User talk:Onel5969/Archive 108

Archive 105

Archive 106

Archive 107

Archive 108

Archive 109

Archive 110

→

Archive 115

Archive 108: November 2022

Nomination of Haviland, Arizona for deletion

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Stockton, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 02:16, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Mela Loot Liya for deletion

Hello, hope you are fine

Please take a look on this page Mela Loot Liya as itself described Unofficial song of PSL. Here you can see the official PSL songs. I think there should be no place for this page on Wikipedia as its not notable song more than sung by Ali Zafar.

Please comment and take action (Deletion or Redirect to PSL) if you see any problem. Thanks M.Ashraf333 (talk) 06:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

If you have an issue with the song, you can nominate it for deletion yourself. See how to at WP:AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:16, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Non-load bearing wall

Please don't draftify a page when there is already consensus that any deletion should be through AfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 19:21, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but the entire article was uncited, and as per WP:VERIFY, uncited material may be removed at any time. And as per WP:BURDEN, no one should re-add uncited material without providing references once it has been removed. Does VERIFY not count? Please let me know if that's the case. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:43, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

This isn't a content question. It's a process question. Don't draftify pages when editors have already said that their removal from mainspace should be dependent on an AfD. That said, this is a rather petty invocation of VERIFY. It's not exactly a contentious claim that a non-load bearing wall is a wall that doesn't bear load, and it's not exactly hard to verify. Did you sincerely believe that that was not a verifiable claim? Either way, I've done that work for you now.

This is really disappointing conduct to see from a new page patroller. You BLAR'd an article to an unsuitable target. You draftified it after that had been overturned and a PROD had been contested. And you've removed trivially-sourceable content rather than sourcing it yourself or {{cn}}ing it. If you're so determined to get rid of this mundane set index article, why not do what everyone else does and take it to AfD, rather than trying to twist processes? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 20:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

I like to think that WP at least tries to be an encyclopedia, rather than a compendium of unverified information that anyone just slaps on a page. And I didn't BLAR, I restored a redirect. I did not choose the target, it had already been created by another editor. Where does stuff on WP become trivial enough not to need to pass WP:VERIFY? Is there a some chart which shows what should or should not be verifiable. I have no idea whether or not that information was verifiable, since it was unsourced. It could be true, it even might be true. But I don't know, and without a source, I could not easily check.

But one last thing, I didn't see that it had been restored through RfD, and that is my bad. I simply thought it was restored by the ip without sourcing once again. My apologies for that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Plaza Verde Park notability

Hello! Thanks for reviewing the page I made Plaza Verde Park. Can you share what the page needs to make it notable? I'm not sure how that works with places. Thank you! JaneClawsten (talk) 19:36, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. What you need is in-depth coverage from independent sources to show notability. The sources you used are fine in terms of WP:VERIFY, but you need the in-depth sourcing to show it meets notability. Local papers are okay, but if there is coverage from outside the area, that's better, as simply local sources might not hold up in a deletion discussion. Hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Ashley Darby notability

Hi, would you mind sharing what about the page lacks notability? I've included various sources such as The Washington Post, Miss America Foundation, Eater, etc. I've also double/tripled cited some points. Medievalonion (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

She has no notability outside the reality show. All the info about her is pr. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Autry Technology Center

You were apparently the reviewer on the page Autry Technology Center, but I'm not sure what you reviewed. The page that currently appears is just a redirect to "List of CareerTech centers in Oklahoma". This is not the page I wrote; I can repost if you need it. If there's a problem with the page I wrote, please let me know what it is. Thanks. TulGuy (talk) 17:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

No, I reviewed your page, which had zero notability, and redirected it to the list article, which is what I said in the edit summary. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't get your concept of "zero notability". This is a technical college with almost 22,000 yearly students, sponsored by the State of Oklahoma. Are you saying technical colleges are not worthy of note, or anything in the State of Oklahoma is not worthy of note? The article itself goes into the History, Programs, Other campuses, Enrollment and Accreditation of the institution, and I really don't think there's anything wrong with it. So if you're not going to change your mind, what's the appeal process here?

Nomination of Riordan, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 02:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Clints Well, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 03:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Regarding an article

I don't understand why you tagged the article even though there are three sources and an external link. Sakiv (talk) 04:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, but you seem to not understand WP:VERIFY. There is information in that article which is unsourced. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:50, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

You are contradicting yourself, three sources for an article that is a compilation of the results of a team in a season that does not need dozens of sources to prove it, it seems that I came to the wrong place for discussion. Sakiv (talk) 16:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

No, you simply don't understand. I don't care if there are 30 references in an article. If after looking at those references, there is still information in the article that is unsourced, then it needs more sources. It's not that difficult a concept to get. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Jahborne

Hi Onel. I hope You are well. You noted that the article did not resolve the conflict of interest. I noted on my page that I was asked by its original author to correct and edit the article from a neutral point of view. Please look again. Thank you.StupidPingvin (talk) 17:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I reviewed it prior to you adding that. I'll let another reviewer take a look, for in my opinion there are still POV issues, and unclear notability. You need several in-depth sources from reliable sources to show they meet notability. And remember that interviews do not count towards notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

Philip Kojo Metz

Starting a Talk page on the guy but in the meantime I've taken down your notability note. Could you outline why you think he's not notable? It's essentially an adapted translation of the German article and he's also listed here as being of high interest. thanks! NerdyThursdays (talk) 11:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

See article's talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

About Korra Obidi

Hello. You say the page has been deleted before. Point me to the older version that was deleted. I need to see the content of the former page. Amaekuma (talk) 13:58, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'm waiting on your feedback. Amaekuma (talk) 14:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

An admin will take a look at it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Notability tag on Julian Opuni

Hello Onel5969, I will like to first thank you for following my edits. I believe this is not the first time you have reviewed a page I created. However, I disagree with placing a notability tag on 'Julian Opuni'. This is because

1. Some Wikipedia articles on persons pass the notability mark because of the organisation the person heads. This has been true for politicians and public officeholders such as judges even in the absence of good reference sources. Fidelity Bank is a major banking organisation. Fidelity Bank is NOT A SUBSIDIARY of any global bank but a bank on its own footing. There may be another bank called Fidelity elsewhere in the world but this is not related to the bank Julian Opuni heads. In my part of the world, most banking CEOs are non-notable in Wikipedia standards because they head subsidiaries of larger global banks no matter the bank's balance sheets. Fidelity Bank is an exception. It was started as a finance institution by Ghanaian entrepreneurs before gaining bank status.

2. There is a bit of secondary coverage that comes with Julian Opuni. An example of secondary coverage provided as a source is the Guardian article about Julian Opuni.

3. The subject matter is news worthy. Julian Opuni from this article is shown to attract news coverage by what he says per his position constantly with time. I have shown this by telling Julian Opuni's story chronologically with time.

Please revisit this tag. I was hoping you would allow for the talkpage to be created first before tagging the page. Thanks in advance. Any suggestions to avoid future tagging of the page is welcome Ataavi (talk) 16:28, 4 November 2022

Hi Ataavi. Your first assumption is partially incorrect. You're conflating politicians with businessmen. When talking about politicians, there is an SNG, WP:NPOL, which holds sway. Outside of politicians, notability is not inherited, see WP:NOTINHERITED. Yes, the Guardian is a good source. You need at least two more like that in order to pass GNG. Your third point is irrelevant to notability. Articles get tagged in order to spur improvement. If they do not get improved, they might get deleted. This person may be notable, but with the current sourcing it does not show it. Thanks for reaching out, and thanks for your contributions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

The article Eller (sculpture)

I have added additional citations to the article Eller (sculpture) which you were interested in as you requested. Gazozlu (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Feed Tha Streets III

You recently turned Feed tha Streets III from an article to a redirect. You redirected to the discography, can you explain why you did this? you didn't give me reason.User:3peatlol$ (talk) 6:20PM Novemeber, 4 (EST)

Because it doesn't have enough in-depth coverage to meet WP:NALBUM.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Tayseer al-Jabari

I want to ask why did you mark the article Tayseer al-Jabari as possibly non-notable? The article cites a number of secondary sources which speak about details in the subject's life other than his death. Quantum XYZ (talk) 11:33, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Because other than his death, there is no in-depth coverage of him. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Just like Darya Dugina, where most sources about here life were basically "who was darya dugina, the woman who was just assassinated?" For that article, there was consensus that it is notable. Quantum XYZ (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, you're incorrect, there was not consensus that she was notable. There was consensus that her assassination was notable. There was dispute as to whether the article should simply be kept about her as a biography, or about the assassination. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:50, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Notability of Rivalry

Hello, I have added some context and relevant citations to Florida–Miami baseball rivalry that should help introduce why the rivalry is notable for both programs. Just letting you know so there can be a second opinion with respect to this. Ben^hen₁₉₉₇ 00:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

What does GNG mean?

