done so much sockpuppetry that I doubt any steward or administrator would give you any more chances. It is certainly not up to me to unblock you after this much sockpuppetry.

And if you could get your account back, you could not use it to write an article about yourself. You don't seem to understand that Wikipedia is not for self-promotion, it is not appropriate to use it to promote and advertise yourself, your work or your career. It's an encyclopedia, not LinkedIn. Because of all of your sockpuppetry, I don't think an article will ever be possible, you and your behavior are too well-known at this point.

I appreciate your politeness but I think you have gone too far on too many different Wikipedia projects, not just the English one, to undo the damage that has been done. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:13, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi user:Liz I'm Ali Please don't block me this is the last message I send youCan you help restore the article to the draft

And delete the promotional links and make them encyclopedic, all respect to you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Ali_Al_Suleiman_%28writer%29 I don't need to promote my accounts , I'm a Notable person as you see on google , thank you also Reliable and independent sources like BBC Turkey and other will be available',I hope you will take this into consideration please and please If it is promotional, can this page be returned? Created by a well-known editor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ali_Al_Suleiman_(journalist) stay safe also Should the Arabic language Admin and steward be rewarded with an article on Wikipedia? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alaa Najjar And there is no reliable sources coverage about him? Just because he won the wiki award and so on, Arab voters are editors on the Arabic wiki and so they vote for their admin, who created the article, is an editor on the Arabic wiki. Is this fair?

Turbo Zone Direct

Hi Liz, sorry you needed to delete the article for Turbo Zone Direct. Can you please put the past 2 deleted archives in my user page so I can correctly put this article through the review process? Thank you. bfrasure (talk) 14 August 2021

Hello, bfrasure,

I just posted a note on your talk page. I'm sorry for forgetting about your request. You can find it at User:Bfrasure/Turbo Zone Direct. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:44, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Deathpact

Thanks for the message regarding the six month deletion notice for Draft:Deathpact, however, I would like to attest that the message may have been intended for a different user. The history of the deleted content shows that I had originally started it as a redirect, then another user overwrote the redirect with an article that was subsequently moved to draftspace. Thanks for understanding. Jalen Folf (talk) 04:54, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jalen

Looking into this, you started the page as a redirect to Certain Kind of Magic. But then, as you say, quite a lot of other edits happened. Unfortunately, Twinkle just goes back to whomever started the page to notify. This isn't the first time this has happened, I had another editor who moved a page a long time ago but he was listed as the page creator and he was quite irritated to get this notification. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed speedy deletion of article Mainchi Cultural prizes

Hi Liz, I propose that this article Mainchi Cultural prizes should be speedily deleted without prior discussion, as it contains a typo in its title (incorrect "Mainchi" instead of the correct "Mainichi"), and it's unlikely that people will search for this with a typo in it. (Easy to see as this award is sponsored by the Mainichi Shimbun, written with three "i".) For a temporary solution, I made a redirect to the correctly spelled title, but I think this redirect page is rather obsolete now. What do you think? Best, Robert Kerber (talk) 15:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert Kerber,

Actually, many redirects on Wikipedia are misspellings. Readers searching for the award may not know the exact spelling of the award. It's not an implausible redirect since it is such a close misspelling so if you think it should be deleted, you should nominate it for deletion at WP:RFD. But I think you can up with a good solution though. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Started a discussion as proposed. Thanks, Robert Kerber (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

Hello. I was sorry to see that you have erased the article on Otzar Haaretz.. I am not sure why this was removed from the main English site and moved to draft in the beginning. It relates to a Jewish religious solution to the agricultural sabbatical year which is about to begin in 3 week and therefore very timely. It is based on the Hebrew article on this subject that I translated. I would greatly appreciate your help to reinstate the article. Thank you in advance for yor your help. Drkup(IMJ) (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Draft:Otzar_Ha%27aretz&action=edit&redlink=1 Drkup(IMJ) (talk) 22:50, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Drkup(IMJ),

Drafts that are judged to be "stale" (6 months without a human edit) are subject to deletion as they are considered abandoned but the good news is that they are easily restored upon request so Draft:Otzar Ha'aretz is back.

If you would like it to be moved back into the main space of the project, you can do so. Often though, editors who move articles into Draft space can see them as likely to be deleted and Draft space is a safer place to work on and improve the articles so they are not so vulnerable to speedy deletion. So, I would not interpret this move into Draft space as a comment on the importance of the subject matter and more like the page mover was hoping that the article would be worked on and made less likely to be deleted. Unfortunately, having a page put into Draft space can mean that few editors will see it and spend time on it.

Ultimately, what we want are lots of great articles so if you are willing to work on this one, that's the best result possible. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac Saul

A little while back, I created an article on the journalist Isaac Saul, which was deleted for non-notability. However, since then several more references came out supporting his notability, so I recreated the article and published it. It's also worth noting that I checked the draft with Missvain first, the admin who deleted it in the first place, and I feel confident that it satisfies the GNG. However, it was speedily deleted by G4 despite being fairly different from the article that was original deleted. Do you mind looking at the deleted article (an identical copy is in my sandbox) and letting me know if it passes notability and is okay to return to the mainspace? I'm just posting this on your page because you were the admin who carried out the G4 speedy deletion. Thanks, Mover of molehills (talk) 11:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mover of molehills,

How about this, I'll restore Isaac Saul as a draft and you can submit it to Articles for Creation for review. That's the primary way that articles that have been deleted through a AFD deletion discussion can overcome this decision. I think if I restore it directly to main space, it will just be tagged for deletion again and you'll be going through this discussion once more with a different admin. If it passes AFC review, it is very unlikely to be tagged again for CSD G4 speedy deletion. What do you think? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:54, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that would be okay, but it's frustrating because I actually created it through AfC in the first place and it was approved. Especially now that I've added more sources, is there any chance I could leave a message on the talk page, saying that it has been approved by three different admins by now and should not be nominated for G4 deletion? Mover of molehills (talk) 01:54, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's puzzling, I'm not sure why it was tagged for deletion if it was approved by an AFC reviewer. That must be frustrating. I'll restore it right now at Draft:Isaac Saul. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you! Is there any chance that I can publish it now with a note on the talk page about its history, or do I need to go through AfC once again? Mover of molehills (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Mover of molehills,

You can, of course, move the page right into the main space. But, like I said, it is likely that the same editor who tagged it for speedy deletion before will do so again (or another new page patroller will). I would go through AFC again and, when it's accepted, have them state this in the edit summary when the page is moved over. It might help though if you go to the reviewer who passed it before and explain the situation. They could oblige so you don't have to wait weeks to get it reviewed after it is submitted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That sounds like a good idea! Mover of molehills (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ariticle removing

Hi Liz i hope you are well I did not find what was the mistake that made you remove the article, despite the passage of more than a month since the approval By AFC reviewer, I may have made a mistake in something, but I have no knowledge of it because I am a beginner in this encyclopedia, and I may deserve a chance if I am wrong. I request you to provide more clarification and advise me on the best solution for restoring the article

Hello?

I'm not sure what article you are talking about. Also, always sign your talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~) so I know who I'm talking to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RedX8 -- RoySmith (talk) 11:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i talk about abdullah bin sulaiman al rajhi article Elshitaq (talk) 12:19, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving an article from draft space

Dcw2003 (talk) I am dcw2003. Thanks for your note. I accidentally created an article, John R. Thistlewaite which became a draft article because I never saved it, I believe. Sorry about that. Thanks for pointing that out.

More critically, I created two articles, John R. Thistlewaite, and John R. Thistlethwaite, because I noted that Thistlewaite is the wrong spelling for the subject of the article, although oddly, at least one newspaper article spelled his name as Thistlewaite. At any rate I copied the content of John R. Thistlewaite to John R. Thistleswaite, and changed all references to his hame to Thistleswaite, but have not deleted the John R. Thistlewaite article. His tombstone, and most references to him spell his name as John R. Thistlethwaite. I'm not sure how to delete the John R. Thistlewaite article, or even if I can. I would prefer you inform me of any action your take, and that you certainly DO NOT DELETE the John R. Thistleswaite article. (Sorry for the caps)

Thank-you for any help you can provide.

Can you make a suggestion?

Thanks,

D. Wasserman

Hello, Dcw2003,

I'm confused by what you want me to do. It would help if you would link to the articles/drafts. If you have questions about content creation and which name to use, I'd ask for help at the Teahouse or Articles for Creation and they could assist you. I'm not an expert on content issues and writing problems.

I only noticed your article because I check a page that lists articles that have been moved to Draft space. I do look over articles that are tagged for speedy deletion by editors but I don't spend time going out there, looking for articles to delete. If you ever want to delete an article or draft you created, you can tag it for deletion as the page creator or let me know, again, by linking to the article/draft you are referring to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:20, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:ShoCore

would you like this postponed another 6 months? I can't judge at all in this subject. DGG ( talk ) 03:53, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, David,

Actually, Atlantic306 tags most drafts as "promising" and I was honoring that tag by postponing deletion for another 6 months. Typically, I give promising drafts 12 months of no activity before deletion. But I think the "promising draft" system is flawed because most editors do not know about Category:Promising draft articles and to check it for promising drafts. Tagging doesn't have much effect if no one improves those drafts. As for Draft:ShoCore, I'm not sure what was promising about this particular draft but I know nothing about Canadian rock bands. I have no opinion about this one. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ditto. It is used too inconsistently. It's as a minimum necessary to leave a comment saying why. (I am trying to devise a scheme for the better handing of 6 or 12 month old drafts. There are 3 groups that need different treatment. 1/ those never formally submitted. It would be easy to just submit them, and if they're ok I do, and usually accept it, but if they' need work and the person isn;'t around, which is the overwhelming majority and there's a good chance of notability , I do not like to see them removed. 2/ is similar, but they were declined and proerly so, but they can be rescued. I care only if it would be an important article or the rescue is trivial. 3/ and these are the ones that really bother me, where they were declined for an incorrect reason, and are actually ok or close to ok. . I don't like to call single errors to attention,, but I try to keep in mind significant lack of knowledge from new reviewers and I at least try sometimes to explain to them. . --persistent errors from someone who ought to know better, I just re-review, with a note. It's usually hopeless to explain, without provoking a quarrel.

I think I will figure out a way of labellling all of these this later this year. so at least they won't get lost again. DGG ( talk ) 04:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

xxxx

Hi Liz. I recently created a draft about Ebstar whose a DJ in China. It's my first article and it was speedily deleted with the reasons being its promotional stuff. I kindly ask for a review as I didn't intentionally promote this fellow,,, i simply cited official sources such as Genius & Spinnin Records as well as official songs links from Apple Music. Please kindly point out where its promotional because i wrote this with transparency for a client quoting and citing proven sources. i also acknoledge am new at article writing and so i kindly ask for your help. I'm willing to ensure transparency and getting this page up for my client.

Please help Ebstar.

Hello, EMT2001,

You refer to this this person as your "client". If you are being paid to do editing, you need to abide by Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Please do so or you could lose your editing privileges. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Email

If you would delete the page, that'd be great. Thanks. WikiIsKnowledge (talk) 01:41, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WikiIsKnowledge,

Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uday Ali Pabrai

Hi,

We were unaware of the Wiki’s terms and conditions and the privacy policy, we will delete all the promotion contents. Kindly guide us how to proceed further, is there a possibility to recover the same page or can we create as a new page.

Please advice.

Thanks. Syedshawar (talk) 05:48, 20 August 2021 (UTC)syed shawar[reply]

Hello, Syedshawar,

It looks like this article was deleted through this deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uday Ali Pabrai). If you would like an article on this subject, you have to work on an article in Draft space and submit it to Articles for Creation for review and acceptance.

For more help, I suggest you go to AFC or the Teahouse, they can help answer your questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DO NOT PUT INCORRECT DELETION TAGS

Hi. You just put a deletion tag on Category:Lists of Thor launches for being empty. It is clear that is NOT empty (it has 4 pages on it). Had I not seen that, this category could have been deleted reasonlessly. @Liz:

Hello, Starship SN20,

You have only been an editor for a day so I'm guessing you don't know much about how Wikipedia works. First, do not use all caps, it's like you are SHOUTING which is rude.

Second, the category was empty when I tagged it two hours ago. It only has pages in it now because you just put them there! Empty categories are tagged and then sit for 7 days. If, over that week, they are no longer empty, then the tag is removed. This happens all of the time. If the categories are still empty after a week, then they are deleted. So, there was no reason to panic. And even if this category had been deleted in 7 days, empty categories can always be recreated if they are needed.

I imagine you have a lot of questions about editing Wikipedia, being so new, so please bring them to the Teahouse where they can help you out with your concerns. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:02, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Sorry. @Liz:

CSD decline

Hi Liz, Can you tell me that why did you decline my CSD request of User talk:JaventheAlderick/Shenton Way Bus Terminal. It was part of a SWAP move that I performed, and the one who requested the move at RMT got User:JaventheAlderick/Shenton Way Bus Terminal deleted only, leaving the other residual junk free i.e. this talk page of User:JaventheAlderick/Shenton Way Bus Terminal. This should be deleted as well. See User talk:JaventheAlderick#Shenton Way Bus Terminal as well. ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 04:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TheAafi,

The page tag stated "This redirect may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a talk page of a page which has never existed or has been deleted' and I didn't see how this applied to this user talk page. This page could very well deserve deletion but I didn't see the rationale of the tag that was placed on the page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:18, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I make silly mistakes sometimes when it comes to CSD. I thought since the base page was deleted by Materialscientist, the rationale was okay, because "talk page of a page which has never existed or has been deleted". What criteria it meets according to you? You can rightly delete it per that. I think that it meets the WP:G8 criteria and that made me tag it with Db-talk... ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 04:26, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the page is deleted. For some reason, with user pages, I have to type in "Talk page of deleted page" which is an option with other name spaces but doesn't appear in the drop down menu for speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:30, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Qwerfjkl's talk page.
Message added 07:01, 23 August 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Qwerfjkl talk

Jeremiah's Grotto

Hi Liz. 20 words are enough, is that OK now? I can cut the redirect removal request to even less, but is it necessary? The case is clear anyway: the redirect item is in no way identical with the redirect target. None. Thanks, Arminden (talk) 23:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arminden,

Typically, if there is a long explanation for a CSD tagged page, then we advise editors to use Proposed Deletion or Articles for Deletion instead. I'll look at it but my standard process for looking at CSD pages is unless it is vandalism or the work of a brand new editor, if I refuse to delete a CSD tagged page, I let another admin review it if it is proposed again. It can help to get a different set of eyes. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Liz. The matter speaks for itself, whatever would allow me to get a new article going is welcome - not so much for me, as for the Wiki user. The editor who created the redirect has stopped contributing in 2018, not long after placing it. Check my history, I'm not new on Wiki, but never cared much for the "behind the scenes" technical & admin aspects, and sometimes it comes back to bite me. Arminden (talk) 00:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Arminden,

You'll be able to tell how comfortable admins are with your explanation by how fast the response is to your tagging. So far, no one has chosen to delete this page and pages marked for CSD uncontroversial deletion are usually deleted quite quickly. If the article gets untagged by another admin or it doesn't get deleted for hours or days, then you'll know that your explanation might not be sufficient to persuade an admin to delete this page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz,

I've had a very mixed experience with such deletions. Some went quick, but some took quite long, with nobody pushing against my proposal either. Just like that. All were eventually accepted, as far as I can tell, so patience helps. I admit, I'm always having a very, very hard time understanding Wiki "how-to" explanations, but I'll try out "Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#How to list a redirect for discussion". Thanks again for your kindness! Arminden (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! It's happened! It's been deleted. Wonderful, I can do what I'm better at – archaeology, history, culture... Not technical stuff. Cheers! Arminden (talk) 17:57, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Bazos redirect

Any reason you think Bezos might not be misspelled Bazos? It's quite common on Google search. Misspelling Wizard (talk) 05:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Misspelling Wizard,

There are an infinite number of possible misspellings of words. Please slow down with your creation of redirects and be more selective. I thought this was an implausible misspelling as were several more that you created. Creating as many new pages as you did the other day is a guaranteed way for administrators to start scrutinizing the work you are doing.

If you strongly disagree with me, I'd run it past Qwerfjkl at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories. But, above all, Misspelling Wizard, do not start creating hundreds of misspelled redirects or you will start getting negative attention from administrators. We've found that enthusiastic new editors can cause a lot of disruption on the project when they generate a lot of new pages without the knowledge and experience to evaluate what they are doing. Take things slow and try to collaborate with other editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Google returns 38,000! results for "Jeff Bazos" (exactly). You will find that erroneous spelling even in established news sources. @Misspelling Wizard: I suggest that you keep readily available data on how many Google hits an exact misspelling gets. You can do it in your userspace; a good page title is User:Misspelling Wizard/Redirects. You will be able to point to this page whenever someone wants to delete your redirects. WIKINIGHTS _talk 06:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Requests for Radio peer review

"2020-11-28T19:05:03 Liz talk contribs deleted page Category:Requests for Radio peer review (C1: Empty category) (thank)"

Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio/to do has some articles that seem to be in that category, but the source code seems odd.... Would you take a look? I wanted to recreate Category:Requests for Radio peer review .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 0mtwb9gd5wx,

Category:Requests for Radio peer review was an empty category so it was deleted. If it isn't empty, it can be restored. But we don't restore empty categories before pages have been assigned to them. But if you assign a page to this red link category, I'll restore it and the page history.

