User talk:Eagleash

Will be editing on a slightly reduced basis for the foreseeable future. Eagleash (talk) 06:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Eagleash. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

AfC

Hi, and welcome to WikiProject Articles for creation! We are a group of editors who work together on the Articles for creation and Files for upload pages.

A few tips that you might find helpful:

• Please take time to fully read the reviewers' instructions before reviewing submissions.
• The reviewers' talk page is the best place to ask for help or advice. You might like to watchlist this page, and you are encouraged to take part in any discussion that comes up.
• Article submissions that need reviewing can be found in Category:Pending AfC submissions and there is also a useful list which is maintained by a bot.
• You might wish to add {{AFC status}} or {{AfC Defcon}} to your userpage, which will alert you to the number of open submissions. There is also a project userbox. If you haven't done so already, please consider adding your name to the list of participants.
• Several of our members monitor Wikipedia's help IRC channel, and you are welcome to join in to ask Wikipedia-related questions.
• The IRC channel #wikipedia-en-afc ^connect is used occasionally for internal discussion regarding the Articles for Creation process, and also serves as a recent changes feed, displaying all edits made in the Articles for Creation namespace.
• The help desk is the place where new editors can ask questions about their submissions. You are welcome to help in answering their questions.

Once again, welcome to the project.

Added this myself as it was not added when I joined the proj. and the links should be useful. Eagleash (talk) 13:18, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Peter Arnell

Hi Eagleash. My name is Joanne, I work for Peter Arnell. I see that you are an active member of WP:Brands and thought you might be willing to look at my edit request at Talk:Peter Arnell with some proposed additions, including his work on the Rbk brand for Reebok. Thanks! Joanne PA (talk) 15:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Request on 19:26:50, 6 January 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Pch0807

• Pch0807 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Challavaripalli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Eagleash,

Thanks for reviewing the article. I have added this article about a rural small village. It doesn't have many references over the internet, the one reference that I added haven't been considered as reliable by the other reviewer. Please let me know how I can correct and publish this article.

Pch0807 (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

@Pch0807: Hello, and thank you for your message. I note that there was a reference to a school website(?) but that it has since disappeared. If there is a school, it gives some indication that it is a populated place and therefore *may* be notable; it may not be enough by itself though. I do not think that the earlier reviewer meant to imply that the reference was not reliable necessarily – there were just not enough sources for verification. I note that you messaged them at their talk page but I have not seen a response. References do not have to be online but it does make it easier for reviewers to consider. I would think if there is a population then there will be something to support this, possibly census results or the like. Having said that I'm afraid that without proper sourcing an article will not be accepted. Eagleash (talk) 04:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Jack Wells-Morrison

One of his relatives must have had some inside info, as this was created yesterday. I moved it to drafts, but in case it needs to be moved back later and I'm not around... Spike 'em (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

@Spike 'em: Thanks for the 'heads-up'; I saw the team and considered for about half-a-second before deciding, well no. Eagleash (talk) 13:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Nigel Borell

Hi Eagleash! If you have time, would you be able to take a look at Draft:Nigel Borell a second time? I've worked with the editor to fix up the in-line references, and they've added a more content for notability. --Prosperosity (talk) 06:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding User:Rithikvinayakmravi/sandbox

Hello, Eagleash. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:Rithikvinayakmravi/sandbox, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 21:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Another sandbox draft I declined... no idea what's happened there, just two decline notices at the page and nothing else in the page hstory. Eagleash (talk) 21:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Deleted article Comment of this comment's author

Eagleash,

The submission from my sandbox was indeed intended to be a Comment in the existing Wikipedia article "Original proof of Gödel's completeness theorem" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_proof_of_G%C3%B6del%27s_completeness_theorem ). I assumed, apparently incorrectly, that the people I submitted my proposed Comment to for review would be able to know its sandbox source and from that be able to determine its nature, so I didn't send them (they turn out to be you) details of that. On 2021-12-31 I put a description of my intended Comment on the article's talk page and asked for comments on it, but no one responded except Felix QW, who however did not make any formatting or technical content improvement suggestions back then, but did recently make one technical comment (praising as a "nifty idea" the article's obvious error that I explained in my proposed Comment). I did also put into the article a reference to the proposed Comment draft in the article's Talk page, but that was deleted with the explanation that references to their Talk page were not allowed in articles. Three weeks after I posted on the article's Talk page the request for comments on my proposed Comment and there had been no response other than Felix QW's, I took the bull by the horns and inserted the Comment into the article. Almost immediately Felix QW deleted it, with the comment that before reinserting my Comment I should discuss it on the article's talk page! The Comment itself contains all the useful discussion about itself that I can think of. Any suggestions? Dirsaka (talk) 10:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dirsaka: Thank you for yor message. Articles for creation is not the correct location to propose changes to an article. FWIW, I am an 'AFC' reviewer whch does not necessarily require specialised knowledge on any particular subject. You did the correct thing in making a suggestion at the talk page but it was disruptive to insert your text in its entirety into the article itself. Articles present facts, preferably sourced and 'notes' and other comments within article content is unencyclopedic and amounts to 'talking' within articles. The other editor you mention seems to have some interest in the subject and probably the way to move forward now would be to contact them at their talk page or ping them at the article talk page. You can also use Template:Request edit at the article talk page to propose changes. Eagleash (talk) 12:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