You revereted my edit on jane street for a GNG test or something. What does this mean? Humulator (talk) 01:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Please read WP:GNG, it's one of the core guidelines on WP, so you should probably become familiar with it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:UPE or WP:COI conflict regarding Kazuto Kawabe is not CORRECT!

Dear Onel5969! Replying to your message, I would like to ask You how and on what basis did you assume that a conflict of interest exists between Mr Kawabe and myself. Before our meeting, I never met, never contacted him, I did not know him. After reading an article about his role in James Bond movie, I wanted to meet him and ask some question regarding the shooting of James Bond movie. I did not publish any article about the conversation with Mr Kawabe and I did not get paid for any not-sport-related article in the last 10 years! I plan to make some other interview with other James Bond movie staff members too, but no one got and get me paid for these in the past and in the future as well! If I manage to accomplish many interviews as I plan, maybe I will compile a book in some years. But this is just a long-term goal, nothing sure. The point is the conflict of interest does not exist! I hope it would be sufficient information for You! Thank You Mrandrew16 (talk) 06:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for admitting to a conflict of interest. What you just described is textbook COI. Now follow the instructions at WP:COI. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:02, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Thank you, CAPTAIN RAJU, and the birthday committee!Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Leave me alone

Hello. I came on Wikipedia to bring my own side of the world to the fore. To write about a part of the world that you will never understand, care for or even write on.

You keep meddling things you know nothing about nor care for. Let me be.

You even went as far as trying to get a perfectly good page I created to be deleted (Thank goodness for the intervention of an admin).

FOCUS ON THE THINGS YOU CARE ABOUT ENOUGH THAT YOU'D WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THEM. STOP USING UP AND COMING WIKIPEDIANS TO EARN CHEAP POINTS. Amaekuma (talk) 14:08, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making personal attacks. If you do so again, it could get you blocked from editing. Focus on Wikipedia policies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Personal attack? You tried to get good articles I created deleted twice, but thanks to the intervention of an admin. How does it get more personal than that? Focus on things you know. You don't know Nigeria or Nigerians. Stop using upcoming wikipedians to earn cheap points. Amaekuma (talk) 14:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Okay, have it your way. You could have asked for help, or how you could improve the article. Instead, you continue your personal attacks.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, Onel5969. Thank you for your work on Pol Calvo. User:Robert McClenon, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Contains promotional language.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Robert McClenon}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Robert McClenon (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Weird Behavior of Templates

I don't understand either. You had marked an article as reviewed, and I thought it contained promotional content, and reverted your marking of it was reviewed. The message that was put on your talk page then, as you said, blow up your talk page. Yuck. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

There was a broken tag a little farther up the talk page that was causing the problems. </nowiki< Should be all fixed now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Help on Tag added to Mark Keil (professor)

Hello, I have created a draft page on professor Mark Keil (professor), a prominent researcher in my domain of study and submitted it for review. I see that you have added a tag "Undisclosed Paid" to this page. Writing this to request you to let me know what led you to think that and how may remove that tag. Because I know I haven't been paid to do this work, but I wanted to check with you first as to know what led you to think that. Also, a few other editors removed my news article citations which work as secondary sources to the content since that was written in the LEAD section. I am planning work on that again and add few other references to make the article strong and remove the other tags as well.

Can you please help out on this? How can I remove those tags? User_talk:Vamsy_Alapati 12:59, 7 November 2022 (EST)

Hi. There are obvious signs that you have some connection with the article's subject. It might not be paid editing, but there appears to be some connection. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:08, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

I am studying in the field of Information Systems and I have attended a few guest lectures of professor Mark Keil and was inspired from him. When I was trying to look him, I found that there is no wiki page for him while many other researchers in this field already have one. That made me think let's do an article on him. So, it is out of admiration for him and his work that I started writing the article. I'm not sure if that is called a connection/relationship according to Wikipedia, because no one would so much time and effort on writing about someone if that person hasn't influenced them in their life somehow. I am very much influenced by Anime and the series that I am not planning to make my future edits and writing articles on them. Will that also be considered that I have a connection with Anime and my edits will be considered invalid? No offence, but this is what is going on my mind, when I have spent so much time and effort into my article and it gets tagged like this. I'm sorry if I sounded rude, but let's discuss and hope that you can help me remove that tag on my page. Vamsy Alapati (talk) 12:46, 8 November, 2022 (EST) Vamsy Alapati (talk) 17:46, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

However, even though I have been inspired by his work, I have written the article in a Neutral point of View and tried my best to provide references to all that is written in the article to reach High Verifiability. Although now, the secondary sources which were in the draft are removed now, so I need to write in a proper way to improve the verifiability of the article content. Can you suggest what else that I need to do. Vamsy Alapati (talk) 18:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

What you describe above is a clear indication of COI. Please read WP:COI, and follow the instructions there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

So, what do you suggest I do. I still don't completely completely agree that is a COI. But, what is considered by the other editors should be respected. What do you suggest I do now? Would disclosing the COI on my user page be sufficient? Can the tag be removed after that? What if I would like to make an edit? I should request an edit but who will look at that edit and respond back to me? Please answer me. Vamsy Alapati (talk) 20:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

As I said, follow the instructions on WP:COI, and you should never remove a COI tag that you have a COI with. If another editor comes along and feels it can be removed it will. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Moqui, Arizona for deletion

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

G12 on Melin-y-Wig declined

I've declined the G12 on Melin-y-Wig. It might be a copyvio. It might not be. So that makes it fails the unambiguous part of G12. See Talk:Melin-y-Wig for more details. -- Whpq (talk) 15:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't sure myself, but thought it was a good thing to have someone else take a look. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:36, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

FYI, I found a copy of the original Welsh Government scheduled monument report. -- Whpq (talk) 21:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Cool. That's why even though I CSD'd it, I also marked it as "reviewed", since if it wasn't a copyvio, it was okay. And again, thanks for all the effort you put in. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

autodelete of iMore page

You rolled back a revision I made to the iMore page, which is current a stub here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_community#iMore

Let's discuss this rollback, please. The basic facts about the iMore site are quite outdated: iMore is not a Canadian website, nor is it edited by Joseph Keller. And important facts aren't included here, beyond who the current editor in chief is: The site is owned by Future, among the world's largest media companies, and iMore runs a fairly successful podcast that isn't mentioned here at all. Wikipedia itself links back to the iMore site often, from pages on the iPad, iOS, MacOs, Apple Inc, and others, and Techmeme links to it extensively, suggesting relevance and notability. 63.125.140.62 (talk) 17:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

I can't see where I've ever edited that page you link to. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Bilateral relations

If I'm not well versed then I wouldn't be creating such articles to begin with. You are not adding any improvements by just tagging the article. Just like your nomination for deletion over Ricky Meinhold last year. Which I'm sure you never read through any of the sources cited. And you're tagging the article based on your opinion. Tag it for a real reason. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

WikiCleanerMan, I share Onel's concerns about several of those articles. While articles about bilateral relations with the longer-lived German states are likely notable, there is no general rule that all bilateral relation combinations are notable, and some of the shorter-lived ones like German Empire–United States relations seem particularly unlikely to be independently notable. Meanwhile, generally speaking across the set of drafts, the citations to the US government pages are not sufficient in themselves to establish notability, although the sources are likely to be useful alongside additional secondary coverage. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Cucamonga Junction, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 03:50, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Andrej Studen

Hi! What's up with that 'Notability' tag on Andrej Studen? I've completed my work there and wil not continue any further. If you believe the article does not meet the notability criteria, please nominate it for deletion. Or remove the tag. Thank you. --TadejM ^{my talk} 17:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Deprodding of 2022 California Proposition 29