As far as Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio/to do, "To do" pages seems to be a feature of WikiProjects back in the mid-2000s. I don't see them used much these days. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Wikipedia:WikiProject Radio/to do has a hacked template that implies there are Requests for Radio peer review it may be vandalism, the code is after the template. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Radio/ has stuff... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk)

Okay, 0mtwb9gd5wx, I thought you would take care of this but I assigned a page to the category Category:Requests for Radio peer review and restored it. You can add additional pages to this category, whatever you think is necessary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:00, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I don't know anything about the technical stuff about those pages, I was trying to fix something I thought was broken. Pages at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Radio/ seem broken. Requests for Radio peer review there seem to be from 2009-2010. WikiProject Radio needs repair from somebody who understands the mediawiki infrastructure. I was misled by what seems to be broken at Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Radio/. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 19:15, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm confused then. I thought you were asking for this category to be restored. As far as "code" goes, I'm not technically minded either. I'd go to the Village Pump technical forum. Editors who frequent that noticeboard are pretty quick to respond if there is a problem. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:20, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

John R. Thistlewaite is now a redirect page as requested

Dcw2003 (talk) Dcw2003 (talk) 20:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC) Thanks for your help Liz!![reply]

Ok Liz, I put in a redirect from John R. Thistlewaite to redirect the page to John R. Thistlethwaite as requested. I was going to ask you to do this since its been a while since I've done this sort of thing, but I managed. John R. Thistlewaite now is only a redirect page. You can acknowledge you've received this if you wish. Thanks for your edits. And thanks for not unnecessarily deleting any of my work, as is occasionally done by some editors. (Though its rare)

Can you tell me if there is a good general document on Wiki that discusses each of these issues? Or do most functions have to all be individually accessed by name?

Thanks,

David

PS: DO you use your email address in your username for wiki? I imagine its not a great idea for security.

Thanks again!!!!

Hello, Dcw2003,

Thank you for resolving this. Turning an extra page into a redirect is a great way to retain the page history if you want to be able to access that in the future. You can find more information about redirects at Wikipedia:Redirect and Wikipedia:How to make a redirect. I'm not sure what other policy pages you are curious about.

One great source of information is to go to the Teahouse to ask questions as there are a lot of experienced editors who patrol that noticeboard and can answer questions pretty quickly. I still go there for help if I don't know the location of a specific page that I remember seeing or coming across. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As for my email address, I do have "Liz" in it but it's a fairly common name in the U.S. so I think it's okay. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

dcw2003

Dcw2003 (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Thank-you Liz. Perhaps I can use you as a source for other questions.[reply]

Blucora/InfoSpace

His Liz, could you fix the redirect issue on the talk page too? for the Blucora move over redirect to InfoSpace? ♟♙ (talk) 18:07, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, EnPassant,

The talk page should have been moved over with the main page but somehow wasn't. I've taken care of that now. Thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:18, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

August 2021

Hi, I saw your message on my talk page. Since you told me to not tag speedy deletion tags on articles or draft because I am not an experienced editor, would you mind to delete Draft:Paano Ba Kitang Mamahalin?, Draft:Pangarap Ko Ang Ibigin Ka (TV series) and Draft:Pangarap Ko Ang Ibigin Ka (TV series) 2 because these drafts are hoaxes? Thank You! 120.29.76.128 (talk) 01:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 120.29.76.128,

No, I will not delete these pages. For one thing, they are drafts so no readers will encounter them. Secondly, you are an IP editor without a track record so I don't have any way to evaluate your judgment. They are not obviously a hoax so, unlike vandalism, BLP or copyright violations, I can not see that they are hurting the project. Thirdly, the page creator, Andrewbaifern, has been editing for 7 months without any apparent problems. Finally, you didn't know enough to post notices on the page creator's talk page to let him know that you had tagged these pages for deletion.

If you had created an account and I could see evidence that you are a responsible editor, your opinion might carry more weight but hoaxes have to be OBVIOUS and these aren't, at least to me. Sorry. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:07, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PROD

Hi Liz. Thanks for all your work keeping CAT:EXPROD clear. Just one question: you declined a PROD here because the article had previously been dePRODded. While that would of course normally be entirely correct, this is a special case: as the page history shows, the dePRODder was a sockpuppet whose edits were being reverted per WP:BANREVERT. WP:DEPROD actually discusses this case, noting that "a tag may be restored if removed by a banned user or blocked user evading a block". Since that's what happened, it would seem that this article is eligible to be deleted. Do let me know if I'm missing something (which is always possible!). Cheers, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:09, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Extraordinary Writ,

"In addition, a tag may be restored if removed by a banned user or blocked user evading a block." Learn something new every day. I had never run into this situation before. Thanks for pointing this out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy upmerging

Please see my proposal to upmerge Category:2019 Nigeria senatorial elections to Category:2019 Nigerian Senate elections. Hugo999 (talk) 04:03, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hugo999,

I'll take a look. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

'Salem's Lot (film)

Hi Liz, just quickly wanted to ask you a question. Regarding the redirect at 'Salem's Lot (film) and the Rfd discussion, am I permitted to remove the request and request for speedy deletion, to accomodate for a cleaner draft-to-mainspace move, or should I wait further until comments have been added to the Rfd? Thanks. KaitoNkmra23 (talk!) 07:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KaitoNkmra23,

As the editor who proposed the deletion discussion, you can always withdraw your request but don't remove the RFD tag from the page until someone closes the discussion. But after you withdraw your proposal, you could post a request on the talk page of an editor or admin who frequently closes RfD discussions and ask them if they could take action.

There are advantages to an RfD discussion. There is no guarantee that an admin will agree with a speedy deletion tagging and it does look like you have support in your RfD proposal. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

News and notes: Enough time left to vote! IP ban

In the media: Vive la différence!

Wikimedians of the year: Seven Wikimedians of the year

Gallery: Our community in 20 graphs

News from Wiki Education: Changing the face of Wikipedia

Recent research: IP editors, inclusiveness and empathy, cyclones, and world heritage

WikiProject report: WikiProject Days of the Year Interview

Traffic report: Olympics, movies, and Afghanistan

Community view: Making Olympic history on Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't move to draftspace

Please don't move to draftspace my document. Okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hajoon0102 (talk • contribs) 01:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, not okay. Who are you and what page are you talking about? Moving to Draft space is an alternative to deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request to undelete User:Tom (LT)/sandbox/WikiProject days of the year interview draft

Hi Liz. Just wondering if you could undelete User:Tom (LT)/sandbox/WikiProject days of the year interview draft . It was moved to the Signpost draft page? (I think) and I find it helpful to keep my redirects as I often have linked to them (twice in this instant). If you can undelete it I can also work out why it triggered to display as problematic and so prevent this happening in the future. Thanks, Tom (LT) (talk) 03:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tom (LT),

Done Happy to. Just remove the broken redirect or it will keep popping up on the broken redirects list. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Link removal

Hi! Just wanted to give you a heads up to not remove only the link markup after you delete a page, especially in disambiguation pages. (Such as this.) A disambugation page can't have entries that don't exist. The same goes for some templates, such as the ones for populated places. Geschichte (talk) 19:44, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Geschichte,

Okay, I need to double-check this with you. Every time I delete a PROD, I unlink all of the links so that articles aren't littered with red links for an article that will not be created. I usually try to delete any page mentions of deleted articles when it is appropriate but I guess I missed this one.

Are you saying it's better to leave red links? Because I don't think most admins who delete PRODs unlink mentions of them, that step is skipped. I thought I was going the extra step by turning the red links to standard text. ALiz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:15, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page Deletion Request

[[21:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

I won't delete an article with your claim of being the subject of a Wikipedia draft article especially after your previous stunts to have this draft deleted. If you wish to pursue deletion, go to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help or Wikipedia:Contact us and you can request deletion after you verify you are the same person. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:45, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

21:47, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

I just told you the steps you need to take to have this draft deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz. I don't take threats and don't endorse any of the methods employed here, and I also question what may happen with the topic the future, but I am confident that G7 has been satisfied somewhere along the line. Unless you yell at me promptly, I'll delete it. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:56, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, zzuuzz,

I don't yell. Well, I did once, recently, and I got called to ANI for it. I am not advocating for this draft article, I objected to sockpuppets PRODding a draft, several times, it doesn't seem like the typical response of an unhappy subject of an article. You can delete on any grounds that you, or any admin, believe fits this situation. But thanks for asking first. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know exactly where you're coming from, and yes I appreciate things look a bit strange. Fortunately, I have some magic available to unpick and expedite this particular situation. I thought it would be worth a quick explanation. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, right, your CU tools, zzuuzz. Well, if all four accounts are the same person, I guess I owe them a sort of apology. I never thought to bother a CU over what appeared to me to be trollish behavior. Next time, I will. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you should be apologising for anything. Anyway, hopefully that's the last we'll be hearing about that. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First, please do not edit talk page comments. If you want you can <s>~~strike out~~</s> any content you no longer need or believe.

Secondly, accounts are not deleted, none are. But you can blank user pages and user talk pages if you'd like, just remove the content on the page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:59, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting to create a redirect page

HelenDegenerate send me to you. In Rishton Ka Manjha as there is a main cast Ayan Nayak as the person doesn't have any article. Can you create a redirect page Rishton Ka Manjha on the person as Ayan Nayak is protected. খানকির চালে (talk) 02:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, খানকির চালে,

I'm not sure why she sent you to me. I don't know any of these names, are these people? I suggest you create the redirect yourself or request it at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories. But you'll have to provide a better explanation because these names are likely to be unfamiliar to the editors there, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ayan Nayak a person and Rishton Ka Manjha is a article for a Hindi Daily Soap as the person does not have any article that's why I thought to make an redirect page for Ayan Nayak as the entity does not have any article and the page is protected to create only administrator could create Ayan Nayak. I can only make a draft for him I would request you to move that to the mainspace. Thankyou খানকির চালে (talk) 02:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why was a page removed?

Hello Liz,

Can you tell me why the page “Every Fool His Own Tool” was removed, March 2021? It was a page describing a software engineering anti-pattern. Several non-wikipedia articles now link to a nonexistent page.

I could not find the history on the delete anywhere.

Thanks HighTML (talk) 05:26, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted by you on 19:53, 6 March 2021 HighTML (talk) 05:30, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=Liz&page=Every_Fool_His_Own_Tool&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype= HighTML (talk) 07:00, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For undeletion Undeletion

Brij Kishore Sharma " Tara " · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]

I know that this page was created by a banned user or blocked user but see that page it was created by a blocked user but in good faith it was created by good faith see about it's refrences see that the person is reliable and notable as it's refrences so please undelete it It was created with Good Faiths so please review that page and undelete it and one more request please publish it —Indian Wiki User CG (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC) Page Link Brij Kishore Sharma " Tara "[reply]

Indian Wiki User CG (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a suspected new sock of an editor already indef blocked for having created more than a dozen socks. Ignore. David notMD (talk) 14:04, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am in a very extreme problem

Please I beg you please read this full I am Harsh Vardhan Sharma "Tara" I have created many articles for my father, at that time when I was a kid, so I don't know about refrencing, but this time i got all reliable referencing content but I have blocked by other users because when I was kid I don't know about refrencing and after I know about referencing so I create a wikipedia page for my father who is politician but whenever I submit it for review users delete the page which has good reference and good article but they remove it because i am a blocked and banned user but at that time I don't know about the blocking policy so I create many articles for my father but this time I have reliable references but whenever I create the page in good faith then they delete it so what i do please answer what i have do i have been indefinitely blocked from wikipedia without an expiry set so please help me how to make a wikipedia page for dad Please help me to create wikipedia page I have never abuse Wikipedia I only want to add my father's name in wikipedia who is politician but that time I have nothing for refrence but this time I have so please help me to create page for my father please I beg you that time I was kid so I mistakenly abuse wikipedia by adding my father name many times without any refrences so please help me please sir

That time I don't know about blocking policy and refrencing because I am kid so please help me to create a wikipedia page for my father really I don't abuse any wikipedia page next time but please create that page contact me at my talk and I will give you contents so you have to create wikipedia page by it please that time i was kid so I don't know about wikipedia so Please help and please don't block me I will never abuse wikipedia Note- I haven't abuse wikipedia but only add my father's name many times but please this time help me I really want help so can you help me.

I will give you draft link so you have to reveiw and publish it please Are you aggree for this or not 49.35.250.10 (talk) 11:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to read the answers which you received at WP:Help desk#I am in a very extreme problem and at WP:Teahouse#I am in Extreme Problem. You must NOT continue your sockpuppetry using IP addresses. The place to request an unblock is at User talk:HARSH VARDHAN SHARMA "TARA". --David Biddulph (talk) 11:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Besides following David's good advice, I think you need to give up your goal of writing articles about your father. You have a clear conflict-of-interest and it is unlikely that he is notable enough to warrant an encyclopedia article. As long as you keep trying to spam his name around the project, you are not going to be unblocked for very long and this is true whether you are 10 or 100 years old. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kashmir Premier League

I asked for this deleting in order to fix the mess one editor has created with a series of controversial and undiscussed moves. It used to be a disambiguation page, which is now located at Kashmir Premier League Topics. This has two primary entries, Kashmir Premier League (India) (which is still at that location) and Kashmir Premier League (Pakistan) (which also currently still exists at Kashmir Premier League due to a copy and paste move). I'm not asking for any article to be deleted, only for the status quo from before the disambiguation page was moved. FDW777 (talk) 19:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FDW777,

I'm not disagreeing with your plan, which I don't fully understand, I just think it's too complicated a matter for speedy deletion which is for obvious, uncontroversial cases that fit a limited set of criteria. I recommend you propose this at WP:RM where you can explain the situation and what you want to happen. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Or for another admin to see what has happened, to identify the move issues, and to roll it back to the status quo. —C.Fred (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, C.Fred, that would work, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing things C.Fred. FDW777 (talk) 07:46, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restore the article Stephen Zechariah

Hi there, I have recently came across on the article Stephen Zechariah seems deleted. And I also saw that the article was created by a suspected user/banned user. But I strongly believe the person in the article is completely notable to WP:NMUSICIAN and they added the reliable sources in the reference. So, respected Liz, kindly restore the article Stephen Zechariah. ButterSand0 (talk)

Not done as you are also a blocked editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Minecraft (game) R3

Hi, Liz. I saw that you deleted Minecraft (game) under CSD R3. It's my understanding that that was a redirect to Minecraft. Such redirects are normally allowed as {{r from unnecessary disambiguation}}. Would you mind restoring it? If you feel strongly about it, you can always take it to RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 16:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done, sorry for the delay, Tamzin. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

or

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

template.

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But How?

Why you delete Category:Wikipedians who use Android 10 this is not for vandalism or disruptive behavior please explain me as soon as possible. Thank you. HEA42DAVFA (talk) 03:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion by Category:Wikipedians who use Android 10 HEA42DAVFA (talk) 03:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HEA42DAVFA,

Did you read the notice that was posted on your user talk page? That's the first step you should take. Empty categories are deleted unless they fit a small number of limited exceptions (category redirects, disambiguation categories, categories being discussed at CFD, etc.). This is true for all categories no matter what subject they are about. If they are deleted after being tagged for 7 days for being empty and are later needed, they can be recreated. This has nothing to do with vandalism or disruption, Wikipedia just does not stock up on empty categories that are not being used.

Please do not add pages to this category unless they are relevant. Random pages added to empty categories will be removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I didn't want to take this to a noticeboard to avoid the lengthy heated debates that would probably arise, so here I am. Is the following statement appropriate for a user page? This user supports man/woman marriage as the definition needed to protect the integrity of the family, preserve the true meaning of marriage, and keep it as a child-focused institution. – ².O.^Boxing 10:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Squared.Circle.Boxing,

It is important to see isolated quotes in context. Can you provide a link to the page? Sometimes a user talk discussion should occur and other times a noticeboard discussion is called for. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Johnpacklambert – ².O.^Boxing 16:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

Hi, saw you listed as a resource per How to request Revision Deletion. Would you look at this and decide whether it should be revdel'd? ☆ Bri (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bri,

Revision deletions are often judgment calls but this seems disruptive to me so I went ahead and deleted it. Thanks for removing it and bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:35, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Empty categories

My first question is, since when has there been a "seven days" rule on deleting categories that are tagged for speedy deletion? It can't be called "speedy" if there's a "you have to leave it there for a week" rule, and has to be renamed to something else.

My second question is, then what am I supposed to do in situations like Category:Swedish expatriate sportspeople in the Faroe Islands, where the use of a "fooian fooers" template in lieu of direct category declarations is causing the autogeneration of a non-existent Category:Swedish expatriates in the Faroe Islands parent category, whose status as a redlink is in turn causing it to appear on Special:WantedCategories — but precisely because that category is being autogenerated by a template, there's no category declaration to remove, and thus it's impossible to clear it off WantedCategories by any other method besides immediate speedy deletion? The answer to that isn't, and can't be, "just leave it sitting on WantedCategories as kludge to be worked around for seven days" — if Category:Swedish expatriates in the Faroe Islands is sitting there today, then I have to do whatever is necessary to get it cleared today, and can't leave some entries on that list sitting around for seven days as "non-actionable items". Bearcat (talk) 19:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Paid Editor tags on my Talk Page from new accounts

Hi Liz. Thank you for blocking Иван8 for their vandalism of my Talk Page, I greatly appreciate it.

Another new account has done the same, so I was wondering if you would be willing to block them too please? The account is AndrewRyan214. Thanks, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:09, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

I gave them a temporary block and a warning. I'm sorry you've had to put up with this harassment. I can also semi-protect your talk page for a while if this persists with other accounts. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:12, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! If it happens again, I will take up your kind offer of semi-protecting my Talk Page. All the best, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz. Another one just popped up from a new account, so it would be great if my Talk Page could be semi-protected. Would you be able to do this for me please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:20, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

I don't know if it is the same person but I've given the page temporary semi-protection. I hope it helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow that was quick, thank you so much. None of the accounts so far have been autoconfirmed, so I think this will be a great help. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Sorry to both you, but my poor Talk Page has become a target for vandals again: Special:Contributions/Andy1292111, Special:Contributions/Lev19861, Special:Contributions/Armensar81, Special:Contributions/Acushian, Special:Contributions/DroopyPoopy, Special:Contributions/Ron4554 and Special:Contributions/Kevinhodges.