The original article itself already contains an incidental Comment just below the Lemma which begins "Let k>=1. If every formula...", which Lemma states the conclusion of the induction on k argument. My Comment, on the other hand, is not incidental, it is central to whether the so-called "proof" is correct. There is hardly anything more nearly certain, and so a "fact", than a conclusion (correctly) derived from the rules of logic, as I think my Comment is. I listed two fairly advanced books as references for my comment, but all that is really required is the half-joking "Aristotle" reference for basic logic. While induction arguments can be very complex, the basic form of finite induction is simple, and the article's induction argument, which is hardly advanced mathematics, violates the logic of this form. Felix QW has already sent me a message about my Comment, giving two criticisms of it. I think both are wrong, and will reply to him with my reasons. He is not an expert on the article's subject, and suggested waiting until some expert comes along to discuss it. How an expert would know to visit the article's Talk page, unless he/she notices a problem with the article, is not clear to me, since no notification of the existence of an issue with the article, to be discussed in Talk, is allowed in the article. I am myself a semi-expert in mathematical logic, having passed my Ph.D. qualifying exam in that subject. Kurt Gödel is (was) a recognized authority on the subject, but was more than a little weird on that and other subjects; he might be wrong, and subsequent experts on it, such as Stephen Kleene, too much influenced by his reputation, which was largely due to his (Gödel's) incompleteness theorem. I'll probably wait a little while, then reinsert my Comment (unless Felix QW or some expert convinces me that it is wrong). If it is again deleted, I'll likely just let Wikipedia continue to have this obviously defective "proof". The article does have the virtue of accurately representing Gödel's original proof, up to where my Comment was, even if Gödel was wrong. Dirsaka (talk) 17:43, 22 January 2022 (UTC) My final attempt to get the format correct failed. Dirsaka (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dirsaka: I'm afraid I have litle if any interest in this article and probably even less knowledge of the subject; my only involvement has been to decline a submission which did not present as an encyclopedic entry. To make it clear, Wkipedia articles do not 'discuss' the topic within the actual article (any more than any other encyclopedia would) but the talk pages exist to suggest ways of improving articles. If you have received no response at a talk page then 'edit request' will flag up that there is a proposed change. Or, you can post at the WikiProject talk page; you should find Wikiproject 'banners' at the article talk page. I would fairly strongly request that you do not reinstate your edit at the article as this would probably be seen as disruptive and could even lead to the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Articles for creation: sandbox (January 25) St Brighid's Day

Thanks a lot for the feedback. The reason I prepared this article is that topic is fundamentally different to imbolc. Imbolc is ancient pre-Christian festival which we know from texts such as Cormac's Glossary, while St Bridgid's Day is a traditional rural festival, eg. crosses and brideogs which we have data from around the 17th century to the present. We know St Bridget has a following throughout the medieval period but we don't even how the festival was celebrated until about 300 years ago. The two festivals are intertwined, although the extent is unclear, but nevertheless, one is ancient festival and other post-medieval Catholic festival. I have been discussing a need to split the article on imbolc talk since April and I got support from people such as Bastun. Others flagged this issue back in 2017 Aerchasúr (talk) 13:00, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Aerchasur: Thank you for your message; to split an article, there is not typically a need to submit a draft for review. Please see WP:SPLIT fo rmore information. If the split has consensus, it can be carried out and the draft abandoned (it will then be deleted after 6 months) or deletion can be requested via WP:CSD. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 13:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Randy Mavinga

Hey @Eagleash. Thank you for approving my article 'Randy Mavinga'. How long approx will it take until it shows up on google searches? Sorry for what may seem a dumb question, I'm fairly new to this haha.

Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benpring112 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Benpring: THe article is still subject to new page patrol; it will not be indexed by search engnes until that has occured or 90 days, whichever comes soonest. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	I published my first article on 29 January 2022. Even though it was redirected, I wish to appreciate for expedited action and valuable guidance. I will do my best to do better with your guidance. Neelesh Pandiyath (talk) 05:07, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

" Draft: Yaşar Vurdem page Request: confirmation of translated page

Hello dear Eagleash,

Thank you so much for your helps on this page for my translation Turkish to English. I double checked page and writing this talk message for your analysis approval for page release. Please let me know if i need to change something on page if need.