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from 2022 California Proposition 29, which you proposed for deletion. I stated my reasoning at Talk:2022 California Proposition 29.. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Micler (talk) 16:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Onel5969. Did you find more sources showing that Woh Mera Dil Tha, which you marked as reviewed, passes WP:GNG? I've previously AfDed a couple of similar articles, from what I see most of the current refs aren't reliable, e.g., Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Hip in Pakistan though I might be missing some references. Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 22:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Genius

	Genius Award
	I appreciate your contribution to Wikipedia Vaishnodevimandir (talk) 07:45, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Adrian Bouchet

Hello Onel, Draft:Adrian Bouchet: I've removed questionable lines and added receipts for rolls of film. I completely deleted the part with the theater play. I hope the article is ok now. DinoKenner (talk) 09:10, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Without going into notability, the big issue for me is the COI issue. If the actor asked you to translate the article from German to English, then you obviously have some type of relationship with them. As per WP:COI, you need to disclose that. As to notability, he probably meets notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:37, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for your response. What is the easiest way for me to disclose this? The actor wrote me an e-mail at the time, because I wrote the German article independently of it in 2020. Best regards. DinoKenner (talk) 08:42, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

If you explained that on your user page or top of your usertalk page, that would probably suffice, along with the COI template. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I think I complied with your request. Can you move the article again? Best regards. --DinoKenner (talk) 14:17, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Done. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Transformer ratio arm bridge

If you look at the sources I cited in this article, you will find that everything in the article can be traced back to them or to other Wikipedia articles. The exception is the statement that Standard Telephones and Cables did not manufacture test equipment, which is the sort of statement that you would not expect to find anywhere. It is based on personal knowledge: I used to work for STC. I was going to delete the refimprove template, but perhaps there is some other issue that I have missed. EEye (talk) 11:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

There is an entire section still unsourced. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Which one? I can't see it. EEye (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

notability, primary sources

Hi,

Please review the notability and primary sources tags on the page for The Connecticut State Medical Society. There are no primary sources references, and the notability is not in question.

Thanks!

Chris Cczollo (talk) 19:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Sorry. 4 of the 5 are primary. And the 5th doesn't have enough information in the reference to pass WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

don't do any unusual edits especially on my created pages

hi. according to Wikipedia:NFOOTBALL and Current guideline, article Aria Barzegar is notable. no new wp:CON are decided. please Do not make unusual edits. you done this before and that was wrong because of future events. we have article 2034 FIFA World Cup that will held in 11 years later then you redirected article that will held in this month? if i see this actions again i will ask admins to check your edits. be aware of wp:3RR in above article too. Miha2020 (talk) 23:34, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Miha2020, the actual current guideline is at WP:NFOOTY. The page you've linked to appears to be an outdated draft from when the discussion was going on. You can see the discussion in its entirety at WP:NSPORTS2022 (Proposal #3 is the most relevant part), and a lot of the discussion around it by looking at any post on the talk page for WP:NSPORTS since March of this year when the discussion was closed. Please refrain from asserting without evidence that another editors' edits are "arbitrary" or "abnormal", as this can be taken as a personal attack. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:02, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

@Rosguill He is online every day and can answer himself. that link you pointed show nothing special (proposal 3) and no wp:CON at all. Aria Barzegar played in 2 professional leagues: Belarusian Premier League and Persian Gulf Pro League many times. he played for senior national team (Iran national football team) too. the article is existed in russian wikipedia and persian wikipedia. it has many refs too. I mean tasteful editing not about himself. thanks. Miha2020 (talk) 00:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

You ignore the very clear formal consensus which is the actual text of WP:NSPORTS at your own peril. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

And if I was on, I would have answered, although probably not as eloquently as Rosguill. You quote a policy which you yourself are in violation of, since CON was that NFOOTY, which was the policy you originally quoted in your incorrect edit summary, has been deprecated. I suggest you desist from your disruptive editing. The fact that articles exist in other wikis is irrelevant. NFOOTY now redirects to WP:SPORTBASIC, which the person does not meet with the current sourcing.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Sigh Rosguill... they are continuing their personal attacks at the AfD I felt forced to begin due to their insistence. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

The most recent PA is mild enough that I think the inevitable drubbing at AfD from other editors will be lesson enough. And if they still don't drop the stick, ANI. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 03:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, that's not what's occurring. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Wait for the discussion to close. If contrapolicy arguments aren't discarded by the closer, then I think it's probably time for addressing this at ANI. Frankly, personally I don't really care what our NFOOTY standard is, but a situation where this many editors are flagrantly ignoring consensus is untenable. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:47, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Especially since at least one of them is a NPPer (albeit low-volume). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I can understand editors that have only ever contributed to writing articles and were not aware of the SNG discussion being angry and confused, and am willing to give a fair amount of leeway there. The same cannot be said of people who participated in the discussion and simply disagree with the outcome. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Hope to get further explanation on the notability concern of China Folk House Retreat

Hi, Onel5969, I noticed that you tagged the article China Folk House Retreat as lacking notability. However, I have provided some reliable sources such as the Washington Post and China Daily. And obviously they are independent of this organization. Can you consider reviewing it? ——🦝 The Interaccoonale ^{Will be the raccoon race} _{(talk・contribs)} 06:22, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

About the article and NPB rosters and Developmental player system (NPB).

Hi, thank you for your review.

If you look at the sources I cited in this article you will see if they can be verified. Nikkan Sports and Sports Hochi are some of the leading newspapers in Japan, and full-count.jp is a popular baseball site. In addition, the cited PDF files of agreements and regulations, such as the NPB Agreement prepared by the NPB Organization, are published as official documents by the JPBPA, the players' association of which active players are members, and can be verified as reliable published primary source that can be cited under the guidelines of primary source. Quotations from these articles are used to describe the regulations and rules in a nutshell. And see the Teams index on the official Teams index - NPB.jp site cited in the External links.

Thanks.

ELBOW01 (talk) 17:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. The sources you've added to the first article are fine. The second article still has several assertions in it which are unsourced. Not enough to be a worry, but still enough that it should get looked at. I've marked both reviewed, and removed the tag from the first article. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:15, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt attention.

ELBOW01 (talk)　19:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Hidden Springs Mission, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 07:03, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I have no connection to Wayne Randazzo

Hi – you reverted my article on Wayne Randazzo as UPE/COI. This is incorrect. I've never been paid by Wayne Randazzo — or anyone else — to edit Wikipedia/any Wikimedia project. I have no personal tie to Wayne Randazzo; he's not a friend of mine, and in fact I've never met him personally or communicated with him personally about Wikipedia or anything else. My information is sourced entirely from the articles cited in my WP article (though I began with the Wikidata item/Wikimedia Commons category as I was tagging my photos and had taken a photo of him at a Met game). I have been adding information and photos on New York Mets-related subjects since ~2015 (and I edit under my real name) and I've never engaged in paid editing. I'm just a fan of the New York Mets and a radio listener. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 14:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm also not connected to the Mets — I am not and have never been an employee or otherwise a stakeholder in the team or any affiliated organization. I have taken many photos at Met games, but all of these photos were taken from the stands (as a paying fan) on a purely amateur basis and with no connection to the team (and in line with their limitations on non-credentialed photography). This includes my photos during postgame broadcasts (taken from the Citi Field pavilion as the postseason pre- and post-game shows are recorded outside before a live audience). D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 14:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. And since my daughter's middle name is Shea... Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

No problem. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 16:41, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Request on 17:58:09, 13 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Gabriel.A.Wainer

• Gabriel.A.Wainer (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Gabriel Wainer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi,

I completed the addition of many more references; I'm pinging you as you requested (I hope this is the right way to do it). Thanks!

Gabriel.A.Wainer (talk) 17:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Done. However, as this appears to be an autobiography, please take a look at WP:COI, and follow the instructions there. If not, there is a chance it gets sent back to draft. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion: Mayday Health

Hi there. I missed the window to contest the speedy deletion nomination, but would you be able to help me bring this page back as a draft? I'd like to make some improvements. Thank you for your help. HPLeu (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You'll need to contact the admin who deleted the page, Jimfbleak. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:23, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

Details

Hello @Onel5969! Hope you're doing well.

Lately, I've been trying to form a solid idea on which details merit a mention in an article, and which ones are best omitted. I was sifting through some recently created pages and happened upon Fry Pioneer Cemetery. The question I have pertains to this sentence:

"It has sparse vegetation and is surrounded by a chain-link fence."