Could you please consider adding the semi-protection again? Thanks, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

just moving this old topic to the bottom, in case my new reply was missed) MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:33, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

You shouldn't have to put up with this, I have semi-protected your user talk page for a week and filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Armensar81 on your behalf. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:00, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your efforts with this. I really appreciate you creating the sockpuppet investigation on my behalf. Hopefully the folks over there can find a pattern there to stop it popping up again in future. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:00, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Stevelmans

Dear Liz, Thank you for support WUKF page a this is a great organization. Reza Goodary's article has credible sources approved by WP:News sources. Unfortunately, the article was not confirmed by one of the users yesterday. Please kindly help for approve. (1), (2), (3), (4). IRIB, IRNA, ILNA are in the list. Also IPNA is Iran Pro Sport News Agency (5) and BORNA News Agency (Reputable news agency affiliated with the Ministry of Sports of Iran) (6). Also It is news from official website of Ministry of Sport Iran (7) (Link open only in Iran). The Reza Goodary (رضا گودری) article already approved on The Persian Wikipedia. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 03:12, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MMA Kid,

I don't review articles, that is done by the good folks at WP:AFC. I recommend you talking to the reviewer for tips or going to the Teahouse which is a resource for new editors to ask for advice or visit Articles for Creation. I'm an administrator and spend most of my time on administrative tasks, not content review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might also look for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts, that's a project for editors interested in martial arts. They might have some resources for creating strong articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for response and help. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WUKF

Dear Liz, The WUKF page nominated for speedy deletion again. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 02:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MMA Kid,

It looks like WUKF is a redirect page you just created. Did you mean another page? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Yes. I mean is World Union of Karate Do Federations. Regards. MMA Kid (talk) 02:36, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused, this page isn't tagged for Speedy deletion, Proposed deletion or an AFD. It's had no activity since I removed the CSD tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

Hi Liz, I was wondering if you could please redact revision ID 1043430816 on the page Rickey Brady. What the IP editor (2600:1700:64F0:2A20:D194:2B00:6808:EA20) wrote about Brady was pure libel. It falls without a question under criteria 2-- grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material. Thanks, Helen(💬📖) 02:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HelenDegenerate,

Sorry I'm just seeing this. Looks like QEDK took care of it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

Hi there! Hope you’re well. I saw your note re my article and I would love any suggestions you may have how to have it post properly as I’ve for years edited revised reposted and been denied over and over regardless of the facts and other credits on wiki that are accurate it’s really strange to me it keeps getting rejected as many other people with similar background have similar worded articles and they’ll allowed and validated even. I seem to keep attracting rejections here and unclear entirely why. Happy to make edits needed just unsure how to do more than I have repeatedly done. Thank you for any suggestions in advance and your time / attention. Wolfstarmoon (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Wolfstarmoon,

I assume you are talking about Draft:Tom Syrowski? I deleted the draft simply because it had gone 6 months without any edits by human editors (not bots). You can get it restored either by asking me (or any administrator) or by going to WP:REFUND.

I don't review content creation, I handle administrative tasks but I think it's unusual for a recording engineer to have an article on Wikipedia unless they are particularly notable. You can receive some editing help at a number of pages including Articles for Creation, WikiProject Music or, especially, the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My ip is a VPN

The ip that i'm editing from right now is a proxy ip, can you block it?

Hello, User:1.53.126.126,

You are asking me to block your account? From what I can see, you are not a proxy account but maybe one of my lovely talk page stalkers can check this claim out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:22, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's proof: https://www.vpngate.net/en/ (you can see that the ip on the page). Also here: https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip-lookup-proxy-vpn-test/lookup/1.53.126.126

Hello, Enwiki~enwiki,

Okay, thanks for the link, I've never seen that website before. And I've never had an editor come to my talk page, asking to be blocked. And I've never made a block on a proxy IP so I'm not sure of the appropriate block length but I gave them a week. If any admins visiting this page think this is a sinfully short period of time, please correct the duration of the block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for a good admin

Andrybak has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Being an admin can be tiring and tedious. Put the mop away for a while and have a pie. Thank you for contributions to the project! —⁠andrybak (talk) 10:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—⁠andrybak (talk) 10:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you, andrybak, that's very kind of you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quitento

Hello there. You have deleted the article Quitento, which was prod-ed. However, I contested such proposed deletion by providing sources in the talk page. Granted, I should have added those to the article, but it's clear it complies with the general notability guideline. Please restore it. Kind regards. Bedivere (talk) 14:28, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bedivere,

I'm used to editors simply removing the PROD tag if they disagree with the proposed deletion. It has been restored upon your request. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Liz. No worries! I'm just accustomed to the Spanish Wikipedia procedures in these cases. Proposed deletions are discussed on talk pages and these tags can only be removed by admins or the user who tagged the article. Anyway, good to know. And thanks for restoring it as requested. Kind regards. Bedivere (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, on the English Wikipedia, editors can remove speedy deletion tags and PROD tags but they are asked to provide a reason and improve the article if they do so. The restrictions that exist here is that editors can not remove speedy deletion tags from pages they have created and no one should remove an Articles for Deletion tag until the discussion has concluded. Now that I write this all out though, I can see why this system is confusing to newer editors, especially if the procedures are different on their home Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Katharine Towne

Hi Liz, I am not sure reverting to an earlier version is the best thing. The last submitter did add some additional sources (they were not formal citations but nonetheless something). In addition, it removes my decline and comments providing my reasoning for the decline along with some guidance. Granted, I am new to AfC so could be completely wrong. S0091 (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, S0091,

I'm not sure what to do, I haven't run into this before. Everything that I reverted to was in the page history that had been restored. I re-added your AFC decline to the current version.

Maybe Anachronist can assist...should I revert my reversion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I left a comment there. I think the version you restored has better content and formatting than the original submission, but the original submission had better sources (while the one you restored has none). I merged the contents of both versions, so now the sources are back as external links. If they were incorporated into the article as inline citations (which is the responsibility of the submitter to make that effort, not me), we may have something worth publishing in main space. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:12, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Thanks to both of you. S0091 (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your merging magic, Anachronist. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:17, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There was no magic, just manual effort. The submitter has some work to do, particularly learning how to cite sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Thank you for clearing out the promo and hoaxes I've found at Category:Stale userspace drafts. Your help is greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, MrLinkinPark333, but as far as I'm concerned, you did the heavy lifting, going through those old drafts. That's unseen and thankless work that is heroic to me. It's kind of like wandering into uncharted territory. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi

Hello can you please see if this article which was proposed for deletion actually meets the criteria for deletion. Please see my message. 197.52.65.201 (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 197.52.65.201,

Proposed deletion is for uncontroversial deletion. If you disagree with the nomination, then you can remove the PROD tag from the article. In my experience, a good proportion of articles that have been de-PRODded are then nominated for deletion at Articles for Deletion. That action prompts a deletion discussion where you could make an argument for whether you believe the article should be kept or deleted. Right now, it only has an PROD tag which can be challenged by any editor. If you do remove the PROD tag, please respond to the deletion rationale in your edit summary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, so can I remove the PROD tag without making the User who nominated it for deletion keep nominating it for deletion again and again, because I was just reading the reason for nominating it for deletion and I said that It was a bad reason because Rewards for Justice and the FBI are reliable sources and It has other refs not only Rewards for Justice and the FBI. So then the User who nominated for deletion should also see the article Abu Muhammad al-Shimali which all of its refs are based on Rewards for Justice and FBI. 197.52.65.201 (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) If a prod is removed, it can't be added back. However, there is an expectation that if you remove the prod, you will improve the article in a way that addresses the concerns. Once the prod is removed, if the next step is to start a discussion at WP:AFD if someone still believes the article should be deleted. I have removed the prod tag, with my reasoning in the edit summary. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Listen to Anachronist, 197.52.65.201. At this point, you can not stop an editor for nominating a page for deletion, but you can work improving the article so that other editors agree with you that it should be kept. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County

Would you mind explaining why you deleted this page? It doesn't seem to be standard practice to delete WikiProjects, especially speedily without any discussion, and your deletion left several traces behind, including hundreds of articles still tagged as belonging to the project. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:08, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Pppery,

Oh, my God, I have no idea what happened here. Thank you for bringing it to my attention so I could restore the page. There is no reason to delete a WikiProject main & talk page unless it is a result of a WP:MFD discussion and the general opinion there is to prefer to turn inactive and defunct WikiProject pages into redirects to active ones. I do know that UnitedStatesian and I have been cleaning up empty categories that were never used for article assessments but those are categories not main WikiProject pages. I'll go through my Deletion log for the past few weeks and make sure that this mistake didn't happen twice. I am very thankful that you came to my talk page and allowed me to rectify my mistake. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I encountered this myself, somewhat ironically, when doing a similar bit of maintenance (cleaning up "WikiProject X <members/participants> categories" for defunct/nonexistent projects). Also remember to restore any redirects and subpages you deleted, which appears to include Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Articles, Wikipedia:ALVA, Wikipedia:Albemarle, and Wikipedia:ALBVA, and their talk pages. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I went back to August in my Deletion log and I just found those redirects to Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Left and Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Articles which I have restored, all of the rest were empty assessment categories from inactive and defunct WikiProjects which is what we were focusing on. I don't know how this random Virginia County WikiProject got in the mix. Strange but I found Wikipedia talk:ALVA had been tagged for speedy deletion but none of the others were. The rest is all on me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tiffany Houghton

Thank you for restoring this page. Is there a tag or chit or something I should attach to the page to indicate that it is beyond the reach of a G4 speedy? Chubbles (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Chubbles,

I don't know of an appropriate tag but there are hundreds of templates and tags on Wikipedia. I posted a comment on Missvain's talk page so she might know or you can ask at the Teahouse, I've almost always been able to get an answer there. Sorry. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zoca

Don't fret, this wasn't a draft but an article an admin decided wasn't good enough. Spoiled the whole clogs ecosystem but I cleaned up after whoever it was. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Martin,

If you want to continue to work on Draft:Zocca (shoe) just let me know or you can ask at WP:REFUND. Drafts deleted due to inactivity can be restored today, tomorrow or next year if you find some better sources. One of the few kinds of page deletions on Wikipedia that is easy to reverse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, as I mentioned another editor had put a bit about zocas onto the main page instead of its own page as is done for all the different types of clogs. I moved the information off to restore the clogs page and I was sat on by an admin so just cleaned it all up. That's why my name was on the stub. As I said, don't fret about it, admin action had condemned it 6 months ago. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Faster than Thunder

Hi Liz. Would you mind taking a look at this? Perhaps there's no real harm since there's no RFA for this user, but it might be seen as misleading. In addition, based on these, this might be a WP:YOUNG editor who might mean well, but might not realize things like WP:REALWORLD; at the same time though, it also kind of seems like this isn't a completely new editor based on some of the technical things they've been trying to do so far. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1077#User:Faster than Thunder and WP:CIR for more on that possibility. Maybe the ANI thread should be re-opened to see if it can be more formally resolved? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Marchjuly,

I posted a message on their talk page. They've only been editing for two weeks, for me, it's too soon to issue a block for competency when it's actually inexperience. I read that ANI thread and there was some question about socking and that's more of a concern to me...if they start being disruptive, I suggest contacting a Checkuser. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Liz. I think you message is probably fine for now. FWIW, I first came across the account because of this edit, which seemed to a bit too BOLD for a major policy page. I only saw the ANI discussion after I first posted here. It seems that there are probably a number of others (including admins) already watching the account; so, perhaps someone will indeed step in if things start getting too disruptive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Headcount Index by Parish in Antigua and Barbuda

Hi, you removed my CSD tag. The text and table for Headcount Index by Parish in Antigua and Barbuda are fully copied from here on page 25. Citing (talk) 02:59, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Citing,

As I said in my edit summary, if you looked at the source, it says it was published in 2007 and the chart on the article says the data from 2011. That is why I PROD'd the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but I had tagged it for speedy deletion as an unambiguous copyright infringement -- the text is almost a word-for-word copy of its source. I'm not sure why Earwig is showing it at 0% because it should be closer to 100%.Citing (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

You've got mail. - wolf 20:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thewolfchild,

I don't see an email message. I don't check it very often but I did tonight and I don't see anything from you. Did you use the link on the left or an email address you have? Did you send it today or a few days ago? Let me know and I'll investigate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:45, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and "b". I'll just resend. - wolf 14:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Still nuthin'...? - wolf 04:14, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot, I'll check right now. My apologies. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Thewolfchild, I've responded. Sorry for the delay. Nice to hear from you! Let me know if you don't get my response. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do not interfere or I will.

I do not need your mindfulness diatribe. I will not assume good faith, as you have attempted to intervene in a scenario in which your elderly assistance is clearly unneeded. I have put three tags, as they are necessary. Your asinine contribution has done nothing and thus, it is highly advisable you retract your choice and do not engage with me on this platform anymore. If you continue, I will seek higher authority in legislative manners. Not a threat, it is a promise. Gongfong2021 (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Gongfong2021,

First, I have no idea what you are talking about. Is this about an article? A talk page comment? I make hundreds of edits a day I have no clue what this is about.

And second, if you continue like this, insulting people at random, you will find yourself blocked. We believe in civility at Wikipedia. That's not a threat or a promise, it's a fact. I've seen plenty of people like you and they don't last very long here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, is this regarding Chemmalai Maha Vidyalayam? If so, then you must be User:JohnDVandevert. Why are you signing messages Gongfong2021 instead of a regular editor signature? That's why I didn't recognize your name. That is deceptive...you should use your current username so people know who you are. And sorry for "engaging with you on this platform" but I usually respond to messages on my talk page. Especially the crazier ones. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I've gone through your edit history, John, I've found 5 or 6 other editors you have ordered to "not have contact with me!" including Ponyo and Cabayi, two other administrators, so I'm in good company (wait a second, I tripped over my walker, I'm such an old geezer). I do not think you will make a good Teahouse host with that attitude (nice photo though). And someone thought you were a sockpuppet of John from Idegon who was a good editor but who shared your surly attitude.

Well, this was one of the more peculiar introductions to new editors I've had but back to the actual work of cleaning up this project....I look forward to hearing from "higher authority in legislative manners", it will be interesting to find out who the hell that is. Bye. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw this

I presume in the short while Ashleyyoursmile was here you both had mutual respect for each other and I’m pretty sure her exit subconsciously upset you. I’m not sure how I missed it, perhaps at the same time frame when I had sustained a knee injury. Coming from BN I saw your input and i can tell this hit you hard. Hopefully she’d be back. Celestina007 (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Celestina007,

Welcome back to my talk page. Unfortunately, lately we have only interacted at ANI which is a place I try and stay away from these days. I spent my early days hanging out at ANI, trying to mediate conflict, but now I like to stick to the work.

I'm not sure I'm "upset", emotionally, I just think it's tragic. Ashleyyoursmile was like you, a workaholic, and I cleaned up a lot of pages from vandals she reported. She was tireless. And, unfortunately, at least one of those people came back to the project and made it their mission to malign and insult her very personally and graphically. We had to do a lot of revision deletion. And this was before she became an admin so there might have been more after her RfA that she quietly cleaned up herself without mentioning it. I don't know if this is why she left but, if it happened to me (and it was much worse than the message above this one), I would have had second thoughts about being here. And having her departure come after she had weathered an RfA, which, for me was a very unpleasant experience, it must have been serious. Editors usually don't come back after a vanishing and I think someone as active as she was would just have to cut their ties. It reminds me of an outstanding Indian editor we had who had to vanish after he was personally threatened in his off-wiki life. It is so unfair and it seems to happen to the best people, editors who stand up for Wikipedia pillars.

But we really don't know why she left and I expect we never will. But I hope WMF & Wikipedia finds better ways to protect their editors who come under fire. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what the circumstances are but I was sad and disappointed when I learned that she had retired. Really too bad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:11, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It really is awful, I respect her decision all the same. I really was routing for her to become a celebrated sysop just like you. If what was intended to be a hobby that brings you happiness is doing the inverse of that, then dropping it is a good idea. Celestina007 (talk) 22:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Celebrated"? LOL, there are those who would disagree with your evaluation. I keep busy but I just hope to be in the top 50% of admins, better than average. I could have benefited from your support at my RfA which was a squeaker! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:19, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who doesn’t appreciate you, clearly do not know about your works at G13's, you carry about 90% of the workload there and this is not even an exaggeration. But yeah! I get your drift. Celestina007 (talk) 01:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pist Idiots

Hi Liz, I saw you deleted an article on Pist Idiots back in August and dare I say accurately. I am Australian and listen to a lot of music and have never heard of them. They released a debut studio album this week, and according to ARIA, it's on track to debut inside the ARIA top 50 albums this Friday. https://www.aria.com.au/charts/news/amyl-and-the-sniffers-steps-pist-idiots-aiming-for-top-tens-on-this-weeks-aria-charts

As such, I went to create a stub article in preparation and saw it had been deleted by yourself. Are you able to un-delete or send what was done, I can do some research, add some content and make it notable for Friday, assuming their album does debut inside the top 50. Thanks Tobyjamesaus (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tobyjamesaus,

I checked and it was a completely blank pages. Nothing there. So, I can say with 100% confidence that your version will be an improvement! I generally advise folks to start in Draft space and submit it to Articles for Creation for review...you have a greater chance of it surviving editors who patrol new pages if you get a review from the AFC folks. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LOL - a blank page??? Oh Lordy... Ok thanks. Yeah, well, I planned on working on it for a bit first. I've created quite a lot of pages, so I am fairly familiar with what makes something notable :). Thank you though. Tobyjamesaus (talk) 05:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Abdulrahman Akkad

Hi user:Liz, how are you , I think this article is promotional Article ,can you look into it, and if you want delete it and delete the promotional links Social Media stay safe --Hasan AB123 (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

Hello Liz,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Batch deletions

Liz

Thank you for your entirely reasonable comment on my talk page. I have only one comment to make.