Draft page (English): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ya%C5%9Far_Vurdem Original Source (Turkish): https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ya%C5%9Far_Vurdem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peacesaa (talk • contribs) 17:32, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peacesaa (talk • contribs) 17:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Pallab Bhattacharyya (IPS) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pallab Bhattacharyya (IPS) 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/Pallab Bhattacharyya (IPS) 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.

Djm-leighpark (talk) 12:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark: Thank you for the message; this item seems rather confused... I noted your ES at the draft page and moved the AfC in article space accordingly, to remove the 'IPS'; as you said, there seems to be no other topic of that name and the page wth IPS attached is currently a redirect as far as I can tell. Other than removing the DaB and a bit of clean up, I Have not had dealings with the item. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 13:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Apologies. Standard Twinkle message. When I started the Twinkle AfD message it was on a page, when I hit publish (10 mins later) it was an redirect. I actually checked it hadn't moved before I published but for some reason I thought it hadn't moved .. hence mess which I hoped I've cleared up. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 15:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@Djm-leighpark: Thanks; not a problem, it appears to be OK (AFAICT). Eagleash (talk) 06:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
31		Suez Stadium (talk)	Add sources
769		Lewis Grabban (talk)	Add sources
425		Jervis Bay Territory (talk)	Add sources
7		Kim Rosen (mastering engineer) (talk)	Add sources
3,508		Meena (actress) (talk)	Add sources
18		Seriality (gender studies) (talk)	Add sources
50		Steve Davies (footballer, born 1987) (talk)	Cleanup
1,542		Cinema of India (talk)	Cleanup
36		Singapore women's national football team (talk)	Cleanup
28		Conor Thomas (talk)	Expand
7		Hemavin Kadhalargal (talk)	Expand
1,546		Right Said Fred (talk)	Expand
208		Honda Magna (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
18		Homeostatic plasticity (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
101		Honda CR series (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
69		Foundation of the Premier League (talk)	Merge
204		Rex Airlines (talk)	Merge
28		British Tanker Company (talk)	Merge
43		EFL Awards (talk)	Wikify
68		Streatham (UK Parliament constituency) (talk)	Wikify
6		Hazel Gluck (talk)	Wikify
5		Avijit Lahiri (talk)	Orphan
12		Samuel Attah-Mensah (talk)	Orphan
3		Rebekka Wolf (talk)	Orphan
47		Randell Williams (talk)	Stub
17		Ephron Mason-Clark (talk)	Stub
7		Shane Paul (talk)	Stub
12		Andy Roberts (footballer) (talk)	Stub
70		Nya Kirby (talk)	Stub
35		Brandon Pierrick (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Zaha

Yes; no total rows are better than a misleading one. GiantSnowman 22:04, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Help request

Respected Sir, I published an article my first article on 29 January 2022. But it was redirected to draft. I worked on the same article and I wish to publish it again. Request for guidance please. I am an exserviceman of Indian Army, now homemaker and I am very much interested to contribute to Wikipedia. Request for valuable directions to publish my article successfully please.--Neelesh Pandiyath (talk) 03:54, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

@Neelesh Pandiyath: This appears to refer Draft:Ramapati Singhania (RS)? Please refer to the post at User talk:Neelesh Pandiyath#Draft:Ramapati Singhania (RS). Little appears to have been done to inprove the notability of the subject and it is of some concern that the first draft of this item was an exact copy of an earlier draft of Draft:Ramapati Singhania, including all the mistakes which had been corrected by others. That earlier draft was declined at least twice and then rejected. At which point you (presumably, as you admit to involvement in your OP above) moved it to mainspace, out of process. It was then sent to AfD (proposed for deletion) whereupon it was moved back to draft (again, by you or another account operated by you). I cannot really see that the item is worthy of a Wikipedia article as things stand and no amount of editing can overcome notability issues. Further, if you have not already done so please make the necessary declarations in respect of an additional account. The necessary link is in the post at your talk page. Creating a second account and then re-creating a rejected item is not looked upon favourably by the wider Wiki community. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 09:51, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Request on 08:10:45, 14 February 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by JasonHolmes11

• JasonHolmes11 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Save Ferris (Hip-Hip Artist/ Music Producer) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hey, I am trying to add an article "Save Ferris (Hip-Hop Artist/ Music Producer)"however, since it is an auto biography it has been rejected due to lack of notable resources. I have edited the article extensively now as far as resources go to hopefully comply more with Wikipedias rules. If this still isn't enough, I could really use some help because I am often confused with SKA-PUNK band "Save Ferris" since we share the same name. If a more experienced editor or someone could help me to publish this article it would be greatly appreciated to help my career. Thank you very much I look forward to resolving this problem. Thanks again

JasonHolmes11 (talk) 08:10, 14 February 2022 (UTC)