In this case, would these two details be regarded as trivial, or is there some encyclopedic value? "It has sparse vegetation" in particular, considering that the state of the vegetation may not remain the same?

Thank you for your time and your hard work! Mooonswimmer 22:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

When dealing with physical features, such as NHRP, a physical description is usually apt. The fact that it is a chain-link fence, rather than a brick wall, or no fence at all is an important. The sparse vegetation is mentioned, since the flora is gone to in more detail slightly later. It is usually best to take cues from the sources used. In this case, there is one major source, but in other cases there might be several sources. If all the sources give weight to something, it is likely not trivial. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Noted, thank you. Mooonswimmer 12:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Little Spring, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 04:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Long Valley, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 04:19, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Need suggestion

Hello @Onel5969! Hope you are doing well.

This article was declined previously. I have edited to add more content and appropriate sources. It would be very helpful if you could take look at it and suggest how I can improve it.

• Karmaker (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Asif Saleh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Karmaker (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I'll leave it in the queue for someone else to review. Right now I would decline. You need several in-depth articles about him to show he is notable, and they need to be from reliable, secondary sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Lower Tillman, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 06:05, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Hazara Divison

Hi i want to tell you that Hazara Divison is not a duplicate article of Hazara Pakistan. "Hazara Pakistan" article is about historical region in Pakistan, and Hazara Division is about administrative sub-division of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, Hazara Division was merged into Hazara, Pakistan region article for not having enough content. 202.69.12.17 (talk) 11:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

And since it was merged, there is no reason to split. I suggest you discuss it on the article's talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

There was no discussion conducted for merger, it was unilaterally merger for not having enough content, now i added the content and their is no reason left for merger.

If in future any user has any valid reason for merger then they can start the proper discussion for it.202.69.12.17 (talk) 11:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Please also see this[1], Because of merger other editors are removing historical content and converting historical article, like other administrative sub-divisions article.

Also see this[2], there is a history of these type of content removal and converting historical article into administrative subdivision article. Splitting article is the only way to and this confusion/Dispute. 202.69.12.17 (talk) 12:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Query for V-Mart Retail

Hello, Onel5969. For V-Mart Retail, which you marked as reviewed, did you find more reviews passing WP:NCORP? Most references are routine acquisitions, retail prices, or other announcements. My WP:BEFORE search didn't find much that passes WP:SIGCOV and I don't think it passes notability but I'm hesitant in AfDing this. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 20:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Note I've marked it as unreviewed for now but feel free to mark it as reviewed again if you reply. Thanks again! VickKiang (talk) 20:36, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Always feel free to undo a review of mine if you feel strongly about it. I won't take offense. Two editors can look at the same sourcing and one can see it has not passing GNG, and the other can see it as barely passing. When I did a quick WP:BEFORE, I found this, this, this, and this; and to a lesser extent, this. And that was just on the first two pages in my Google News search. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:35, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. This seems to be IMO routine revenue info, whereas this is a routine revenue and retail plan. While this is also about retail and seems to be not satisfying CORPDEPTH, is the site a WP:RS in your opinion? Somehow I couldn't open the about us, maybe just an issues with my browser... Thanks again! VickKiang (talk) 02:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I had questions about the RS of that source, and had similar issues opening the "about us" page. However, from their home page, they are an industry source, and their articles have bylines. In several of the articles, they've separated reporting from stuff from the company by adding comments like, "from the company's press release". And their articles are full of analysis. This is the issue with articles on corporations, you have to delineate from the routine announcements from detailed analysis. These sources are national in scope, so I feel CORPDEPTH is met. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed reply. Feel free to mark it as reviewed again, and if another reviewer do so I will have no objections. Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Details, advert tag

Hello again @Onel5969. I'd like to hear your perspective regarding a few phrases in this article (all in the "Facilities" section).

"The mattresses are from Sealy Corporation." My gut instinct was to remove this. Especially considering the source is a Telegraph Travel article, which also includes a link for readers to book at the hotel. The language tends to be a bit 'promotional' in such articles. Or is there no harm in mentioning it?

"The hotel has a signature scent designed by perfumer Olivia Giacobetti which is reflected in the bath products." An interesting tidbit, but is it necessary? Not too sure about this one.

" The hotel also includes ... a 2,500-square-meter spa with three hammams; 10 wellness rooms, a hairdressing salon, manicure and pedicure cabins, an indoor heated pool, a jacuzzi, and a health club in a glass cube equipped with Life Fitness machines." Would it be better to just leave it at "The hotel also includes a 2,500-square-meter spa"?

What do you think of the rest of the "Facilities" section in general and do you think the {advert} tag can be justifiably removed from the article?

Mooonswimmer 20:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

So you have three items above. Item #1 -- go with your gut. Superfluous bit of fluff. In addition, it's not in the source, so it's an uncited bit of fluff. 2, since the perfume designer is notable, there is no harm in leaving it, although it's not mentioned in the Daily Telegraph article. The Lifestyle magazine piece is a press release disguised as a magazine article, so I would delete the perfume thing as well. Finally, yes, I would make that change. I would leave in the bit about the restaurants, get rid of the orange trees, etc. and the wine cellar. I would cut it down to two lines. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again! One last thing. See this article. It covers the expulsion of Jews from Yemen in the late 17th century. The article contains 8 images, 7 of which I believe are not directly pertinent to the subject matter. They are simply 20th century images of various Yemenite Jews, no relation to the Exile. Would I be justified in removing all of them, except the one of the The Tihama Coastal Plain? Mooonswimmer 01:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

You know, that's a good question. I do not really delve into the appropriateness of images in particular articles. I don't know much about that subject, but as per WP:BOLD, if you can cite a policy/guideline, you could remove them. Alternatively, you could open a discussion on the article's talk page about it. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Question from Clovermoss

Hi, it's been awhile. I just wanted to say that I do keep the NPP school on my mind and I'm sorry it's taking me forever. Anyways, I did have a question that's kind of related? So I noticed that Weight phobia redirects to Anorexia nervosa. I had to switch to desktop view to actually see the redirect page as it is (I won't have access to my computer for a bit) and I noticed that it's an R from merge. That complicates what my original train of thought was... that the redirect is kind of vague and might be better targeted elsewhere. Is that even possible with redirects related to merges or are they always just left alone? I noticed the disclaimer about not being deleted for page history reasons. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

No, you can change the target, the key is to preserve the history. However, in this case, this wasn't truly a merge to that target, it was actually merged to Obesophobia, see this edit. Obesophobia, meanwhile had originally been a redirect to Anorexia nervosa, then a bunch of stuff was added to, including the merged material from Weight phobia, between April 2012 and May 2015, at which point, someone unilaterally restored the redirect to Anorexia nervosa. A bot then came along and fixed the double redirect on Weight phobia to go straight to Anorexia nervosa. So if you felt there was a better target, have at it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Rare Metals, Arizona for deletion

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Reverting to old redirection on update page?

Hi Onel5969. I see you redirecting to an old project for this page Im working on? Im currently in progress updating all the cites to film awards and coverage. What am I missing that you keep rolling back on? On COI, Im helping fix the earlier bad redirect. Regarding notability, she is an award-winning filmmaker, with a new film at big festival in process. I can point to many other filmmakers with less notability with pages. Pls advise? LRB2022 (talk) 01:38, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Your username suggests that you have a COI with the article's subject, who by the way, does not currently meet notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:12, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wahweap, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 04:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Need Suggestion for Article Change

Hi Onel5969

I just received a notice that the EaseUS Todo Backup article I submitted was marked for deletion.

This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising.

I have reviewed the content of the two help pages you provided, and in response to the suspicion that the page is advertising, please allow me to explain the following.

1. Google search results show 1.8 million matches for "EaseUS Todo Backup," In the process of finding reliable citation sources, I found that it has been vetted by PC World, The Guardian, etc.

2. The only thing I think looks suspiciously like advertising in the article is that different versions of the product were mentioned.

3. The WikiProject Software project mentions that Wikipedia created the project to improve Wikipedia's coverage of software articles, which was also actually my original purpose for writing this article.

While I agree that the page may not be neutral enough, I think it should be marked as unbalanced, not deletion.