Oops! ----Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 11:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Anthony,

And thank you for your very reasonable response! I've made the same mistake...and other admins, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the page Rise Up Dubai

I saw that you put the Speedy deletion nomination in that page, which is entirely necessary and you did that. But the page author/creator is removing or playing with the tamplet by renaming it. I just re placed the speedy deletion nomination tamplet but he will do that again. So please do something, otherwise he will not Stop doing disruptive editing Jogesh 69 (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jogesh 69,

Thanks for the alert. I'll check on the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Stricagnoli

@Liz: Hi liz , i hope you are keeping well, you helped delete an old draft of mine last year, i worked on a very simple short new version a few months ago that one of the other editors that previously rejected it said was better, it was then rejected for a few reasons, so the newest editor gave some pointers for more context and citation. I was working on that while not to make it like a resume, i was nearly ready to put up the new draft for review when it was deleted without notice, that editor was a bit rude and i didnt find it on the deleted log and dont know how to get it back, I am always willing to work on things but i thought this was a little harsh can anything be done?. thanks for listening Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mickmonaghan343,

You're going to have some problems here. Draft:Luca Stricagnoli was deleted as being promotional and another version was previously deleted in a deletion discussion in 2020. I think your best bet, if you don't want to start from scratch, is to ask the deleting administrator, Bbb23, to "userfy" it, that is restore it and put it in your User space, like your Sandbox where you can work on improving it.

Alternatively, you could file an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review, arguing that it shouldn't have been deleted but I'd recommend contacting the deleting administrator directly and making an appeal to them. Don't argue with them, I'd say that you are aware of the problems that existed with the draft and you have some ideas on how to fix them (which is honestly what you just told me). It never helps to be polite...administrators' goal is not to make your life difficult but to remove content that they believe is unacceptable from the project. If you have ways to fix the problems they saw, mention that. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:33, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thanks for your message and advice, i asked to userfy it but im not to hopeful as i got a bad vibe about this editors attitude compared to everyone else who have been very helpful.Below is what was said and no reply since.

Hi Bbb23 I was in the middle of editing my page and you deleted it, I have been working on this a long time and was following guidance from another mod on how to fix it and get it approved.The last mod told me to find more citation and that does make it a little one sided but he rejected the unbiased original one for lack of context , can you reinstate it please and i would appreciate your adviceMickmonaghan343 (talk) 14:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC) .

My advice is to do something else on Wikipedia besides promote Stricagnoli. The only thing you've been doing for the last three years is work on that draft, and all you've achieved is an advertisement.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 11:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zakarid Armenia

Hello, I require your help at Zakarid Armenia because there is a person who reverted my Afd for the third time already. SonofJacob (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Salts and ACPERM

Hi, Liz. Thanks for deleting Ziaul Hoque Polash. I noticed that after deleting it, you salted it too. However, when you salted it, you protected it against creation by non-confirmed editors (I think I've seen you do that before). Given WP:ACPERM forbids non-autoconfirmed editors from creating pages in the mainspace anyways, I think you meant to put it under extended-confirmed protection. Sdrqaz (talk) 10:03, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sdrqaz,

You are correct. Thanks for noticing and brining it to my attention. I'll fix that right now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Borthwick

Hello, Liz. Just wondering, did you notice that I had disputed the speedy deletion tag for Stephen Borthwick (schoolmaster) on the Talk page? Moonraker (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Moonraker,

Just a cursory look at the old version, prior to the first deletion, and the last version of this page, but the references look similar to me. The AFD was just closed in January 2021 so it was not that long ago. But taking into account your years of experience, I will restore all edits and move it into Draft or User space (I'd recommend User space) for you if you wish.

Since you have autopatrolled status, this might sound silly but the only way I know to get around a recent AFD deletion decision is to have an AFC review and approval. Otherwise, if you move it back into main space, even with improvements, it will probably just be tagged again for deletion (and it might be tagged in Draft space which is why I recommend moving it to a User page). Let me know what you think. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, helpful reply. Well, yes, the references are mostly the same, and they are good ones. I have a saved version in user space. You may see my point that one AfD decision (a bad one in this case, in my humble opinion) can’t be for all time. Perhaps an AFC review is the way forward, but on the other hand is there an AfD review, and is there any time limit? Moonraker (talk) 21:56, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing by User:Pitzzaboy. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 21:05, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, Tartan357. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

A kitten for you ! :D

The furret lover (talk) 05:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, The furret lover. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 46

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

Library design improvements deployed
New collections available in English and German
Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Extension of Full Protection for the Kisii people Article.

Hey Liz,

Thank you for protecting the Kisii people article which was being vandalized through blanking and deletion of content. However, I'm requesting you to extend the full protection of the page to 6 months or indefinitely because the article seems prone to vandalism. I'm sure once the current page protection is removed, there are still going to be more attempts to vandalize the article. I believe long term protection of the page will be very beneficial in preventing future vandalism. I will appreciate your extension of full protection for this page. Thank you! Nyanza Cushitic (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nyanza Cushitic,

The standard approach to protection is to have the duration and level of protection the minimum possible to avoid disruption, especially for full protection which doesn't allow any editors to edit the page except administrators who are not supposed to use their status to change content in content disputes.

I would feel more comfortable if you posted your request to extend the protection to such a long duration at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for increase in protection level. Administrators who patrol that noticeboard have a better feel for what an appropriate level of protection would be and for the length of the protection. Until that decision is made, I'll make sure that the article is not the site of an edit-war. But admins kind of specialize in these tasks and I'd rather have an admin experienced in this to make such a big decision, especially since I imagine that full protection for six months would be a decision that would be appealed. I don't think I've run into full protection of an article for such a long period of time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, thank you for your suggestion. Can you please block Wojak6 from editing this article? His edits are very destructive and vandalizes articles. His vandalism actions on the Kisii people article were very unacceptable and destructive to the article. This editor has done serious damage to many articles and needs to be blocked indefinitely to stop vandalizing articles. Nyanza Cushitic (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nyanza Cushitic, are you discussing your differences on the article talk page? Could you invite other editors to participate in the discussion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About deletion of "Draft:Shorash Baker"

Hello Liz,

I've read your comment about the deletion, I want to address to you the subject personally. we are "Kurds", we are already being suppressed by the dictatorships, if you do a simple google search about "Afrin City" you will see the pictures of bombing and destruction. The Turkish media and it's huge online army is trying with all its resources to eliminate our presence on land and online... therefore, I was not able to gather enough "satisfying Media links, resources" for this article, because they make sure that our culture, artists, names, etc.. get played-off.

However, the artists I tried to make an article about, "shorash baker", if you do also a simple google search about his name, you will find his official record label, Spotify verified artist profile, verified artist YouTube channel, etc.. Please consider this subject, and the circumstances about this small occupied city, at least to have its people's and culture online.

Thank you.

Hello, Xelilof,

This draft was deleted because it hadn't been edited in 6 months, not for any political reasons. With no activity after 6 months, drafts are considered to be "abandoned" and are deleted. If you want to continue to work on it, I can restore it for you or you can make a request at WP:REFUND. I didn't make any judgments about the notability of this person, that is done by reviewers at Articles for Creation. You should discuss their review with them.

When you make a talk page post, please sign it with 4 tildes (~~~~) so that it includes your username, a link to your talk page and the time & date of your message. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About deletion of "Jashmir"

The article "Jashmir" was removed for copyright infringement after it was run through a plagiarism scanner. The page on the website that was supposedly plagiarized was created after the Wikipedia article, not vice versa! Whoever wrote the article on that website simply copy pasted the Wikipedia entry.

Please review the deletion. Thank you! Moonswimmer Mooonswimmer 16:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mooonswimmer,

You were absolutely correct here. When I looked into this case, it was very strange, Enverceylan, a new editor, asked another editor to tag it for a copyright violation (he asked several editors to do this for him), and after you reverted this tagging, another brand new editor reverted you. Have you had contact with Enverceylan? He tried writing an article about himself at Enver Ceylan but I can't see why he was so insistent about this article being deleted.

I'm sorry for not being more thorough when I checked this article. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have a good day

Hi,Mrs Liz.I just saw your sentence I wish we had more editors with knowledge of that country to evaluate the notability of Azerbaijani athletes and the quality of the sources used.If you need any help with this, I'll be happy to help.As a sports journalist in a famous news agency in Azerbaijan, I have some knowledge about these issues. Good day again. MuradAli2000

About deletion of Anup Shukla(More Than 10 Years Old Page)

--AnupShukla (talk) 12:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC) hi Liz On September 22, 2001 I suddenly came to know that my page which is more than 10 years old has been deleted,I don't understand why and how this happened,I think this page got deleted due to some misunderstanding,I would like to tell you that this page was not created by me,I have done many international projects,Any updates that have been made are done by the same people who were involved in some way in the international project,I feel very unfortunate that such an old page has been deleted in such a way, I feel as if injustice is being done to me,So I request you to restore my deleted page I will be very grateful to you. my page link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anup_Shukla IMDB -https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3754623/[reply]

About Deletion of Shakir Subhan

Hello, Article about a youtube vlogger Shakir Subhan has been deleted by you, a day ago. The reason you said was recreation of already deleted page. So my reply to you is, article firstly created by someone who wrote in a bad way, that why it got deleted by other user. But later, i created it most perfectly with additional references over 27 News think so. Still it got deleted by you with reason "Recreation". I was created the article as Shakir Subhan (Mallu Traveler), but someone renamed it to Shakir Subhan. Whether its recreation or not, the article i provided was perfectly Written about a well Notable youtuber person. I request you to recheck again & bring back the same article to wikipedia. Otherwise i need to be suggest same article to other extended confirmed users to bring back it... So thanks for your time to read it & hope your reply Xavier 500.30.10 (talk) 16:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

News and notes: New CEO, new board members, China bans

In the media: The future of Wikipedia

Opinion: Wikimedians of Mainland China were warned

Op-Ed: I've been desysopped

Disinformation report: Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages

Discussion report: Editors discuss Wikipedia's vetting process for administrators

Recent research: Wikipedia images for machine learning; Experiment justifies Wikipedia's high search rankings

Community view: Is writing Wikipedia like making a quilt?

Traffic report: Kanye, Emma Raducanu and 9/11

News from Diff: Welcome to the first grantees of the Knowledge Equity Fund

WikiProject report: The Random and the Beautiful

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft talk:Susovan Sonu Roy

Hi Liz, I'm pretty confused here. They're obviously a sock of [13] and [14]. This thing quacks like crazy. Waggie (talk) 06:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Waggie,

I don't see what you are seeing but I'm not familiar with every sockpuppet and every article. I suggest bringing this to the attention of one of the admins who has blocked the sockpuppets as they will be familiar with their habits. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I figured a quick look at the history of the deleted article and talk page history would have made it clear (I can't link to them for obvious reasons. It's OK, though. Although, maybe leave it for a different admin if you're not familiar? That said, it's your tools and your prerogative. Please have a good day/night! Waggie (talk) 06:47, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Namchak Tsasum Lingpa (September 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from http://www.rangjung.com/book_author/chokgyur-lingpa/. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Namchak Tsasum Lingpa may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bkissin (talk) 15:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Liz! It was coming up as 88% on Earwig. Bkissin (talk) 15:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's no problem, Bkissin, I look at hundreds of CSD G13 drafts every day and if one looks especially promising, I'll submit it to AfC for review. I didn't stop and analyze the content. Sorry to take up some of your time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you can answer a question for me, Bkissin, it seems like notices like this should be directed at the page creator, not the individual who places a submission tag on a page. I've also been congratulated for successful drafts that I didn't write, I just put an AfC submit tag on the page. I always thought that the page creator should get a notice like that, not me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I used to do the same thing around the G13 drafts! Unfortunately Liz the same thing happens to me. I think it's an issue with the Helper Script. I'll bring it up on the AfC talk page and see what people know about it. Bkissin (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Template:Star Wars drafts

Hi Liz. You deleted this under G5 because of the user who created it was violating a block or ban. Even though that was the case, I believe I had made some edits to it and was one of the editors maintain it etc. Can this be recovered? Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Favre1fan93,

I thought the primary contributions were from the sockpuppet but I'll track it down and look at it again. Other editors can have made some edits to a page and it can still be deleted, for me, it's whether the sockpuppet was the primary editor in terms of content added to the page. It's a rather subjective opinion by the admin looking over the page, I've seen some admins delete pages where the sockpuppet only created the page and then made no further edits to the page but I look at whether they were the primary content contributor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: Thank you. If I personally recall, I do believe the sockpuppet did create the bulk of the edits, and my contributions could have been minor afterwards. If you can't restore it for the reasons you stated, is there a way at least that the wikicode for the table could be copied, even into a personal sandbox of mine, so I could restore the template properly? I do find it a useful template, and I could start from scratch, but I know I might miss some elements that were in the previous version if I did. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again @Liz:. Just wanted to follow up on the possibility to restore this template or at least salvage the coding? I have since realized/remembered that the template helped autocategorize articles into Category:Star Wars drafts and now that cat has essentially been emptied as a result of this template being deleted. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Something.

I just noticed that some of WoW's old contributions are now back in the contributions log. Is this a mistake or did an admin intentionally do this? 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Direct link btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Willy_on_wheels~enwiki 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard, just realized this was a different person. 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I was looking at both accounts and couldn't understand what was going on...but slightly different usernames. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Levi Sharan

Hi Liz. Thanks for your tireless efforts working on WP.

You removed the {{db-afc}} tag at Draft:Levi Sharan because "it's not been six months since the last human edit. For today, that would be March 28, 2021". The last edit (prior to my tagging) was May 9, and this was not a meaningful/real page edit, but merely a page move to correct capitalisation. The last real edit on this page was December 29, 2020. It would certainly qualify for CSD#G13. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, P199,

One other admin and I review anywhere from 200 to 300 expiring drafts each and every day of the week and we don't make distinctions between "meaningful" edits and those that are just cosmetic. We just see when the last edit by a human editor was done. The quality of an edit is a subjective judgment that would vary too much among administrators. We just go by the calendar and discount edits by bots. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your incredible hard work, but in this case you may need to show some leeway, especially since you are suggesting that the next time this draft may come up for deletion is March 28, 2022! And only because requesting deletion was a human action by me! That is utterly defeating the purpose of this process... Thanks again. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your inaction sacrifices proper application of WP policy for expediency. This is not right... Please take appropriate action. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, P199,

I don't understand the urgency you are feeling about the deletion of this draft. Is there a problem with this specific draft or is this your opinion about stale drafts in general? If you have problems with Draft:Levi Sharan, you need to let me know what they are or you can consider another criteria for speedy deletion that might fit. If you want to challenge Wikipedia policies and how they are practiced, you should start a discussion and present your argument at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion and see if it resonates with other editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Benahficial Creed

How you are doing, I, Benahficial Creed in the flesh, well, in the pixel. Lol. I, Benahficial, as know as #ItsCreed, would love some help with my wiki page, please. Benahficial (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Benahficial,

I recommend visiting the Teahouse for help, there are very experienced and friendly editors there who can answer any questions you have. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did a lil bit can u give me your thoughts? Benahficial (talk) 22:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your draft to User:Benahficial/Sandbox as it shouldn't be on your main User page. You have no sources, you need to have substantial coverage in newspapers, magazines, books, mainstream websites (and social media doesn't count) in order to be judged to be notable. You have to have a notable career to have an article on Wikipedia. If no one has written about you, it's too soon for you to have an article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Restore talk page of premature deletion

Hello! I noticed that you accidentally deleted the page University (film) before the PROD expired and you also ended up deleting the talk page as well. Could you restore the talk page as well? (not sure if there's anything that was of note on it before it got deleted) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blaze The Wolf,

Done Yes, that was my mistake. There is a list we use, User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary, and typically, those PRODs listed at the top are the ones coming due in the next hour or two. I thought those listed at the top were for today, 9/22 but they are for tomorrow, 9/23. I've never seen such a gap in time before in the listings. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:12, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting. Wonder if you somehow got through all the PRODs for today. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Good job Mohammed12313893 (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, not sure how I earned this but it's always nice to get some appreciation. Happy editing! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lmao, perhaps because you are internet famous & a Wiki celebrity? Celestina007 (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

September 2021 Guild of Copy Editors newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2021 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021.

Current and upcoming events

September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!

Drive and Blitz reports

June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.

August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Other news

June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.

New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive).

Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aj Raval Article

Hello, I noticed that you deleted the AJ Raval article because it was created by a user who was banned/blocked.

Leaving aside the blocked user for a moment, that article had an extensive deletion discussion which resulted in no consensus and ultimately resulted in the article not being deleted. I am confident that the subject is notable (and there have been some articles/references that have come out since that discussion which further buttresses their notability).