I want to make another change to the content, but I'm still not sure exactly what caused the deletion. So I would appreciate it if you could take the time to tell me exactly why. Thanks! Carlytuan (talk) 01:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. And thanks for reaching out. New editors sometimes create articles which are too promotional, thinking that is the way to show that the subject is notable. My suggestion is to ask the admin who deleted the article, Jimfbleak, to restore it to draftspace, where you can work on and submit it through the AfC process. It's a long process, but some very good editors will help you develop it, if you ask them to. The # of google hits is entirely irrelevant. It's the depth and nature of sourcing which matters. There has to be in-depth coverage of the subject in independent, reliable, secondary sources. But notability was not why your article was deleted. It was deleted for promotional reasons. I don't have access to the deleted article, but that usually means the article read like a promotional brochure. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:23, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2022

Hello, I'm Malo95. I noticed that you recently removed content from 2022 World and European Wheelchair Handball Championship without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 (talk) 06:50, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

TNA Simbu Lions and Simbu Warriors redirected to another page for failing WPGNG for 'not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass'

Hi thanks for your work

As the title says your redirected the two pages above. However both have sources from the only two current newspapers in the country! Not sure where else one could get more sources.

Presumably i could work on the article to make it longer. But if i continue to find refs in those two papers will you continue to make it fail WPGNG?

Thanks again. Eleutherius (talk) 15:09, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually i wonder if you could show me how to 'move them to draftspace' I see you suggest that in other places. Id be happy to work away on them a while and resubmit them again. Or maybe you have a better suggestion? Eleutherius (talk) 15:17, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I'll answer both questions here. The second one first is simple, you can only do that if you have the page mover right. Which I see that you do not. I'll be happy to move them for you, if you would like, just let me know. Regarding your first question, a source has to be reliable, which both of those papers appear to be. But the issue is depth of coverage. You should have at least three in-depth articles about the teams. This would not include routine sports coverage. For example, on the Warriors page, both of those articles are just barely in-depth enough to qualify, but they are both about the same event, so you would need at least two more to pass WP:GNG. Hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:37, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks

That's great help

Do please move them to draft space and i will work away as you suggest

Thanks Eleutherius (talk) 07:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Muevete en Bici

I noticed that you put Muevete en Bici in draftspace. I futz around with the bicycle infrastructure and sustainability articles on here and I’d like to help improve it. The Mexico City version of Ciclovia is notable and I will build that out if I can. What else does it need? Any comments on what specifically needs to be improved? jengod (talk) 15:30, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. There are two issues. First, you'll need in-depth coverage about the program from independent, secondary, reliable sources. At least 3, and right now there do not appear to be any. Two of the articles do not even mention the program, while a third gives it a brief mention. The fourth is a primary source. The second issue is one of WP:VERIFY, everything needs to be sourced to show that what is said in the article is true. Hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

On it! TY for replying. jengod (talk) 22:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Cool. If you want me to take a look at it when you're done, just hit me back. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:26, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Cardiff Arms Park - a decision

A decision needs to be made on whether or not to split Cardiff Arms Park - To split or not to split. There are two options which have been agreed. SethWhales ^talk 16:52, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Review

Hi! I noticed that you're the one checking the page I made Sela Guia often. I just want to tell you that I made a draft out of that article, and I'm wondering if you could review that too? It's Draft:Sela Guia, thank you. Master jk (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it later today. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Douglas (cosmetics)

Dear Onel5969, We would like to replace the outdated and in many ways incorrect English Wikipedia page of Douglas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_(cosmetics)) with the new and current English page. We have recently tried to redirect users from the old page directly to the new and constantly updated page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parfümerie_Douglas) and to delete the old one. You undid this process yesterday. Could you briefly explain why? The page does not provide any added value for Wikipedia users because the information is very outdated. In addition, we are convinced that there are now too many different pages related to Douglas and that this leads to confusion. PR Douglas (talk) 08:35, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Faculty of Science, Charles University

Dear editor, I have noticed that you have deleted the content from the article ‘Faculty of Science, Charles University. I would like to ask you how many sources you would expect. The sources – Živa and Vesmír – are sources described by GNG (Živa is published by the CAS, Vesmír is quite well established and has been published since 1871, nowadays published by a private company). I would also mention the governmental act. With many thanks Martin Tauchman (talk) 12:44, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I support it to be restored but you need to add more sources in English, especially from media, consider English-language Czech media 193.6.218.97 (talk) 10:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

It's the depth of sourcing. Virtually your entire article was sourced with primary sources, and the ones that weren't were not in-depth enough to qualify for notability. And it doesn't matter if they are in any language other than English, that's not a requirement. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Well, but articles ‘Dějiny Přírodovědecké fakulty Univerzity Karlovy’ and ‘Přírodní vědy v českých zemích a 90 let Přírodovědecké fakulty Univerzity Karlovy v Praze’ are in-depth secondary sources of the history. According to the article Secondary source. Let me cite the article: ‘Secondary sources in history and humanities are usually books or scholarly journals, from the perspective of a later interpreter, especially by a later scholar.’ And those are later interpretetaion since they deal with the history of the 19th and 20th centuries. Martin Tauchman (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Franz Lanzinger

I'm unsure as to what content you believe was copywritten in the Franz Lanzinger article, which if you had read my last edit would've found that many of the references I used are from Wikipedia pages already. (Gubble, crystal castle, Actual Entertainment.) I'm unsure how anything I linked to isn't within fair use as their already being used actively on the site or publicly accessible information explicitly on Wikipedia. Even if it was, deleting the entire article seems like overkill as I don't even know what the issue was so I now need to restart from scratch. KunoDemetries (talk) 13:15, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Rwanda Mountain Tea

Hello @Onel5969], I appreciate you opting to move the Rwanda Mountain Tea article to a draft that others would have just deleted without consideration. Since I saw this article I have been working to improve it as I am just passionate about African topics. I uncovered the contribution of Rwanda in the tea industry and with multiple awards won but yet no proper coverage on Wikipedia. I took this on and did hours of research to arrive at its current state. I'd like it to move it to the article space but wanted to draw your attention before I did so. Thanks @Flixtey Flixtey (talk) 12:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Looks good, nice job, moved it back to mainspace. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your diligence in doing this work! @Flixtey Flixtey (talk) 12:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Notability of Nouakchott tramway

The two sources I've quoted are Sky News Arabia and AlAkhbar.info, one of the largest news agencies of the country. Wouldn't that kind of sources for an public transit project for a million-inhabitants city be enough? Thanks :) Tidjani Saleh (talk) 14:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but you need at least 3 in-depth sources to show notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Thanks for the review page ThomasBrown (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Joke political candidates/disruptive editing

Hey,

I now feel like more of these joke political candidates are going to appear more and more with Gen Z-dominated social media, who are the ones who know how to use Wikipedia nowadays too. Perhaps I'll advise to semi-protect all election articles from now on to protect articles from these self-proclaimed candidates by Gen Z? Thanks! Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Not sure which political candidates you are speaking about. But folks are always going to try to get the guy/gal they support onto WP, no matter how feeble a candidate they may be. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Karen Fralich Jump to navigationJump to search

Under Category:Canadian sculptors is this category which should be removed. The artist has a page and this must have been made by mistake but I'm afraid to touch. Could you do it please, big brother? Thanks, Joan arden murray (talk) 20:41, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Will look into it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:06, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Looks like I was confused between commmons and en:wiki. Ive started to fix, feel free to finish. My error. Victuallers (talk) 23:45, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!Joan arden murray (talk) 00:24, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

2022 Seoul ePrix

If it weren't for @Hansen Sebastian:, the five sources I added wouldn't have been deleted. The race is obviously notable, as Motorsport.com, one of the biggest (multilingual!) motorsports-based sites wrote about it too. Ricciardo Best (talk) 11:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

If it is obviously notable, then add the sources. It would also help if you would learn how to add sources, and how to structure articles, and what are valid sources, and what notability is. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:NSPORTSEVENT states that "The final series (or single game when there is not a series) determining the champion of a top league" will pass said guideline. The race was the final race of the season, and it also determined the champion.