Therefore, I would like to request that you restore the article. Alternatively, I can recreate the article, though I am unsure how to retrieve the previous version. Thank you. Koikefan (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G5

I have undeleted Draft:Istana Gedung Dalom 2, Draft:Islam in Lampung (2), Draft:Islam in Lampung, and Draft:Gong Gajah Mekhu, which you deleted as WP:CSD#G5. While they were created by sockpuppets of Dedy Tisna Amijaya, G5 requires pages to have been created in violation of the sockmaster's block or ban. This was not the case, as the master and their puppets were simultaneously blocked on September 29 per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dedy Tisna Amijaya/Archive#29 September 2021. G5 can not be applied before that date. This was also explained to the IP who tagged these pages as well. ✗plicit 03:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback @ MISSION 33 Talk Page

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at MISSION 33's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Click here to see the Discussion →MISSION 33 (talk) 04:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ibiza

Hello, Liz. Can you check my first stub-article User:Владлен Манилов/Ibiza (Philipp Kirkorov and Nikolay Baskov song)? I think it fits the criteria WP:NSINGLE. The song reached a place in the national charts. Kiselyov wrote about the music video. I want you to check my English in the article and correct it if there are any mistakes. Can this exist as a stub in the mainspace? Thanks. — Vladlen Manilov ✉ / 05:16, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article for Deletion Daura, Nigeria

The Article Daura already exist and I unknowingly created another Daura, Nigeria. Therefore you can go on with the deletion. Thank you Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Boyz (Jesy Nelson song)

There are two versions of this article, one of which is spelled Draft:BOYZ (Jesy Nelson song). There has been vandalism; I have tried to revert some of it. The two versions should probably be merged. I think that the proper place is in draft space, because the song is not yet released. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greg26 93 and "Back TO Christ" promotions

Thanks for dealing with those. There's one more at Draft:Back To Christ but I didn't know if it could be speedied. Meters (talk) 06:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Meters,

Yes, I saw that page. You know, admins differ in their judgments of pages and, for me, although that draft will never be an article, it doesn't have any unacceptable content on it that would warrant a speedy deletion. I'm not sure what CSD tag would even be appropriate.

Yesterday, I had to restore a lot of just crappy articles & drafts that I deleted because I misread an SPI report. I couldn't make any sense of the writing, it seemed like nonsense to me, it wasn't coherent in any way. But it didn't violate any of our guidelines as long as it wasn't in main space. I think I might tag some of the pages for MFD but the bottom line is that we see a lot of content that is junk or misplaced and, in many cases, we wait for CSD G13 to kick in to delete it because there isn't a CSD criteria for just bad writing. We don't even delete drafts that are not written in English. So, we live with the criteria that we can use.

Of course, you could tag that page and another admin might find grounds to delete it. But I didn't see any CSD criteria that fit, in my judgment. Thanks so much for paying attention, especially on a weekend. ;-) Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty much what I thought about the criteria, too. Meters (talk) 06:57, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico City Grand Prix

Hello Liz. I'm a little confused by some recent actions of yours relating to the Mexico City Grand Prix. See my comments at Talk:2021 Formula One World Championship#Piped links and also User talk:Island92#Mexico City Grand Prix. Are my assumptions about what it will take to fix the problem wrong? --DB1729 (talk) 04:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DB1729,

I am not following you or the conversation you linked to about piped links. There was a CSD request to move an article to Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton) which I did. It seemed straight-forward to me. Are you saying that this was a contentious move request? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:46, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed it was going to have go through RM because of this requested move in February. Also all you have really done is swap the article with the redirect. We need Mexico City Grand Prix to point to the F1 race Mexican Grand Prix. Ultimately I think the F1 race will be titled Mexico City Grand Prix if/when primary is established. --DB1729 (talk) 04:51, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ping Tvx1 who tagged the redirect and requested the page move and see what they have to say. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I believe most of those involved are among our friends across the Atlantic. They may be waking up soon. --DB1729 (talk) 04:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just for reference, in case you missed it because it was sort of buried; here is my relevant comment from one of the talk pages I linked:

We cannot currently link to Mexico City Grand Prix because a) it's not a redirect, it's an article, and b) it's...badminton. We can't, that is, until after we get that article moved to the current redirect Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton). To do that, that redirect and its content will have to be deleted and its edit histories merged to make way for the move. Also there was a requested move in February to move the badminton article there in the first place, so all this will need to go through another WP:RM process. Then, after all that, we can have a redirect named Mexico City Grand Prix that points to the Formula One race.

Keep in mind several facts are now untrue after your page move. Also pinging User:SSSB while I'm at it. DB1729 (talk) 05:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Final note for now. Maybe I don't understand how edit histories work with moves, and I hope I'm not the bringing bad news, but here is the edit history of the current redirect at Mexico City Grand Prix. It contains only your page move. There was an article about badminton with that title, so is that edit history now moved to here at Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton)? If so, what happened to the edit history of the redirect that existed at Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton) before your move? DB1729 (talk) 05:50, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The edit history of that redirect was deleted, I assume. The edit history of the article on the badminton tournament was moved to the disambiguated tile along with the article itself. The only thing that was left to do to make Mexico City Grand Prix correctly redirect to Mexican Grand Prix, was to simply change the target of that redirect. I will do some further cleanup shortly.T v x1 06:19, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did notice though that the article’s talk page wasn’t moved along. I tagged that one as well.T v x1 07:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've been pinged so I'll comment: Googling "Mexico City Grand Prix" gives the majority of sources about Formula One (I went through 5 pages of results and got nothing else), so I don't see why a WP:BOLD move is an issue. SSSB (talk) 08:12, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you for your input. I'm fine now with everything so far, assuming everything's good on Liz's end of this. I believe I made several incorrect assumptions about something I obviously don't know a great deal about. I intend to step aside from this issue now. Sorry for the (my) confusion. DB1729 (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nano-oligosaccharide factor (NOSF)

It's a patented product. The one ref is to a COI paper written by a company employee as last author, and the only other link in the article is to the firm's website. Sorry if that wasn't clear, but it's 100% advertising for the product. Jclemens (talk) 06:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I took it to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Nano-oligosaccharide factor (NOSF). No action needed on your part. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4 October 2021

Ma'am I am wandering like a lost soul for the past two weeks everywhere just for the sake of one article Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana, begging and approaching so many people just for help. Honestly I'm in a state of literally crying. Finally, I reached here because I have heard that you are one of the chief admins in Wikipedia. Ma'am I have been editing indian WP:TVSHOW articles of Wikipedia since the last two years and I have seen and gathered knowledge of what all are the minimum and maximum requirements for a WP:TVSHOW. I firmly believe that the show Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana does have everything that a good WP:TVSHOW article needs but nobody is giving it a chance. It is also because so many earlier editors caused so much of mess in creating drafts of the show that it is highly protected that only administrators of Wikipedia can create it. Ma'am you too are an administrator so can you please help to create the article? I assure I will produce all the material required for the article in a Word document and send it to you through e-mail and you can verify it yourself. Or else, atleast give the page creation access to the extended confirmed users also because the extended confirmed users create articles respecting all that Wikipedia needs. Please I beg you can you help with Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana?--117.193.146.71 (talk) 11:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion

Hi. Hope you will de doing well. I got this notification today. "01:30, 4 October 2021 Liz talk contribs deleted page Cupid Chan (R2: Cross-namespace redirect from mainspace) Tag: Twinkle (thank)." Can you please guide me if I have done anything wrong? Because all I can see is a draft now which states that "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use" It's concerning for me because I consider it unethical to take money for writing Wikipedia pages or get paid to make any edits. I joined Wikipedia after getting inspiration from the project and I won't take any money for writing Wikipedia pages for someone. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyatthewheels (talk • contribs) 13:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PROD deletion

Hi Liz! In May, you deleted the article for PayScale after its PROD from ScottishFinnishRadish expired. Per Archive.org, the references on the page at the time included six sources that each look to me to clearly qualify for WP:NORG:

Could you please restore the article?

I know you put in a lot of work to handle the PROD queue, but I have to say that instances like this make me question whether the system should exist. When topics like this are being deleted, it doesn't seem that there are enough safeguards in place to preserve valid work by writers, especially while the redirect restoration issue remains unresolved. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per NORG, articles discussing new hires, promotions, valuations, rounds of funding, etc do not contribute to notability. We're left with no where near enough sourcing to establish notability. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ScottishFinnishRadish, that's an (understandable) misinterpretation of WP:NORG. What that guideline dictates is that articles consisting only of hires/promotions don't contribute to notability; it doesn't dictate that any article discussing a hire/promotion doesn't contribute. I'll grant that the Business Journal one is perhaps a little borderline, but it's still clearly a reported article that has many details about the company beyond just announcing the new CEO. Ones like Geekwire, at more than 600 words, aren't borderline at all. And then there's sources like the 2006 TechCrunch profile or the 1400-word New York Times profile that aren't related to any of the trivial coverage examples. You could always try taking it to AfD after it's restored, but it's not a close call (especially given that a WP:BEFORE would turn up additional substantial coverage like [15]), which is why I was disconcerted to see it deleted via the PROD process. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:57, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dropping by, I was curious, and this is the sort of article I tend to have doubts about, so I looked at the NYT article, which certainly surprised me by being quite substantial coverage. DGG ( talk ) 06:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: I'd appreciate a reply when you have a moment (at least on whether you're willing to restore or I should go through WP:REFUND). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Qatar Turkish School proposed deletion

Hi Liz ! As you cancelled my proposal to delete Qatar Turkish School, I just wanted to understand why the mentioned article is relevant on Wikipedia. Thanks --78.100.47.43 (talk) 13:36, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletion guide

Hi, I would like to participate at WP:Requests for undeletion to restore pages, and would like to know if there is a undeletion guide that admins follow. WP:Viewing and restoring deleted pages only says to follow WP:Undeletion policy, which doesn't say much. I have restored some pages in the past, but only for individual requests at my talk page. Whereas I see WP:Requests for undeletion is more streamlined and rule-based. Is there a check list an admin goes through? Jay ^(Talk) 19:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jay,

There isn't a guide to restoring pages although there is some guidance at the top of the page that covers the basic purpose of the process. My advice is to first, go to the deleted page whose restoration is being requested and read the deletion summary to find out why the page was deleted. Secondly, if you go to edit a request to reply to it, above the edit box is a line that states "Show attendant instructions". If you click on the link that says "Show", it will show you the most common responses that are given to restoration requests. You can choose whether or not to add your own response to a template.

My own judgement is that, ordinarily, CSD G13 stale drafts and PRODS are restored upon request unless there are other issues with the content...the most common problem that might occur are copyright violations. But if that is present, it is typically mentioned in the deletion summary. A page with copyright violations is never restored under any conditions. Aside from G13 draft requests, the second most common request is that pages deleted through AFDs be restored. There is a template for that where you add the admin's name who closed the AFD discussion and the requester is advised to approach that admin or go to Deletion Review to request a restoration. WP:REFUND is only for uncontroversial restorations. There is also a special template for CSD G11s and CSD A7s which you can use. If it is another speedy deletion criteria, you'll have to write your own response or adapt one of the templates.

The templates will likely cover 95% of requests you'll see. My only other comments are that requesters will often say that they want to restore a CSD G13 stale draft but the page wasn't deleted as a G13. The reason why they state this is that there is a form for requesting stale drafts be restored, because most restorations requested are G13s, and they just use the form any way because most of the requesters are new editors who started a draft and then forgot to come back and work on it. So, you need to confirm the real reason for deletion. Also, after a G13 has been restored once via WP:REFUND, if it is deleted again and the editor comes back to ask for it to be restored a 2nd time, ask if they will actually be working on the draft. Just last week, an editor came to ask for a draft to be restored for a 4th time and in between deletions, they never did any work on the draft. After 2 or 3 restorations, G13s are typically refused. Also, sometimes an editor will be told "No", a restoration can't be done and they will keep coming back and requesting it again and again. At this point, you might need to post a admin response on their user talk page because there might be other issues going on.

I think the only element that can vary among admins who work at WP:REFUND is that occasionally, an editor will ask for a page that was deleted through speedy deletion to be restored to Draft or User space. Some admins will accommodate that request and restore the page to an editor's Sandbox, others will not and just point the editor to Deletion Review. But I think the best guide to working at WP:REFUND is just reading over the page and seeing how other admins handle a variety of different requests. Luckily, the page is only archived after 7 days so just reading over a week of requests and replies will cover most of the cases you'll run into.

I'm glad that there will be another admin patrolling WP:REFUND. Right now, there are 4 or 5 admins who regularly check the board but sometimes requests can sit for a day or two before an admin gets to them. Be sure to read back a few days and not just look at the bottom of the page for the newest request because sometimes an admin will miss a request from a few days ago but that is obvious by looking for the red links. I'll just add that WP:REFUND is one of the more pleasant admin duties because some times you'll get a request from an editor who wants to work on a draft that was deleted 2 or 3 years ago and it's nice to think that a new article might come out of a forgotten deleted draft.

If you see anything in appropriate or confusing, just ask me, Hut 8.5, Graeme Bartlett or Muboshgu (whom I consider to be the regulars) and we can offer some advice. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the detailed response! I'll keep referring back to this advice as I get familiar with the undeletion cases and how they are handled. Jay ^(Talk) 20:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The attendant instructions says If you are fulfilling or rejecting a request, please ping the original requestor (if s/he is a registered editor). Many requesting editors are comparatively new, and a ping helps such editors to be aware of the action that has been taken, whatever that may be. Where does this ping happen? I don't see any response being added to the requestor's talk page, or a ping happening in the undeletion response. Also, I see some restorations have a comment summary like Dummy edit to reset G13 clock after undeletion. Is it required? Jay ^(Talk) 08:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you got a chance to look at these additional questions. Jay (talk) 06:53, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Harlem African Burial Ground

Hello sir Liz, Sir I will do it as you told, thanks for the great advices.Superatp 02:00, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Questions re: Rama Kirve

Hi Liz,

While patrolling new pages, I've noticed that you deleted Rama Kirve in this logged action owing to ban evasion. I'm not an admin, so I can't see if the deleted version is similar to the version that's currently present on the page. Does the deleted version look similar to the current version?

Best, — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Application of G5

Hi Liz. You said G5 didn't apply; can you help me understand why? I'm guessing it has to do with the timing of a sockpuppetry block/unblock and subsequent creation of a sock. My reasoning follows the bullet of the policy that states When a blocked or banned person uses an alternate account (sockpuppet) to avoid a restriction, any pages created via the sock account after the earliest block or ban of any of that person's accounts qualify for G5 which seems to me to apply. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bri,

It's a bit confusing and if you scan up further on this page, you'll see that I misunderstood it about a week ago and another admin corrected me. I needed to restore a bunch of pages I had deleted that were actually not eligible for deletion under the G5 criteria.

Let's say there is an Editor A, Editor B and Editor C. Editor A is created and starts editing and a week later Editor B is created and starts editing. They both edit for a month. Then, an SPI is filed and on Day 1 Editor A is blocked for multiple accounts. Then, on Day 2, Editor B is blocked for being a sockpuppet of Editor A. Then, a week later, Editor C is created and starts editing until they are blocked as a sockpuppet of Editor A. In this case, even though Editor B was a sockpuppet and was editing at the same time as Editor A, Editor A was not blocked at this time and so Editor B was not an incidence of block evasion, therefore, their page creations are not eligible for CSD G5. However, Editor C's page creations ARE eligible for CSD G5 deletion because at the time Editor C created the pages, Editor A was blocked and so Editor C was both a sockpuppet and an incident of block evasion.

So, it one sense, CSD G5 is misunderstood, it shouldn't be applied to the page creations of all sockpuppets but to incidents of block evasion, when sockpuppets are created after the sockmaster has been blocked. This usually means that in the initial complaint of an SPI case, when the sockmaster is first identified, the sockpuppets in that first case' page creations should not be tagged CSD G5. But those of every sockpuppet coming afterwards are eligible for CSD G5.

I hope this clears things up. Take if from someone who learned it the hard way! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:11, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following your terminology, A is the master Sasha Boudville, B is Adarna Herna [16] and C is Lara Hatsumi [17]. So therefore aren't all the Lara Hatsumi creations G5 eligible? ☆ Bri (talk) 01:46, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You know, Bri, I wrote out a long explanation of how you were wrong and when I reread it and checked the reports, I realized that you were correct. Then I wrote out a second reply stating you were right and I was wrong. This is the third response and I have to say now I'm not sure and I'm going to ping Bbb23 to see what the right answer is.

Here's what happened after I looked at the article you tagged for CSD G5: If you look at Sasha Boudville's contribution page, it states that Bbb23 blocked them on 12 September 2021 for being a sockmaster. So when I then checked the SPI case, it was in my mind that they were blocked last month and I didn't see that the original case was September 2020 and the follow up case was September 2021. So, I realized that, yes, they were a blocked sockmaster in 2020.

But then I checked their block log to see why Bbb23 had issued a recent block when the SPI was in 2020. The block log states that in 2020, they were only blocked for a month on 20 September 2020 for sockpuppetry despite the SPI. So, when Lara Hatsumi was created on 20 October 2020, they weren't a blocked account any longer and so even though Lara Hatsumi was a sockpuppet, I don't know if this could be considered block evasion because Sasha Boudville wasn't blocked when that account was created.

I haven't run into a case this murky before and it didn't help that when I glanced over the SPI I just read 2020 as 2021. But hopefully, the wise Bbb23 can deliver a verdict. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, I think your last reasoning is correct. I also think both of you should stop torturing yourselves. :) --Bbb23 (talk) 02:55, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting ready to stop torturing myself by taking the pageant stuff off of my watchlist. I hope that somebody else is ready to step up to it. It's a real time suck. BTW this is amusing in retrospect. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is the right interpretation, Bri and Bbb23. In Liz's first line, the creations of editor B that were started after editor A was blocked are in my opinion eligible for speedy. As I see it, the block was evaded not by creating the account, but by creating the article. (the creations by B before A was blocked are of course not eligible) DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

گردليدان

Hello sir Liz, Sir can we use another languages as a redirect page title in English Wikipedia? Thank you Superatp 03:25, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Superatp,

First, thank you for your formality but I'm not a "sir". You can just call me "Liz".

Yes, we have redirects in foreign languages. Check out Category:Redirects to English-language terms. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Meditation as Medication for the Soul | need your help in improving article

Hi Liz, Thank you for your previous support in reverting gibberish edits on Meditation as Medication for the Soul.

It is marked for deletion by some user stating it promotional. This page is not written to promote or publicise an entity or person, it is just an article about a book focusing on benefits of meditation. Please guide me on how I can improve this article or please help me rewrite this in a neutral tone. --Jake Peraltaa (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I don't know how you keep writing such amazing, high-quality warnings to people. Having tried writing some myself, I appreciate the effort that goes into them. Thank you for the good work! Enterprisey (talk!) 23:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you, Enterprisey. They take time to write because I proofread them several times. I've found that sometimes the first draft sounds harsh because I'm frustrated at that moment but I don't want the editor to feel like I'm scolding them. That reaction never produces a positive result and the goal is for every editor to develop better editing habits. And we can all improve, including me. Blowing up at an editor or embarrassing them on their own talk page doesn't make them feel like doing better work, it either makes them want to quit or they continue to work and simply resent you.

I have to say that I model my messages on ones I've seen written by JBW and Cullen328. I remember being very impressed years ago by an extensive message JBW left on a disruptive editor's talk page, carefully explaining policy when I think most admins would have simply blocked them. It takes more time but good editors are really our most precious resource here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for the response! That's a really smart philosophy. I would like to quote it on my user page, if you don't mind. Enterprisey (talk!) 05:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Expatriate soccer players in Malta

A tag has been placed on Category:Expatriate soccer players in Malta indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Faster than Thunder

Argh, Faster than Thunder is still at it, continuing to be oblivious to their warnings.

They know about user talk pages; they've left comments for others and removed warnings from their own; I don't know why they're not listening to the comments on their own.

I've RFD'ed yet another WP:RFOREIGN redirect Μέγαρα and left a final warning. TJRC (talk) 00:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TJRC,

Thanks for alerting me that they were active again. I don't see enough disruption to warrant a block but I'll keep an eye on their contributions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I guess I'm venting. I wouldn't suggest a block prior to a final warning in any event, and they hadn't had one until just now. TJRC (talk) 01:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's not great that they haven't communicated or responded to talk page messages, that's not a good sign, but I don't see them on a page creation rampage. I've heard that editors who work on mobile devices don't even see talk page notices and I wish we had a solution for that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of "Marcia Pally"

The new entry for "Marcia Pally" that was speedily deleted was substantially different from the previously deleted page. It did not contain any of the alleged flaws of the previous page. The subject is certainly notable and I believe that the new page is entirely factual, objective, and well referenced. Given the above, I do not understand why it was deleted without discussion. I would respectfully request that it be restored or at least that the deletion be discussed.AlexaVamos (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AlexaVamos,

The page was tagged as a CSD G4 after a very conclusive AFD decision to "Delete". If you would like the page restored, please make an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review and you can present your argument. If I restored it right now, it would immediately be tagged again for speedy deletion and a different admin would delete it. You need for there to be a Deletion Review decision that overturns the AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Holy ejaculation

Hi! Is there anything non-obvious going on with the deletion of the redirect Holy ejaculation? As far as I can see, it's not a typo or misnomer for Ejaculatory prayer, just a regular synonym that sees occasional use [18]. – Uanfala (talk) 08:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Uanfala,

Those books you found all look like they are 100-200 years old and I don't think there is a religious use of "ejaculation" any more. I thought the page was vandalism so perhaps we used the incorrect CSD tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you searched for the title of the target article, you'd get similarly old results (and besides, we try to account for common historic names anyway). The redirect was neither a typo, nor vandalism, so would you mind restoring it? You can take it to WP:RfD if you still are of the opinion that it should be deleted. – Uanfala (talk) 21:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't Batman say that?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's twice I've done a double-take at my watchlist... ~TNT (she/her • talk) 22:10, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll restore it and send it to RFD and we can stop talking about Holy Ejaculations here. This is a PG talk page although sometimes strong words are used. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't disclose my age, but I will disclose that I'm older than 13. Sorry, Liz, I'll shut up now.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's now up to the 2 or 3 editors who regularly comment on RFDs. They are a thoughtful bunch though and take redirects very seriously so I hope they won't keep it just for amusement's sake. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! There's at least four of us. ;) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, however many there are, you really take redirects and the purpose of redirects very seriously unlike the majority of editors. I know this because my poorly prepared nominations get shot down regularly because you all saw value in a redirect that seemed totally implausible to me. So, who knows maybe there is one very very innocent person out there that will type in "Holy ejaculation" on Wikipedia in order to get to an article about prayers. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear you appreciate what we do. :) RfD can be a bit alien to outsiders. Often we're looking at things that don't occur to most people (like "Actually this was an article for 3 days in 2007 and for some reasons still gets views"), or that would be invalid arguments in most other venues (like "It's a popular meme"). One thing I like about it is that most people really do "Call them like we see them". Not much inclusionism or deletionism, although certainly everyone has individual kinds of redirect they're more conservative or liberal on. Potentially offensive redirects are always an interesting category. With them I try to just always think about whether the redirect will take the reader somewhere useful (like this racial slur) or mislead them (like "Gaza Holocaust", deleted after five RfDs).

Anyways, I'll shut up. :D Get me on the topic of redirects and RfD and I'll ramble all day. Do let me know if you ever have questions about RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:59, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For all the round the clock arduous tasks you perform. You are indeed a tireless contributor Celestina007 (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does Fandom count as a Good Source?

Im curious because I'm trying to a make page on an Internet Series called Madness Combat, and I need some help with fandom counts or not. Thegibuspyro (talk) 21:29, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thegibuspyro,

I can't help you with creating articles as I mostly deal with admin and maintenance tasks so I recommend you take your questions to the Teahouse and Articles for Creation both of which are set up to help new editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hi @Thegibuspyro:, no Fandom is not a reliable source because it is user generated. You can read more about what is considered a reliable source at WP:V and WP:RS. Also, feel free to ask questions at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification, S0091. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

Corrosive RfA atmosphere
The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
Level of scrutiny
Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
Standards needed to pass keep rising
It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
Too few candidates
There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
"No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
Admin permissions and unbundling
There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
RfA should not be the only road to adminship
Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.

There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CSD on Draft:Qissa Meherbano Ka

Hi - the IP that created the article is from a known IP range for Bttowadch. They've shifted mostly to using IP accounts and draft space because their user accounts get caught fairly quick. Please reconsider the CSD on that draft. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ravensfire,

If you look over my talk page, you'll see multiple discussions over CSD G5 tagging along with mistakes I've made by not reading SPI cases thoroughly. I will not delete a page tagged CSD G5 unless the page creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry and whose account was created after the sockmaster was blocked. You very well may be correct that this IP is a block evading sockpuppet but until I see confirmation, I won't delete that page. You are free to approach another administrator and see if they will oblige. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly understandable, appreciate the reply! Ravensfire (talk) 03:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Association for Asian Performance

Hi Liz! I would like to bring the page Association for Asian Performance [[19]] back to life with proper notability, citations, and credit. Since you deleted the page on 19 January, 2021, Wikipedia notified me that I should contact you prior to recreating the page. I have found a sizeable amount of notable source material beyond what has been included in previous iterations of the Association for Asian Performance Wiki page and plan to reinvent the page properly this time. Thank you for your dedication to Wikipedia! --Camargue19 (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Camargue19,

As a contested Proposed deletion, these pages can be restored upon request so I have done so. Good luck with the article! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparent meatpuppetry/proxy editing

Hi Liz, I noticed that you protected the Stephen Zechariah page due to sockpuppetry. A new-ish uer @Ram Dhaneesh: appears to be doing the bidding of the Spreadmediaglobal sockmaster here. This tag team effort mirrors previous attempts to create the SZ article [20]. Ram also previously created a page on Deri Lorus under a different title after it was salted [21]. Would appreciate it if you could take a closer look at this. Thanks.-KH-1 (talk) 03:26, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yaacob I ben Aaharon ben Shalma

You deleted by G4, but it does not seem to apply. It had an additional reference and an additional illustration added, and the earlier deletion reason "contains no information beyond that available at Samaritan High Priest no longer applies . I've restored it. I will add some other information also. DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, David,

I defer to your judgment, always. It didn't seem like there was much there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I went back to the original deletion argument and I'm not certain I did the right thing, it turns out that this is a complicated problem, and I've asked for advice on how to handle this and a number of similar drafts. I'm consulting the author and the deleting admin; both are more knowledgable than I. There are always one or two decisions a day that leave me with a residual feeling of doubt, and I've learned to go back to them, because very often my feeling turns out to be correct. I do not know how my mind works to generate this sort of feeling, but it does. DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Señorita Panamá 2021

Hi Liz, i noticed that you deleted the page of Señorita Panamá 2021, I see that the apparent reason is because it was created by an already blocked User, I understand the situation of that user, even so the event is real and is currently being developed in the country whose final night will be celebrated on November 7 with concrete and real references, previously I add several references of The National Contest. My question is about the possibility of being able to restore the page and what can be done to improve it and not be completely eliminated even though the creator user has been blocked / removed. Evanex ( talk ) 03:17, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Papua New Guinean educationists

My mistake. Please go ahead and delete. Sorry. Roundtheworld (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Taros1990/sandbox/Hiroyuki Sekino

From what I could tell, Taros1990 (talk · contribs) started editing while its master, Michaelse2002 (talk · contribs), was blocked for unrelated reasons. (Michael's initial block was on 10 Oct and only extended to indef after Taros' discovery; Taros began editing 11 Oct.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:08, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problem

Hello, @Liz! If you don't mind, Can you check at Makerfield (UK Parliament constituency), I don't understand if it's ok to put "+" and "-" signs. I think increase & decrease templates are correct in this case, persistently changing by ips. Thanks ~ Limited Idea4me (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit at Template:Infobox Wikipedia user

Hi Liz, could I ask if you remember the reason for Special:Diff/1032469784? There were two parts to the edit you reverted, you mentioned categorization in your edit summary, but the categorization code I replaced simply doesn't work any more. {{substr_any|{{{location|}}}| {{str find0|{{{location|}}}|,}}+2| 50-{{strlen quick|{{{location|}}}}} }} for |location=Cambridge, United Kindom evaluates to {{str sub old|Cambridge, United Kindom|9+2|50-24}}, and this evaluates to the whole original string "Cambridge, United Kindom" because the template str_sub_old doesn't evaluate expressions. Maybe it used to. Immediately above there is already an attempt to categorize into Category:Wikipedians in {{{location}}} so I'm reasonably sure the code I replaced wasn't doing anything useful at all. I just can't see the problem myself but if you could let me know what categorization it broke it would be appreciated! Many thanks, User:GKFX^talk 10:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Joeyjoeymintzmintz's empty categories

Hi Liz, I almost tagged the cats as WP:C1 myself, but I wasn't sure if (1) I had to wait until they'd been empty 7 days or (2) I tag them and then an admin deletes them only after 7 days elapses. You're much more experienced in this, and I'm assuming #2 is good?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bbb23,

This is commonly misunderstood. The empty categories are tagged CSD C1 when they are first noticed by a human editor or by a bot (see Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories) and after a 7 day waiting period in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion, if the categories are still empty, they are deleted. The tagging starts the 7 day period because, otherwise, it's impossible to know when the category was first emptied. The waiting period is because categories are sometimes emptied "out of process", as a way around WP:CFD or by enthusiastic new editors, so some editors scan Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion to recover or restore those categories. Hope this clarifies things.

I've also learned that categories can be a rare exception to the CSD G5 rule (see Wikipedia:REVERTBAN) as the deletion of categories that have not been emptied can be disruptive to other pages. I think categories that have been created by ban evading sockpuppets that ARE empty, can be simply deleted under CSD G5 and don't need to be tagged CSD C1. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Liz. I think it would be useful if this was made clear in WP:C1 itself, which has no guidance.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) 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/A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) 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.

BOVINEBOY2008 02:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Possible sleeper

CaptainFalcon73847 was created around the same time as the other socks. Politanvm ^talk 02:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And GiantFalcon1919 is active now. Is this an LTA? Politanvm ^talk 03:01, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for spamming your talk, but CFalcon05 was just created. Politanvm ^talk 03:05, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And FalconsChokeOnCaptainFalcon. Is there a way to block account creation? Politanvm ^talk 03:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Politanvm,

Thanks for alerting me. I've blocked them as well. I don't know if they are an LTA but they are very active tonight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a bit too passionate about sports. Adding onto the list, we have User:W kut a w Captain Falcon, but maybe it’s not worth it to block them ASAP since they’ll just create more accounts and some of the disruption is on drafts and user pagers nobody will ever see. If there’s anything else I can do to help, let me know. Politanvm ^talk 03:24, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. I've gone to a Checkuser with a request for advice. I don't know what else to do at this point. The account creation blocks seem to have no effect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll just keep an eye out for some of the more visible disruption. I’m not an expert in LTAs, but maybe the list of users they complained about at User talk:BusterFalcon9 would narrow down who it is. Politanvm ^talk 03:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Spine of Night

Hi Liz. While reviewing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ConyJuul, I noticed the unusual history of The Spine of Night (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). It was an article, but was then redirected by a misguided newer editor to Draft:The Spine of Night, without merging any of the content to the draft. Having looked at the deleted version for the SPI, it doesn't look to me like an article that would have been speedied or draftified (although it does need some copy-editing and referencing improvements). Would you be open to restoring the article? Or if you do think the deleted version was draftifiable, could you please restore and then histmerge into the draft? Thanks. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:50, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tamzin,

It took a while to figure out what was going on here. The page was deleted as a CSD R2 cross-namespace redirect, which is what it appeared to be but it turns out that Limited Idea4me had removed the content and turned it into a cross-namespace redirect so I restored the page and reverted back to before the content was removed. This is an unusual step to take for any editor, to redirect an article page to Draft space, much less for a new one to do, so thanks for catching it.

We've been having some issues recently with articles being moved to Draft space and then the page creator doing cut-and-paste page creations of new versions of the article in main space, leaving us with two versions of the same article, one in main space and one in Draft space, so maybe that is what happened here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars Theory no one told me my article had been prodded

I did not get any message on my talk page that an article I created had been prodded. You deleted it on 10 May 2021 with the message "deleted page Star Wars Theory (Expired PROD, concern was: This may be mentioned in a few reliable sources, but I'm not seeing enough depth-of-coverage to meet WP:WEB or WP:GNG)". I would like this version of the article restored since it had reliable sources giving it significant coverage. If someone disagrees they can send it to AFD in the proper manner. Dream Focus 05:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dream Focus,

Can you give me a link to the exact page? It's the responsibility of the editor tagging pages for deletion to inform the page creator though I recently de-PROD'd an article when I saw that this step had been omitted. If things are as you say, we can see who forgot to notify you. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Dream Focus is almost certainly talking about Star Wars Theory. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 17:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's it. Star Wars Theory is a popular YouTube channel, with people that worked on the Star Wars films doing interviews, as well as bestselling writers of Star Wars books. I see after you deleted it, someone else created a different article there it then it got erased by another prod. I created my version on 2021-01-12 and you deleted it on 10 May 2021. Dream Focus 17:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Firefangledfeathers .This is a bit tricky because since the PROD deletion, another editor recreated the page and it was deleted, for a third time, on CSD A7 grounds. But I was able to restore your version, deleted as a PROD and keep the other edits still deleted. It doesn't look like there is a whole lot of substance to this article, Dream Focus, so it might be tagged for deletion again, this time in an AFD discussion which would make a deletion more permanent. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Issues regarding Akpakip Oro speedy deletion removal

The article Akpakip Oro is a hoax, such kingdom never existed in Nigeria and there is no archaeological evidence to support the claims presented in the article. from my understanding the cited references do not present any evidence of such kingdom. The page contributor User:Joe Bassey, who maybe from the Oron ethnic group is well known for formulating things attached to Akwa Ibom State or the Oron people most of which have been deleted. The article should be deleted because wikipedia is not a place for personal research or hoax and i think the article is entirely formulated because after searching google i could hardly find any evidence. Emma emmanuel okon269

Help with Red Assessment Categories

Hey L: quick question: would you be willing to fully protect the 13 problematic Wikipedia version 1.0 statistics pages, to prevent the bot from re-adding the red categories to them? The admin. with whom I was working is on a short wikibreak, so I am coming to you. If you are amenable, I'll drop in the list of pages below. Thanks in advance, UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wuh, huh?

Please list a page that is currently protected so I can see exactly what you are talking about, what has been done in the past and why full protection is needed. Before saying "Yes", I need to see that this is necessary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is not a page that is currently protected, though there have been ones protected in the past by User:Gonzo fan2007, with whom I was working on this. An example of one to be protected would be Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/South America military history articles by quality log (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); if you look at the history, it is the only easy way to stop the bot from re-adding the red category after I (or you) remove it, which is all that the bot does. I have just removed the cats from that and from the 12 other pages that should be protected for this reason; happy to give the list of the 12 if you agree. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It sure was

Yes, obviously I had no idea. Need to do a bit of reflection on whether there was anything I should have picked up on earlier in the process, but it did come as a shock. Girth Summit _(blether) 05:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Girth Summit,

When I originally left that message, I actually read the big reveal on the SPI case report and then posted on your talk page as I was in shock. A bit later I saw the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard and realized that there was a public discussion of the situation and you really didn't need a talk page notice. I think that some people will think the discovery was a result of the RfA but it was really a coincidence.