Okay, so what? NSPORTSEVENT does not trump GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Articles do not need to pass both GNG and the specific notability guideline of their subject. --Ricciardo Best (talk) 11:46, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, they do. SNG's do not override GNG. Sorry, don't know where you came up with that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Ricciardo Best: Please see Talk:2022_Seoul_ePrix#Notability. I'd also like to note that WP:NSPORTS explicitly states in the first line that "The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline" (emphasis removed; link added). Anarchyte (talk) 15:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Category:Members of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts Category:Associates of the Royal Canadian Academy Category:Ernest Thompson Seton

The category:Members of the RCA, an editor has created 2 sub categories which need to be removed. Members means both "full" and associates. Also I looked up Ernest Thompson Seton and he was an Associate. Could you take a look at this when you get a chance? Thanks, Joan arden murray (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

"Look Up!" to Draft

Here is why the article should not have been moved to Draft.

The term "Look Up!", has been used in different calendar years by established journalists, in established publications. These established journalist are, Sharon Mizota, Chadd Scott, and Brett Bralley. The following publications are the publications that used the term "Look Up" in the description of Artists' Billboards, Forbes, Los Angeles Times, and the Newsroom for San Jose State University.

One of the contributing sources in support of this article "Look Up!" is Sharon Mizota. Mizota is a recipient of an Andy Warhol Foundation Arts Writers Grant, and an art critic whose writing appears regularly in the Los Angeles Times. In 2008, the title of a Los Angeles Times article she authored on Artists' Billboards was entitled "Look, up in the sky! It’s women’s art."

Another one of the contributing sources in support of this article "Look Up!" is Chadd Scott. Scott covers art and travel for Forbes.com in addition to owning and operating seegreatart.art. In 2020, Scott's opening to his Forbes article on Artists' Billboards went, "Look up. You may see work by your favorite artist."

The third contributing source in support of this article "Look Up!" is Brett Bralley. Bralley is an editorial, marketing, and UX writer and editor specializing in science, technology, and innovation. Her work has appeared in higher education outlets, such as Washington Square (San José State University), UAB Magazine (The University of Alabama at Birmingham), Celebrate (Hoffman Media), Coastal Living (Meredith Corporation), Lookout Alabama, The Anniston Star, and more. In 2021, Bralley's opening to her San Jose State University's Newsroom article on Artists' Billboards went, "There’s a new art exhibit opening this week in San Jose — but you won’t find it in a gallery. Instead, look up."

If multiple reliable publications have discussed a topic, as the case here, across multiple calendar years, this improves the topic's probability of being covered in Wikipedia.

The subject matter of these Artists' Billboards that have been described as Look Up! are based on the use of billboards for addressing social issues. The term Artists' Billboards is based on an academic paper by Colombian artist Patricia Correa published in Theory Now. Theory Now is a peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal of contemporary critical thought.

Every reference in this "Look Up!" article is supported by reliable sources who speak to an art exhibition on a billboard as being related to a social justice issue.

Three references, two of which occurred in the same calendar year used the term/phrase Look Up! for mass public dissemination. In 2015, The Billboard Creative was the curator of an event featuring 14 artists from seven countries. In utilizing the services of PR Newswire, published the following press release, "Look Up! Billboard Creative Art Show Open on the Streets of L.A. Through May 15."

In 2021, Silicon Valley Fine Art and Real Estate Broker Anna D. Smith curated two billboard events. In utilizing the services of Eventbrite, an online event management and ticketing website for mass dissemination, published the following titles to these events, "Silicon Valley's Newest 'Look Up!' Exhibition Tickets, Oct 18 - Nov 17, 24-hours, and "Anna D. Smith's 'Look Up! 2' Hope & Beauty Art Exhibition Tickets, Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 1:00 AM."

Published means, for Wikipedia's purposes, any source that was made available to the public in some form.

The reliability of a source depends on context. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Wikipedia article and is an appropriate source for that content.

Across decades, in different calendar years, Artists' Billboard curators and journalists have used the term or phrase "Look Up!" to describe an art exhibition involving Billboards. I sincerely hope you will restore the article back to Wikipedia.

Selena Ebony (talk) 00:43, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Moved back to mainspace. And nominated for deletion. I had hoped you would work on the article in draft to improve it, but alas, you did not. There is not a single in-depth source in the article. Please familiarize yourself with WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

The Boardwalk Station redirect

I was wondering why you redirected The Boardwalk station to GRT. This makes no sense as the station page is now gone CanadianBrick1 (talk) 04:01, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

As was stated in the edit summary, there were not enough in-depth references from independent, reliable secondary sources to meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:42, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

I was never given a chance to fix it. With the Stanley Park page there was a 7 day warning CanadianBrick1 (talk) 17:07, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

"Edward Eaton Mason" to draft

I am happy to work in draft status. I understand much that is irrelevant to presenting Mason's achievements needs to be cut. I have added statements to the my user page and the draft talk page to address UPE and COI issues. Do I need to do more for the UPE and COI issues? I did not click "Submit your draft for review" but there has been a lot of revisions made. I will continue seek your and other's help. ParaDocs (talk) 04:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Saudi Vellakka

Hey,

Talking here as you were reviewed my old articles, I have created a new article Saudi Vellakka, could please take a look ? Ameer al safar (talk) 08:12, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

November 2022

Please analyze both the articles.

1.Panwar (Surname)

2.Rautela

TheManishPanwar (talk) 15:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

David Mayer page

Hi, can you please explain to me what is the problem with the David Mayer page I created? Surely the dab page should be called 'David Mayer (disambiguation', not 'David Mayer', which is the name of the professor in question. Are you suggesting I create a page called 'David Mayer (academic)', and then leave the 'David Mayer' page as a dab page? Some guidance on this would be useful, as I keep on asking for clarification and I'm just told 'that is the protocol' without any guidelines being referred to. Thanks. Jwslubbock (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Anyway, since I've got no response to my request for guidance on this, I've created David_Mayer_(academic). I still don't understand why I've had to create this page, rather than having the guy called David Mayer on the page David Mayer, and the dab page on a page called David Mayer (disambiguation). If you could please explain to me why I am wrong, I would be very grateful, so that I know what the rules are on this next time. Thanks. Jwslubbock (talk) 17:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You're going to be very disappointed if you expect instant responses. As I have explained, your David Mayer is not the primary topic, so hijacking a long-standing dab page was inappropriate. See WP:NOPRIMARY. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The reason is because David Mayer is a disambiguation page; note that it has links to multiple people named "David Mayer". If you feel that your David Mayer is the person that is more prominent than the others, then start a move request on the talk page and see if there is consensus to do so. Primefac (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Well he's the only person on the dab list who is actually called David Mayer. The others are all called something slightly different. But hey, no worries, I've just made a separate page for him to avoid having this discussion. Jwslubbock (talk) 18:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Raso, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) Mangoe (talk) 13:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Deletion of List of years in video games

The AfD in 2017 for List of years in video games was for an WP:OR article that listed video games. The article that you blanked was an unrelated article of the same name in the Lists of years by topic series. I'd like to restore it as part of the series. How do I go about showing that distinction? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:47, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Took care of it. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:39, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I didn't want to restore it without talking to you about it first. Is there a procedure for reusing a deleted title, or is it usually just handled on a case-by-case basis like this? Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Just on a case by case basis. The only time you don't want to use an existing title, if it's a long-standing redirect or disambiguation page. Those pages can have history and/or links which need to be preserved. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Henry W. Brown

Onel5969: The issue is that the subject of your article is not the primary subject. Most likely, there is no primary subject. So once you create your article, a hatnote on both pages would suffice. 09:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

My reply: I see... So I should add said hatnote in Henry William Brown the ace and Henry W. Brown the footballer and that's it?

I want to stress the fact that EVERY link to Henry W. Brown is related to the footballer. There is not a single link to Henry W. Brown that is related to the ace. I made sure of that. So there is no point in keeping Henry W. Brown as a redirect to Henry William Brown.

Thank you for trying to find a way.