The thought I'm left with is that Icewhiz obviously could edit quite well, if he had acted as responsibly and productively as Eostrix, he probably could have become an admin himself rather than banned, that it was a choice that he made to be disruptive because Eostrix was a promising admin candidate that got almost unanimous support. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pluto (minor planet)

I noticed you removed Pluto (minor planet), for WP:R3, even though it not a typo, or a misnomer, as Pluto is part of the minor planet catalogue and the similar Minor Planet Pluto redirects. It is not misinformation like Pluto (asteroid) or Pluto (comet) would be. Pluto (minor planet) also fits in with other currently unnecessary disambiguation articles like Jupiter (planet) and Makemake (minor planet). Beanpickle (talk) 17:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,Beanpickle

The deletion summary doesn't say "typo or a misnomer", it says "Recently created, implausible redirect". I think it is implausible that a reader would search for Pluto (minor planet) as a way to get to Pluto instead of just typing Pluto. We don't need more complicated version of a simple names as a way to get to the simple name. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But what makes it different than Minor Planet Pluto or Pluto (planet)? Beanpickle (talk) 00:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't looked into those two pages but the major difference is that another editor tagged Pluto (minor planet) for speedy deletion as, as an admin, I patrol the CSD categories and evaluate articles and pages tagged for deletion. But I don't actively go out looking for redirects to delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry, I must have misread the page or something similar. Beanpickle (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

draft:Diary of a Wimpy Kid (2021 film)

Thank you. Moving it to draft again was what was needed, but I didn't know of any other way to request it than a G4. If I had moved it back to draft space myself, it would have been move warring. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert McClenon,

I think we have a problem right now of moving pages in and out of Draft space and I don't see an obvious resolution. If an editor objects to the move, they are supposed to move the page back to main space but instead of doing that, we have some editors simply copying the contents of the Draft page into a new main space page which leaves us with two versions of the article with two different edit histories. But I don't think that was the case with this article though. I didn't think it was wise to delete the article, despite the AFD, because the movie will be released in another month or two and there will be an article about it in main space. There are just some editors who are eager to have that article appear now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that there is no obvious answer. Much of the problem has to do with movies that have been produced and not yet released. There is discussion at the film notability talk page again, but I have been trying to call attention to this problem for more than a year. The guideline is poorly written, and there are two very different interpretations both of what the guideline says, and of what the guideline should say. Some film studios and directors have ultras, fanatical fans, and they aren't willing to wait until the film is reviewed. Another factor, to which you allude, is editors who create two copies of an article, one in draft space and one in article space. I think that they do this on purpose to game the system, because then the version in article space cannot be moved into draft space. This isn't restricted to movies; it also has to do with people and companies. I sometimes write an AFD in that case, and sometimes say that the draft should be kept. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The AFD for Wimpy Kid has said to move it to draft space, so you were just reinstating what the AFD had said to do. No one wanted it deleted. It is just that animation studios have ultras who want to see animated movie articles as soon as possible. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recreating a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

Hi there, Liz! Hope you're fine! I'm here to ask a question that can I recreate this page again? The page was deleted as per as deletion discussion. Because the page didn't meet with general notability guideline. But I've found some sources which meets with general notability guideline. So I hope that if I recreate this page, it will meet with GNG. Thank you so much! || Orbit Wharf 09:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent Arb request

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

DGG ( talk ) 16:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of spiritual entities in Islam: Difference between revisions

Greetings and first thanks for warning me instead of blocking me instantly about List of spiritual entities in Islam: Difference between revisions. But I must admit, I am really puzzled and disappointedm, about the rule. If there is really a rule, if justified or not, we always have to request deleting an article again after someone removes the templatem without any reason, deleting nomination is easily exploited and articles promoting a certain status of "unprofessionality" have a clear advantage. I think you are not in the position to bend the rules, but I request your advise how to properly act in such a case.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 00:14, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chaonians

The Chaonians article has has edit warring between some editors for a few days. Can you make a short page protection or sth else to stop it? [22]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I just noticed that they have now solved their dispute on the talk page. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Olga

I redirected the Typhoon Olga (1976) page to its section in the 1976 season because I thought the original article was deleted for good; only realized it was deleted to give way for a more comprehensive draft which was about to be published at that time. Apologies for the confusion I caused. Vida0007 (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/ProTaylorCraft

Thanks for catching that! S0091 (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, S0091,

Well, the hoax intrigued me, it was so implausible and easy to check that it was false. He's had an amazing number of sockpuppets for a young teenager. Tag any draft you see about the legendary Cody Taylor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:10, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol \| November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:Santana MontanaQP

The page User:Santana MontanaQP has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spencer^T•C 15:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Teahouse ping

My apologies for the unnecessary ping to the TeaHouse. I should have read the thread a second time before I saved my reply (rather than after). Meters (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Meters,

Thanks for the apologies, Meters, but I was getting so many unnecessary pings that I kind of stopped checking them regularly. I've had 99+ notifications almost all the time. I should probably just clear them out completely and start over with 0. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I exacerbated the problem. Meters (talk) 01:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HordeFTL

Hwy, that's not a name I recognise. Didn't know Efem itis went back that far. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Deepfriedokra,

I didn't recognize it either. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HordeFTL. I checked a half dozen of the tagged pages and everything seemed okay. I wish page taggers wouldn't attack their job with such gusto, it's easier to handle a few articles at a time rather than over a hundred. As far as CSD G5s, there is really no reason to rush their deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New message from Taking Out The Trash

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Taking Out The Trash's talk page.
Message added 20:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Taking Out The Trash (talk) 20:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jovan actor

You deleted page Jovan (actor) as per Wikipedia Policies but I can say that was three years ago and hehave changed alot and he now pass the criteria of Wikipedia Nactor, has more reference rewritten properly. All the things has been solved २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 01:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, २ तकर पेप्सी,

I think the article was in terrible shape. But I'm willing to restore it to Draft space where you can continue to work on it and submit it to Articles for Creation. Please know that if you move it right back into main space of the encyclopedia without AFC review, then it will just be deleted again. You can't sneak it back into main space without AFC approval. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure will mind and send it to Afc for New page pattroller review. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 01:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you can find it at Draft:Jovan (actor) and I put an edit notice asking that it not be tagged again for speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

draft

Hello, according to what you said on my discussion page for Nima Bavardi's article I drafted it on September 23rd but it What should I do now to create it? --Juror134 (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Juror134,

It looks like the draft has been submitted to review to AFC which is the next step to take. I noticed that AFC reviewer KylieTastic contributed to Draft:Nima Bavardi, you might ask them for their opinion of your draft. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recent G13 deletions

Hi, the drafts you're currently deleting are scheduled for November 1, not today. ✗plicit 00:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Explicit,

You know, I knew that but when the clock changed days, I just went to the next list. Thanks for the reminder. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina people of Israeli descent

A tag has been placed on Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina people of Israeli descent indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

From the editor: Different stories, same place

News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded

In the media: China bans, and is there intelligent life on this planet?

Opinion: A photo on Wikipedia can ruin your life

Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process

Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention

Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia

Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game

Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more

Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp

Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality

WikiProject report: Redirection

Humour: A very Wiki crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Administrator changes

Clpo13

Brian0918 • JDoorjam • Karanacs • MrDarcy • Mindspillage

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

CheckUser changes

Dreamy Jazz • Ferret • GeneralNotability • Girth Summit • RoySmith

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz • LuK3

Guideline and policy news

Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Liz, I saw that you are on the list of currently active admins, so I wanted to ask if you would take a look at something; a blocked user started using another account, (and have stated as such). I had pinged the blocking admin, but then found out they are away on a leave. I don't believe this is particularly urgent, likely more of a procedural block. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks - wolf 20:29, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Thewolfchild,

I am really bad at spotting sockpuppets unless they go back to editing the same articles so I don't know how you spotted this one which was originally blocked several years ago. But since they confessed, I really had no choice but to block them and ask them to log into their original account and make an unblock request. Good eye! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick! Thanks - wolf 20:37, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm usually either right on top of my user talk page or I forget it's there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:40, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request redaction on my talk page

Hi Liz, Requesting redact for user's recent defamatory comment on my talk page. Thanks. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AngusWOOF,

If you are talking about the comments left by 172.119.3.160, I don't think they fit the revision deletion criteria. He was calling Wikipedia, as a project with its notability criteria, racist. Although he/she was going after you, it wasn't the kind of gross vandalism and slurs that would fit revision deletion criteria and I think removing them from your page is sufficient. It is a judgment call though so feel free to ask another admin for their opinion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:04, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz, thanks, I will remove and have them rant about it on the talk page of the subject. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:06, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Randy Arrington, PhD

Hi, I added the CSD tag to this due to the following sentence which I believed to be negative: “ But be fully aware that being in the close proximity of Dr. Randy Arrington is NOT a safe space.” which I felt had negative connotations. If I was being overly sensitive, I apologise. Equine-man (talk) 00:02, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Equine-man,

No, you aren't being too sensitive, I'm going to remove that sentence. But when thinking about "attack pages", I think about the definition at WP:CSD,

Examples of "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be speedily deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to.

This draft wasn't entirely or even mostly negative in tone (although it is unsourced) except for that sentence which I'm going to delete now. I appreciate knowing that you are looking over new drafts and are sensitive to BLP issues. I think, for the good of the project, it's better to be over-sensitive than tone deaf. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:07, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Equine-man (talk) 00:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of page called "Master of Media in Journalism and Communication program at the University of Western Ontario"

Hello! I published a page yesterday (November 2, 2021) about the history of the Master of Media in Journalism and Communication program at Western University. I based this page off the similar one of its kind for a different program. Here's the link to that inspiration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_and_Information_Science_program_at_the_University_of_Western_Ontario

I'm not really sure why my page was deleted as I didn't include anything promotional. The information was historical and about the current faculty and dean.

Looking for advice so I can get this page to stay up! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdonati (talk • contribs) 01:09, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Cdonati,

If you look at the deleted page, Master of Media in Journalism and Communication at the University of Western Ontario, it states it was deleted because it was the recreation of a page deleted in an AFD discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Master of Media in Journalism and Communication. That AFD discussion just happened in May 2021 and any recreation of pages that are deleted in AFD discussions are deleted through speedy deletion (see WP:G4). It had nothing to do with the content of the article you wrote but to a community decision that there shouldn't be an article on the subject. Look at the AFD discussion for details.

The only way I know to get around an AFD deletion decision is to write a draft and submit it for review with Articles for Creation. You might try that route. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Almond draft

It seems that this draft was deleted in less than 12 hours giving me no chance to respond.

It was marked as "copyright" violation. This is not correct. There were quotes from a page that were clearly marked as quotes, otherwise the page was all a summary in encyclopedia style of this UK women philosopher's work.

Please reinstate the draft. If there is TOO much from the Times Higher profile that can be reduced.Emerald Gibb (talk) 10:56, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Almond draft

It seems that this draft was deleted in less than 12 hours giving me no chance to respond.

It was marked as "copyright" violation. This is not correct. There were quotes from a page that were clearly marked as quotes, otherwise the page was all a summary in encyclopedia style of this UK women philosopher's work.

Please reinstate the draft. If there is TOO much from the Times Higher profile that can be reduced.Emerald Gibb (talk) 10:59, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz, another version of this discussion is posted on my talk page, would appreciate your input there :D Justi yaya 13:30, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations are deleted as soon as they are discovered. They are not restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:26, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Statuette of the lady Tiye has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Statuette of the lady Tiye. Thanks! Hoary (talk) 04:10, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Easy on Me

Hi Liz. Can you semi-protect the page? Those IPs keep removing content without reason. 183.171.114.181 (talk) 04:10, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 183.171.114.181,

Okay, you do realize this affects you, too, right? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:13, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated for deletion

Hello. I'm new here. I've made 2 categories recently and you nominated them for deletion. Is there any problem with these categories? Thank you. Richard M William (talk) 04:36, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Richard M William,

There is an enormous category structure on Wikipedia and at least 16 years worth of Categories for Discussion cases on what is proper and improper in creating categories. Creating User categories for yourself is not acceptable. They were going to be tagged for deletion, if not by me than by another editor. But I invite you to participate in the CFD discussions involving your categories so you can offer your support for their continued existence. The best way to learn about categories is to participate in CFD discussions and hear the arguments put forward by those editors who focus on categories. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Film companion

Did you restore all revisions, including the G12 copyright infringement versions prior to April 17, 2017? Jay (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jay,

I didn't intend to. Now, I'll go check it out. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:50, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I got all of the edits up to the removal of content as a copyright violation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:54, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi Page protection

Greetings Liz, hope everything is well and healthy, this new IP user [[23]] made a few reverts in very short time without posting any reliable sources to explain their edit and simultaneously ignoring already existing sources. Can something be done? Semi page protection or something else? The page in question is Valtazar Bogišić. Thank you. Theonewithreason (talk) 6. November 2021 (UTC)

Albert Fry RIP

I translated the atricle about Albert Fry ( Referenc:https://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Fry) (from Irish Gaelic to English, because I had thought that it would be of interest to English speaking Wikipedians! Evidently my attempt to stop the article from being removed has fallen on deaf ears! I really don't have the time to spare on this language version of Wikipedia and unfortunately will not spend any more time trying to persuade English Wikipedia of the errors of their ways! Stay safe or as we say ion our language Fan sábháilte. Ériugena (talk) 17:39, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Manuel B. García Álvarez

I cannot understand why the article Manuel B Garcia Alvarez has been deleted. First, a 7-day period was set for adding new sources. It's only been 4 days and it's already been deleted, this is not serious. Secondly, the article contained sources from newspapers of worldwide importance such as: "El Pais" and "ABC" of Spain and "Izvestia" of Russia and others from newspapers of international importance such as "Diario de León" of Spain and "Komuna" of Russia. I have not had time to add more sources since they have deleted the article in breach of the 7-day deadline they had given me. Please give me an explanation of what has happened and I ask you to proceed to restore the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morseo (talk • contribs) 11:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Finnish municipality/population count

It appears that about 9 hours ago, you deleted {{Infobox Finnish municipality/population count}}, which has 322 transclusions. Perhaps it should be redirected to {{Data Finland municipality/population count}} instead, or restored to whatever its contents were before the deletion. I would recreate it as a redirect, but sometimes when I fix an obvious problem in a sensible way, I end up getting my hand slapped, so I will leave red links in articles until you are available to take a look. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion of {{Template:Infobox Finnish municipality/inland waters area}} and other similar subpages also appears to be causing big red convert errors in articles like Vantaa. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:42, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging Primefac, who deleted the parent template over a year ago. I am so grateful that people like the two of you are willing to take on administrator tasks, despite having to mop up messes like this constantly. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:34, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More mess: this nomination was made by an editor now blocked as a sockpuppet. I wonder if the best way to fix this tangle is to replace all of the transclusions with their redirect targets. It seems like that should have been part of the RFD close process a year ago. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:53, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonesey95,

I typically do not handle template deletions because of the complications of template transclusions but these tagged pages showed up in the regular Speedy Deletion categories which generally means they have been cleared and evaluated by editors who work with templates. I have restored Template:Infobox Finnish municipality/population count and Template:Infobox Finnish municipality/inland waters area but should all of these Finnish municipality templates be restored? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If they were all redirects, my technical recommendation is to restore all of them to fix the Convert template errors in pages including Vantaa. I don't know how that fix intersects with the various policies and guidelines involved, but I think that would fix the errors. After that, maybe a bot or AWB editor could be recruited to carry out the RFD outcome (or not, if an SP-led outcome is invalid). – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:30, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as the CSD tagger: it simply never occurred to me that any of the subpages could still be in use. For what it's worth, the original deletion of Template:Infobox Finnish municipality might be worth revisiting given the nominator is also a likely Tobias Conradi sock. On the other hand, it's kind of too deeply entrenched to undo now. The RfD in question is irrelevant, since the pages qualify for speedy deletion as G8 (and if they hadn't been deleted in October 2020 I would have CSD tagged them yesterday). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:16, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, I'll take care of this. These complications are typically why I give a wide berth to templates. It makes regular pages like articles and files seem straight-forward in comparison. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:19, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My non-admin recommendation would be to replace all of the redirects with their targets (which I think should have been done following the RFD, but maybe a step got missed) and move on. I do a ton of template editing, so feel free to ping me if you run into any trouble. Thanks for sorting it, Liz. – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:10, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jonesey95, I'm just restoring them all and leaving the template talk pages deleted. There is at least one that Plastikspork restored but later deleted that I'll just let be as I assume that, unlike me, they are familiar with templates. You will be able to see all of the pages in the Deletion log. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:14, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bergius process and Haber–Bosch process

I made a request on the talk page of Bergius process and Haber–Bosch process to hold off deletion. Did you read it before deleting? SpinningSpark 07:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How curious. Instead of removing the PROD tag, you leave a cryptic message on the talk page without even bothering to sign your post. If I didn't know any better I would have assumed this to be an honest mistake, but I think you're deliberately skirting standard protocol to bait your fellow admins into making "mistakes". I wish you would find something better to do with your time. -FASTILY 11:08, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, the signature was an honest mistake. I didn't deprod it because I agree it can't stand as an article at that title. Nevertheless, it contains encyclopaedic information and I think we ought to do something with it. So a) I wanted time to think about it, and b) I want to hear from the creator what it is supposed to be doing (who had not been notified of the prod). I don't think a personal attack is warranted quite yet. SpinningSpark 14:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you

Thanks for taking your time to explain.

I was already about to quit using wiki. But thanks to you, at least I know I'm not an idiot for staying here. Do have a blissful day!!! Ugochukwu75 (talk) 11:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ygm

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 06:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cram schools in India

Hi Liz! This category was used earlier in the FIITJEE article, based on a Reuters reference, and was removed by an editor with a suspected COI in an attempt to whitewash the article. The category resultantly became empty and was C1'd by you. I've reverted the COI edits now, and restored the category, which turns up as a redlink now. Could you please restore the category, now that it is not empty? Thanks! Java Hurricane 14:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 'JavaHurricane,

Done Restoring empty categories is one of the easier admin actions which I'm happy to do. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Java Hurricane 00:55, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Might need your eye for something

Hi Liz—hopefully you don't mind, but I've seen you handle situations similar to this in amicable ways in the past, so perhaps you can help here.

I've noticed a few COI edit request declines from Quetstar after I informed a paid editor on how they should make one on Talk:LoopUp, which was then declined here, with justification I feel is quite lacking. It also seems this isn't the first time they've been notified about improper ER reviews: I see notices all the way back in September about similar issues on their talk page, with similarly bad ER reviews from just a few days ago, so it could be worth taking a look at from someone with more experience in dealing with this type of situation. (Note that I also reverted the LoopUp ER decline and left a note on their talk page.) Perryprog (talk) 16:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Perryprog,

Sorry for the delay but I've been very busy today. I'll look into this. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Can you check on the following articles? Justlettersandnumbers restored them, but didn't remove the CSD tag in that restoration edit, which is why I think Anthony Bradbury then deleted them again almost instantly, since they popped back up in the category. Here they are: Ramón Escobar Santiago, Gladys Ejomi, Iñaxi Etxabe, Elisabeth Ebeling, Dick Klaverdijk, and César Salinas. Thank you for taking the time to check the article histories when doing your reviewing, btw, you're one of the only admins that does. Silver seren^C 23:07, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Silver seren,

Well, it was upsetting to me yesterday when there was a mass batch deletion of close to 100 articles tagged CSD G5 where clearly they weren't examined and reviewed individually. This action can be justified if the banned editor was the only contributor to these pages (as was the case with much of Brancrandran's pages) but that is not always the case (as with SportsOlympic). From a technical point of view, for an admin, is difficult to look at the deleted versions of pages and judged whether there have been substantial contributions by others as the deleted list of edits just includes the date and time of an edit, the editor's name and the edit summary, without any information about the size of an edit. It's much easier to make this judgment on an article before it has been deleted or after the page has been restored. But I looked at your deleted contributions and saw you made about similar contributions to pages that were then deleted so I was going to check on those later.

To be honest, some admins might have questions about you making some substantial contributions to pages AFTER they have been tagged for deletion but, in my judgment, that still makes them legitimate contributions to an article. I think it's not just a matter of changing admin behavior but also talking to editors who are quick to tag pages for deletion, to make sure they review pages before placing a CSD G5 tag on a page. I don't really understand the rush to delete pages as soon as a sockpuppet is discovered, there are some editors who tag page creations for deletion as soon as an editor is mentioned on a SPI case, before they've even been confirmed as a sockpuppet of an editor evading a ban. It's not like these are copyright violations or pages that violate BLP guidelines, pages that should be deleted upon discovery. Articles about past Olympic Game participants or 19th century judges in South America aren't doing any active damage and we can take our time to review and assess whether or not they should be deleted based on policy guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:28, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have the exact same opinion. Especially in regards to this sockpuppet's articles in particular, since almost all of the ones I edited were just translations from other language Wikipedias. I honestly don't know what harm those are supposed to be doing by taking some more time on them. They're even further removed from the potential for copyvios or other issues. And I mentioned to Justlettersandnumbers that the ones I've edited are those that I would be going through the deletion process to undelete anyways to take responsibility for them. Instead, just making substantial changes like this saves everyones' time to not have to bother with that and the article is slightly better than it was before in the process. So, a win-win for everyone, imo. Silver seren^C 23:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Mikko Medics Clinic

Wondering why the article I wrote on a real health institution in Angono, Rizal, Philippines was deleted. The clinic has existed for 22 years. Komki (talk) 16:22, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Komki,

You have no deleted edits/contributions so I'm not sure what article you are talking about. Did you edit it with a different account? Can you give me a link to the page? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:28, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 47

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021

On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
Search tool deployed
New My Library design improvements

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:58, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

thanks for notice

MojonLoko (talk) 23:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ExcuseMePowerGamers

Hello, thank you for deleting Draft:Bloodstain (album) under G3. I am wondering what to do with the creator of that article? They created it with a fake BBC reference and added a bunch of fake references to Tubbo with this edit (1, 2 & 3, dead links, supposed retrival date, source date and lack of a web.archive version makes me think they are fake), leading to said article getting accepted at AfC. Should I bring it to ANI/AIV or does a uw-template suffice? 15 (talk) 00:10, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 15,

This editor has only made 4 edits which is very low, not enough for me to consider filing a case at ANI. I'd keep an eye on them. I see you have participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tubbo but you might cast a vote since you seem to have done some investigation into them. Of course, this is just my gut reaction, another admin might take more aggressive action than I would. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that makes sense. Thank you! 15 (talk) 10:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Legitimate use of File:Caucasian man masturbating.jpg

The Masturbation page used this image which I noticed is just a tracing of this image. I thought "why not just use the original image?" so I changed it; however, it did not show. The warning on the file page says "To prevent the use of this file for vandalism, it can only be used on pages for which it is specifically allowed," and "To use this file legitimately, contact an administrator..." so I came to you. I think this usage is legitimate. Desperatefisherman (talk) 02:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Desperatefisherman,

I have no idea why you picked me to talk to but I have no interest in getting involved in the correct or incorrect use masturbation photos. It was unfortunate enough that you caused me to go look at this image when I have other tasks to work on. Go make your request at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list and make your argument there. Maybe you'll find someone who is sympathetic to your point-of-view. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:37, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sure, but if you're wondering why you, it's because you were the last person to comment on that page. Desperatefisherman (talk) 02:42, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that is a surprise to me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:33, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:CW+ 2017 Reach Map.png

Can you again delete the previous revisions on this image? Despite adding text saying 'stop uploading a larger version it's going to be reverted', another account did so today, and the seven-day wait is certainly not needed. Thank you. Nate • (chatter) 03:30, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mrschimpf,

Okay, I've never actually deleted file versions manually like this on File:CW+ 2017 Reach Map.png so let me know if I did anything incorrectly. I don't work much with files except when they pop up in speedy deletion categories. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

100% perfect. 👍🏽 I appreciate the speed. Nate • (chatter) 03:38, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I am an inconsistent responder to talk page messages. It's either immediate or I forget to even look at my talk page. It depends on if I'm busy working. It's definitely an area that I could improve on. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:46, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General matrix notation of a VAR(p)

Hi Liz. I'm afraid there was some confusion with your intervention in Vector_autoregression - as you ultimately reintroduced a link to a page you had deleted. I'm not 100% sure of the best way to solve this (as I can't see the content of the deleted page), do you have an idea? Notice the main page has more links to the deleted page (e.g. under "Concise matrix notation"). Notifying QueensanditsCrazy who was involved --Toobaz (talk) 08:51, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Liz? --Toobaz (talk) 08:28, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

please restore Draft:Florian Krammer

Hi, could you please restore Draft:Florian Krammer. I ask promptly because sometimes in past an editor like yourself has deleted multiple articles in a row. This and other drafts of mine are valid article topics. --Doncram (talk) 06:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I know I can request "refund" elsewhere but understand it is also okay to ask deleting editor, and I want to head off any new flurry of deletions without causing undue effort on part of others to restore them all. The articles in draft space are about historic sites and about historic architects and others associated with them. --Doncram (talk) 06:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Doncram,

I'm not sure what you mean by "in past an editor like yourself has deleted multiple articles in a row"...I delete a lot of CSD G13 stale drafts when they are eligible for deletion. It's not a matter of whether they are valid article topics or not, it is the assumption that after 6 months with no edits, that the draft has been abandoned.

G13 drafts can be restored upon request at WP:REFUND or by asking any administrator and so I'm happy to do so. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:48, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about you in particular, but there was recently another editor addressing articles which I suppose are on some new list of those "eligible for deletion". Looking it up, the discussion was this: User talk:Explicit/Archive 41#stop with the hotel deletions please; editor User:Explicit did restore all of about 10 historic hotel articles that they deleted. Those were 9 out of 53 drafts indexed at Talk:Historic Hotels of America/Draft articles that were all moved to Draftspace at the same time, of which 29 have been restored to mainspace, including one or two in the last week. I am working on these, sometimes with others' help, and disagree with their having been moved to Draftspace at all. There are also a number of drafted National Register of Historic Places articles which are obviously wikipedia-notable topics. Explicit suggested that all articles in Draft space created by me could be moved to my User space. I would prefer to have them kept in Draft space (including so that others can see and work on them, rather than conveying "ownership" and removing from view) but permanently removed from the deletion queue. Or to get notice before they are deleted / given some report. This should not cause more work than is necessary including edits and admin actions to undo what admin actions are done. Could you advise if there a bunch more about to be eligible for deletion, and/or how can that be headed off? --Doncram (talk) 07:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question about draftifying

Hi I’d like to ask your advice please as I seem to be doing something wrong. When I review new pages I often find articles lacking proper sourcing that I want to move from mainspace to draft. However there us often an existing draft of the same title, usually because the creator has copy pasted from draft to mainspace. What I generally do then is tag the article as G6 so the existing draft can be deleted and I can draftify the mainspace page. Sometimes admins agree to this and sometimes they don’t. Am I doing the wrong thing, and what should I do instead in these situations? Thanks Mccapra (talk) 10:28, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mccapra,

No, it's not you. Since the spring, I've been looking over the nightly "Draftification" report and there seems to be a growing number of editors who simply copy & paste articles that have been moved to Draft space back into a new main space version. I started a discussion about this at AFC back in June and there wasn't any agreement on how to handle it. And CSD A10 for duplicate articles doesn't cover having one version of an article in main space and another version in Draft space. It doesn't even cover having two identical versions of an article in Draft space. At least when I've tried tagging one draft version for speedy deletion in the past because it was a second copy, another admin has removed the tag and said it wasn't a valid criteria that could be applied in that situation.

What I've been doing lately is giving the editor, who usually is a new editor, a template warning about copy & paste moves with a personal note asking them to, in the future, either edit the draft copy or move the draftified article back to main space (which is allowed) rather than creating a second version. You could also turn the draft version into a redirect to the main space version but I realize that you're losing the original page history by doing this. A page merge is also possible at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge but this is typically not done if the page creator is the only editor on both pages.

Or you can try to tag the main space version as CSD G6 but, as you've seen, some speedy deletion assessments are a matter of judgment on the part of an admin. In another case, some admins believe CSD G4 (recreation of pages deleted in AFD discussions) applies to pages in Draft space and some admins think it doesn't, they believe it only applies to recreated articles in main space. There was a time when we had admins who would delete any page that had a speedy deletion tag, without even looking it over, but after desysoppings, those days are over and most admins who patrol CSD categories take the time to personally evaluate each request which means that your result could be different depending on who is evaluating the page. I know that when I evaluate CSD G5s (pages created by a ban-evading editor), I give more allowance if other editors have contributed to the page while other admins are much more strict about deleting pages created by a sockpuppet regardless of other editors' contributions.

So, I think if an article has already been draftified once, and in your judgment, it is really deficient, then AFD or PROD is the next step. Remember to state in an AFD rationale that the article has already been draftified once (or twice) because this fact will influence the response of some participants. I would only go to AFD if you think that an article can't be easily improved or if the page creator seems unusually obstinate. What we are also seeing in these situations is that as soon as the article gets tagged with an AFD, BOOM! suddenly the page creator wants to move it back to Draft space!

Those are just some observations. I have found it helpful to go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation or talk to AFC reviewers individually because they primarily deal with new editors and evaluating drafts and can offer me their opinion on whether a page has potential or should just be tagged for some form of deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much that’s really useful to know. Mccapra (talk) 21:03, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bpoppen13

Hi Liz, you gave this user a short block a couple of days ago, perhaps they need a longer break (straight back in with G3 article creations). Thank you JW 1961^Talk 19:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joseywales1961,

Thanks for your quick attention to this editor. They are now indefinitely blocked. I don't think they made even one positive edit to the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your rapid response - we seem to get a lot people just trying to mess up the place! JW 1961^Talk 20:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I continue to be impressed at the speed at which vandals are noticed. There is one persistent sockpuppet vandal who keeps returning and I swear, his edits are typically stopped within 10 minutes even though he targets obscure pages that I doubt are on many Watchlists. We have a lot of great editors who keep watch over recent changes. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:29, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Statuette of the lady Tiye has been accepted

Statuette of the lady Tiye, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Hoary (talk) 21:25, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, the stuff above is mere boilerplate automatically generated by the AfC process. Well, that draft, terrible though it was (see the comments on the draft), looked a lot more interesting than most drafts, even in the state it was in when you submitted it. It's still pretty rough; but it would survive AfD, and thus qualifies. Cross fingers that somebody who really knows about this stuff and has time and patience will land on it and work on it some more. -- Hoary (talk) 22:44, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, wow, Hoary, you really went to work on this, you spent your time getting this into better shape. All I did was submit it for review. Congratulations to you! Thank you for putting the effort into this little article. I bet if Rheaemory ever returns they will be greatly surprised to see how the little draft they started became an article on Wikipedia. Thanks again! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Makita AWS refund

Hello Liz, would it be possible to have a refund of Draft:Makita AWS to User:Sladen/Makita AWS—it came up in conversation yesterday so the content is probably useful to rescue somewhere… Appreciations, —Sladen (talk) 07:39, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sladen,

Sorry for the delay in responding to your request. Draft:Makita AWS was deleted simply for being a stale draft, G13, which can be restored upon request. So, I have done so and made a minor edit to the page to make sure it isn't eligible again for CSD G13 for another six months. It doesn't need to be moved to user space unless that is your preferred location. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Ihsan El-kousy

Hello! Cn you please let me know the reason why you deleted my article of Ihsan El-kousy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoda Sidani (talk • contribs) 15:18, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hoda Sidani,

Okay this is a bit complicated. I deleted IhsanAhmadAlkousy because it was a broken redirect. It originally redirected to Ihsan El-Kousy but then that page was deleted when Scope creep moved the page to Draft:Ihsan El-Kousy. Wikipedia doesn't allow redirects from the main space to Draft space so that it was why Ihsan El-Kousy was deleted. That made the redirect from IhsanAhmadAlkousy a red link, a broken redirect so that page was also deleted. Ihsan El-kousy was also deleted by EurekaLott as a broken redirect.

Does this help explain things? If your draft is approved by AFC and move back to main space, you are free to recreate the redirects that were deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:52, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miki Agrawal???

hi liz!! im new to wiki & wanted to give a crack at my first AfC submission. im super interested in sustainability n i stumbled upon the Thinx wiki page. noticed that miki agrawal is in red --> which means that someone should look into possibly creating a page?? anyways, im interested in pursuing but wanted to ask you about your previous draft. don't want to step on any toes here!! maybe you just got bored lol all good, only wonderingggg xoxo -- Allthesensualsenses (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allthesensualsenses,

I deleted Draft:Miki Agrawal because under Wikipedia policy, it qualified for a Speedy deletion under G13 grounds in that it was a draft page that had gone at least 6 months without a human editor (not a bot editor) making an edit to the page. That was the only reason for deletion, that it appeared to be an abandoned draft.

But drafts deleted for G13 reasons can be restored upon request. So, you can either choose to start a new draft from scratch or I can restore the old draft and you can work with whatever the previous editor had put together...from what I can see, it was definitely a good start to an article, they had already put found some sources for the biography. Let me know if you would like it restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hi, Liz thx so much! ill get started & will let u know if i need any help :) just wasn't sure if there was some other reason like not being notable, etc. appreciate it mucho!!! -- Allthesensualsenses (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allthesensualsenses,

Okay, I have restored it at Draft:Miki Agrawal. I'm not an expert on creating articles so if you find yourself stuck, I recommend visiting the Teahouse or Articles for Creation, two areas of Wikipedia that specialize in helping new editors. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redeemer University

Hi Liz! I had tagged Redeemer University for deletion as a cut/paste move so that the page Redeemer University College could be moved to that title - The university underwent a name change and no longer has "college" in the title. Is there any way you can handle that or should I just re-tag it? Sorry for the confusion - I didn't catch it right away and so the edit history was a bit weird. In the future, do you know if there's a way for me to add that explanation somewhere? ThadeusOfNazereth^{Talk to Me!} 12:06, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose theoretically the redirects could just be switched, so that Redeemer University College redirects to the correct title, but that probably still breaks the page history we need for attribution, right? ThadeusOfNazereth^{Talk to Me!} 12:09, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://theprint.in/world/k-p-sharma-oli-sworn-in-as-nepal-pm-for-3rd-time-retains-previous-cabinet/658349/

[1]

Endrid Bookling Notability Issue

A cup of tea for you!

Continuing civility issues with AdhiOK

{{expand language}}

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

Sandbox G8

Eric Adams in searches

July corner

Article instead of template

New message from Qwerfjkl

Repeated recreations by COI editor

Abdullah Sulaiman Al Rajhi

A cup of coffee for you!

Murda Bizness

Indeed.

New message from Qwerfjkl

Copyvio

Deletion of Institute for Latin American Studies

A revdel request

DYK cleanup request

Md. Abdul Halim

Category:LGBT Roman Catholic cardinals and Category:LGBT Roman Catholic bishops

Notability Sakura-tai Chiru

A barnstar for you!

Another refund

Rapper T.E.C. page deleted

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matholela Moloi (July 15)

redirect

Deletion

Deletion of draft:Vaush on april

Bubble Bobble 4 Friends - tag removed (no problem)

Marjan Shirmohammadi

Comment from User:Diomedes050465

Sahnil Bhatnagar

Please reninstate

Happy First Edit Day!

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

ok

Draft:Lakshmi Ghar Aayi

WikiCleanerMan

Interwiki links and A3

You've got mail

Walkabout Travel Gear edit

Refund-o-matic

Thanks

Shorter signature

Hip Hop Movement / Six elements of the Hip Hop Movement

A barnstar for you!

Re: Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Category Merge

Orphaned non-free revisions

Deletion of Olakira

Books & Bytes – Issue 45

A big sockpuppet problem

Thank you so much

4RR edit war

Query

ANI notice

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

ANI

Restoring Draft Nuhu Muzaata Batte

Inspirations (Saxon album)

Category:Female characters in animated films

A deletion of a draft

Thanks!

Deletion of Graham 'Abo' Henry

Leftover category

You've got mail

Troom Troom - redirect?

Workingepskeiskxkke

User talk:Community Tech bot

Can you please do an easy favour for me? Thank you!

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Undeletion request

Hello

Rio Grande Valley

Tagging pages for speedy deletion

Cregan

A barnstar for you!

Update