PS: Do you know know how to archive sources/references? 14:14, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

You probably missed the notification of my reply, so I am bringing it to you. Barr Theo (talk) 21:40, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Neff, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 05:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for your work reviewing the articles I make. I don't know how you do it but it always seems to be you who gets there first. Thanks a bunch! Schminnte (talk) 17:52, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Another redirect question

Hey, it's me again. :) I have another redirect question. I wanted to double-check that Lock 3 doesn't get mentioned as a neighbourhood elsewhere like it was before it was a redirect as it's a lock that ships pass through [3]. Is there a way to see what pages use a specific redirect? I'm assuming there's some way to do this because I'm fairly certain I've done something like this in the past, but I can't remember how. If you know, I'd appreciate an answer. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

On the left hand side of the screen, under "Tools", there's a link for "What links here". That will show you which articles are linked to that redirect. That particular redirect is mentioned on 20 article pages. I think that's what you're asking. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:49, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Luzena, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 05:12, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Team Anglès

As the creator of English Colony of Barcelona Football Team, I am here to inform you that I have made a mistake. When I created this page I was convinced that Sociedad de Foot-Ball de Barcelona and Team Anglès were the same entity, so I placed it all on the same page, but I have now realized that they ain't. The Sociedad was an entity that existed between 1892 and 1896, and who in addition to Britons also had Catalans and even Frenchman in its ranks. Team Anglès, on the other hand, was a team that was formed three years later, existing in 1899 and 1900, and whose players were strictly British (not once a non-Briton played for them). I thought they were the same thing because a few players played for both sides, but inheriting a few players from a deceased club doesn't mean you are the same.

When you reverted my changes you justified it as "no reason to split", but I know that the real reason that led you to revert my changes was because of my use of the redirect page (Team Anglès). And I get it, redirect pages should not be recycled because it screws up the links. But I can assure you that every single link will be corrected and re-linked accordingly.

So... I am here to ask you if you will let me correct my mistake. I swear I will never recycle a redirect page ever again.Clenixon (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind inquiry. But, that's not exactly why I reverted. While using an existing redirect to create an article may be inappropriate, that's not the usual case. Particularly for what you did. You took a redirect to the subject which you were talking about and fleshed it into an article. That's perfectly acceptable. The other issue was renaming the target article, as per naming conventions, it should remain the English title, see WP:ENGLISH. And your split was not clear, but based on what you describe above appears to be completely warranted. Feel free to reverse the redirect on the Angles piece, and then excise the info from the target, and you should be fine. Hope this makes sense. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:07, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! There is just one little issue... I cannot reverse the change name because now the Sociedad de Foot-Ball de Barcelona already exists. Or should I rename it with the English title of "Barcelona Football Society" (English)? Maybe its better to leave this matter with you. Would it be too much to ask you for you to be the one to reverse the redirect on the Angles piece, and then excise the info from the target?

Once again thank you very much, and keep reviewing my pages. George Cockram, ‎Luis Arana (footballer), Pedro Larrañaga (footballer), Pedro Larrañaga,

Frederico Pinto Basto, First football match in Portugal and 1901–02 Athletic Bilbao season are still unreviewed.

Take care. Clenixon (talk) 15:00, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Looks like somebody beat me to it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Redirect tag on Inside Voices / Outside Voices

Why did you add a redirect tag to Inside Voices / Outside Voices? The page seemed to be complete. Could you please remove it and restore the changes I and some others made? SaltieChips (talk) 12:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

As was explained in the edit summary, there was not enough in-depth coverage to show that it passed WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:41, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for responding. Could you please restore the changes as a draft so I can work on it some more? SaltieChips (talk) 15:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Done. Let me know if you'd like me to take a look when you've finished. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:25, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I added some more citations. Not quite sure I have enough yet: I've only created a few pages from scratch, and I struggle with finding sources. When you can, could you please let me know if the page is ready to be published? SaltieChips (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I missed this post. Regarding the sources: the Rough Trade link doesn't take me to an actual reference, just to the website. The Vanyaland reference isn't in-depth about the album, just says they announced the release of it, and then scheduled a tour, and does talk about the tour. Similarly, the Exron source is about the Tour's cancellation, not the album. The Stanford Daily is a nice review, but I don't know if it's a reliable source, due to its editorial policy. But if you could find 2 or 3 more reviews like that, from non-student newspapers, that would work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:26, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! SaltieChips (talk) 12:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

24th IFFI

It is a series of International Film Festival editions, it is notable, there is no second guess to it. Only thing is it was non competitive edition by directorate of film festivals. Kindly do not disrupt the flow. One Independent source is already added, soon will update more, in the mean time u may tag them. Request you not to redirect without discussion.Fostera12 (talk) 17:04, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Until you supply in-depth references from independent, reliable sourcing. Request you follow policy and provide sourcing so as to show notability. Perhaps you should work on them in draft. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

The basic notability is already established, issue is with additional secondary sources, will do it by another 24 hrs, pls be patient, and tag the article in the mean time. Will handle article live, no need of draft. I respect your wisdom, and expect the same from you. Thank you Fostera12 (talk) 17:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

You really don't get the notability criteria do you. And that's 3 times you resorted to personal attacks. Do it again, and I will report you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:38, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

I do get what notability is, and I have now updated the articles with a ton of secondary sources. I still have lot of work to do on IFFI, let me do my work. I did not attack you as far as I am aware. If you felt that way i truly regret for inconvenience caused to you. Thank you.Fostera12 (talk) 09:04, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Calling someone a vandal is a personal attack. The fact that you do not recognize that as a personal attack is troubling. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

sorry to trouble you. I regret addressing you like that, will take care going forward. Thank you for your patience.Fostera12 (talk) 13:33, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. And for your work on bringing those articles up to snuff. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Boquillas, Arizona for deletion

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Ginn & Company

Hello Onel5969,

Can you please explain your rationale for reverting the expansion of Ginn & Company from a redirect to a stub?

–Mabeenot (talk) 04:31, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Because it did not have enough in-depth coverage to show it meets WP:GNG. One the three sources (Wiley), seems to be a brief mention, and one is a non-reliable source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:57, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The sources I used came from existing articles about Edwin Ginn and Athenaeum Press, both of which have few references but are notable in large part because of their connection to Ginn & Company. Meanwhile, there has been an article since 2006 for the spinoff/competitor D. C. Heath and Company and that article has just a single source. A cursory Google search brings up more references to both of these long defunct publishing companies and their dead founders that could be added.

The Notability guidelines are not to be used as a bludgeon to kill stubs as soon as they're created. Please be WP:BOLD in helping to grow the article, or discuss your concern on the article's talk page.

–Mabeenot (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. WP:OSE isn't really a strong argument. There are a lot of crappy articles on WP, if the company is notable, there should be sources to back that up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Looney Tunes Super Stars' Sylvester and Hippety Hopper: Marsupial Mayhem

Dear Onel5969

I strongly disagree with the decision to remove and redirect this article's webpage to Looney Tunes Golden Collection. None of these cartoons appear on the Golden Collections and since there is no comprehensive Looney Tunes set- it is important for animation collectors to know where they can find each individual cartoon. This DVD is one of the most important Looney Tunes sets since it is one of the few that contain a character's entire filmography - in this case, Hippety Hopper and Sylvester Jr. If lack of sources is the problem I've also found another source from Jerry Beck at Cartoon Brew from 2013. [[4]] Luxoman237 (talk) 07:19, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

If it's one of the most popular does not make it notable. If it is notable, there should be in-depth coverage about it in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:59, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Highland Park, Cochise County, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 03:39, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Rascal Reporters article

Hi, I have made updates to the article at Rascal Reporters based on the tags added to the page - I have included more secondary sources on the page for key biographical information, including a mainstream music publication Prog (magazine) which I hope should also help with notability. I was hoping you might be able to review it when you have a chance? Djzap (talk) 04:37, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Nice job, I've marked it reviewed and removed the tags. You'll want to find a better source for Gore's death though. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Black Bear Spring, Arizona for deletion

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

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

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

Mangoe (talk) 04:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Emilis Velyvis notability

Dear Onel5969, I have introduced a new section "Selected awards and nominations" to satisfy your expectations for notability criteria. I hope you will observe that Sidabrine gerve (Silver Crane) award is the most prestigious award in Lithuanian cinematography. I ask you to consider notability criteria satisfied and remove the tag. With mere four million speakers worldwide, Lithuania has much lesser audience for any media, be it music, cinematography or literature. The nation nevertheless should be given support and fair playing ground. Sincerely, User:Ttk371 — Preceding undated comment added 08:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately, winning the Silver Crane, while admirable, is not enough on its own to guarantee notability. Currently, the article does not have a single in-depth reference about him from independent, reliable sources. imdb is not a reliable source, the Variety article is a simple mention, and the Mestia piece is a primary, unreliable source as well. You need at least 3 in-depth sources about him. They do not have to be in English, if that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your precious feedback. I have added content referenced by non-English news media sources. At the same time I question, how winning an Oscar award by American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is notable enough yet winning an award by an equivalent institution, Lithuanian Academy of Cinematography is not equally notable. Please allow me a lighthearted joke, is this the case where mere size matters?

delfi.lt 1 calls Velyvis garsus režisierius (famous director).

Verily yours, Tom User:ttk371 Ttk371 (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Draft

Hello. Onel5969 Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You can check the article when you have time. Magomed Shataev--Товболатов (talk) 11:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

The article is also available in 3 languages.--Товболатов (talk) 11:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Moving to draft space

I just came here to say that I appreciate constructive feedback, but considering the subject matter of my pages you moved to draftspace, a tag would be more than enough, or better yet, you could help complete them if you have the ability to do so, but after seeing some of the posts here you seem to already have had quite a number of people complaining about the same thing. Might want to tone it down a little. Wareno (talk) 20:55, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Well, not sure what you're talking about in terms of the article. And yes, there are quite a few less talented editors who don't think that WP policy and/or guidelines do not apply to them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:10, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

WP:GEOLAND

State highways are state highways. International road networks (such as the International E-road network), Interstate, national, state and provincial highways are typically notable. Of course you can try an AFD but seeing how the last few went (WP:USRD/P) it might not go well for your side. Rschen7754 01:05, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Actually, the correct SNG (which you quoted, even if you pointed to the wrong one) is WP:GEOROAD. But not surprisingly, you fail to understand the key word in the statement, "typically". In other words, at the top of the entire page reads, "A geographical area, location, place or other object is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are, in the case of artificial features, independent of the bodies which have a vested interest in them." SNG's do not trump GNG. In addition, you have continued to re-add uncited original research. Comments such as "read a map" have nothing to do with WP policy. In discussions on the Road project talk page, WP:MAPCITE was cited as a rationale for doing what you are doing, however, that is an essay, not policy. WP:OR, strictly says, "Do not analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so" and "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." It also goes on to state, "Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them." Maps are primary sources. Further, MAPCITE, which is the rationale folks on the Road project are using to insert the original research actually says not to do what you are doing, "When describing the route of a waterway, mountain range, road, railroad, etc., a single map should not be used the sole source used to provide the description." Might I suggest you voluntarily revert your continued inclusion of uncited material, which as per WP:BURDEN and WP:DISRUPTSIGNS might be considered disruptive editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

There are so many things wrong with that interpretation of policy that I do not know where to begin. --Rschen7754 04:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

lmao. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:58, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm choosing not to answer because I just get the feeling that you want to watch 30,000 road articles burn and nothing I say will make any difference. I'm happy to engage in a civil discussion that is not condescending and authoritarian. (And by the way, before you write me or the entire roads team off as intellectually dishonest, you may wish to review these: [5] [6][7][8][9]). --Rschen7754 04:40, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Flag of Roraima

Hello. Can you see if now the article Flag of Roraima is ok? Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 13:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Nice job. Done. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Reversion/deletion of Christian Ward

In what way does winning two Eisner awards, and having his work nominated for other comics awards, not fall under WP:AUTHOR #4: The person's work (or works) has received significant critical attention? (I should have put a dab notice on the top - my bad there.) -Mairi (talk) 15:50, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The Eisner Awards are not a major award. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

That is debatable; they are certainly one of the most notable American comics awards, as the article on them makes clear. His work has received other critical attention as well, including nominations for several other awards. Even if Christian Ward ultimately isn't judged to be notable, it certainly is enough of a claim of significance and notability that reversion is unwarranted. -Mairi (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

No, not debatable. There are lots of awards which are significant in their own particular niches (animation, lbqt, etc.) which are not considered at the same level on WP as notable awards such as the Grammys, Oscars, Pulitzers, etc. Second, as was mentioned in the edit summary, if recreated, it should be done as a new article, not hijacking an existing redirect, which has numerous links connected to it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Women's Rugby League European Championship

I question your notability tag on Women's Rugby League European Championship especially when 2022 Women's Rugby League European Championship B has not been given such a tag. Sure the former in a work in progress and needs expanding, but if a single edition of a tournament is notable then surely the tournament as a whole is also. Mn1548 (talk) 16:07, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The latter is well-sourced and shows notability. The former is not. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:09, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

INS Abhimanyu

@Onel5969,

I saw that you put a tag on my article INS Abhimanyu. I figured if you could give me some advice I could fix it and make it better. What are your suggestions?

अथर्व कॉल (talk) 16:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. You need to add several (at least 3) references from independent, reliable sources which go in-depth about the base. That's all. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Richard Cooke (journalist)

Hi, I see you've moved Richard Cooke (journalist) to draft. Can you explain what could be done to improve it? Jimmyjrg (talk) 21:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Well, first and foremost, you need to deal with the COI/UPE issue. Please see WP:COI and WP:UPE. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

I didn't think it was a COI. Granted, the organisation I work for was a partner in a conference he recently spoke at, but I personally have no relationship with him and only spoke with him for a minute when a member of the audience suggested I take a photo of him to add to Wikidata, which I did. Later, in my own time, I decided to make his Wikipedia page after reading more about him. I wasn't paid to create the article and the article doesn't mention the organisation I work for or could be seen as promoting the conference since it's already happened and isn't mentioned either. I can add a COI tag to the article if you like, but I'm still not sure there is a COI. Jimmyjrg (talk) 21:59, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Turkey Flat, Arizona for deletion

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

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

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Emilis Velyvis vs. Leander Haußmann

Dear Onel5969, per your suggestion I have enriched the article with quoting three (3) independent, reliable non-English media sources, delfi.lt, Lithuanian TV3 and Lietuvos rytas. All three sources publish exclusive articles devoted to the subject, unlike the Variety which, according to you, only mentions the subject. I ask you to compare the Emilis Velyvis article with the article about German film director of equal weight Leander Haußmann. The Haußmann's article cites a single reference yet invokes no questioning of notability. You have advised that imdb is not reliable yet confusingly, your own article Astrid Bodin relies on three (3) references from the same imdb and one (1) reference from the Swedish sibling of imdb.

I respectfully request to consider Velyvis notability satisfied and remove the tag.

Sincerely yours, Tom Ttk371 (talk) 05:35, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi. First, you should learn how to format references, which can be found at WP:CIT, second, please be aware that interviews, which are considered primary sources, do not go towards notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:08, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

1. How does reference formatting affect notability criteria? I have merged and otherwise improved the references using your Astrid Bodin example.

2. Neither Wikipedia:Notability_(people) nor Wikipedia:Independent_sources cited in the notability tag you have applied mention the word interview.Wikipedia:Independent_sources#No_guarantee_of_reliability mentions the word interview once; it discusses an example of using a tabloid source. None of the three media sources referenced in the article (delfi.lt, Lithuanian TV3 and Lietuvos rytas ) are tabloids.

I'd love to productively improve a Wikipedia article, but there must be no double standard. I repeat my respectful request to remove the notability tag. Yours, Tom Ttk371 (talk) 09:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

If you go to WP:PRIMARY, and look under note d, you'll see that interviews are primary sources. And regarding reference formatting, it has nothing to do with reliability, it just makes you a better WP editor. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Can you please outline a roadmap to facilitate the notability of Emilis Velyvis solved? I am afraid our effort has been lacking productivity. Whenever I work to satisfy your expectations, expressed or implied, I come back to discover new, very likely irrelevant issues like the reference formatting. Please be not primarily concerned about making me a better WP editor.

I hope we are not alien to Immanuel Kant's philosophy of ethics, what applies to one (Astrid Bodin,Leander Haußmann,Algirdas Gurevičius) shall apply to all (Emilis Velyvis.)

Thank you, Tom Ttk371 (talk) 12:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Well then, civility is a huge thing. I have no issue with helping an editor who wants to understand. I do not have time to argue with an editor who is simply looking to argue. And with that, please stop posting to my talk page. If you want to understand, that's fine, but if you want to insult and argue, go away. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:10, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you check my new article Sreejith Sarang ?

Hi there @Onel5969,

As you review my articles, I just want to let you know that I've created a new article, Sreejith Sarang, could you please check and review ? Ameer al safar (talk) 08:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)