Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969/Archive 87

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 80←Archive 85Archive 86Archive 87Archive 88Archive 89Archive 90

Archive 75:February 2021

Are you sure?

The source says Allium iranicum Wendelbo, and the species is found in Iran. Is is even possible that there is another? Abductive (reasoning) 15:22, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Abductive, the way I read it, the source is for Allium pyrenaicum Costa & Vayr. And there is a page for Allium pyrenaicum. But no, I'm never positive when it comes to taxonomy, that's why I ask for help for time to time. If you feel I've read the source incorrectly, please feel free to revert. Onel5969 TT me 15:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
I see, I didn't copy-and-replace properly. It is fixed now. Abductive (reasoning) 15:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Abductive, no worries. I would fix some of these myself, but I don't want to make a mistake. Have moved it back to mainspace. Onel5969 TT me 15:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

A small token of love for the latest review you gave for my biographical article on the television actress Jiya Shankar. Thanks a million for this generous support and wishing you great success in Wikipedia ahead! :) --Aleyamma38 (talk) 16:11, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Potential AfD

Hi Onel5969. I have noticed your high level of expertise when it comes to Wikipedia so I come to you with a question. While on Category:Wushu practitioners I found Serge Augier. Nearly all the sources (which serve the purpose of only listing the subject's works) are from the subject himself, the subject is not associated with a notable organization or martial arts style, and the subject's mentions in interviews do not seem that significant. The mention of Stéphane Allix seems to be a trivial attempt at association with someone of greater importance. I was going to write the AfD script on this article but since I am still new here, I am looking for some opinions. What do you think? Yinglong999 (talk) 01:24, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

New Books Network - questions about the article

Hi Onel5969,

I am writing to you about the New Book's Network Wikipedia site that you deleted. It was my first article, so I am kindly asking for help, what I should do so it can go back on the page. I am a big supporter of NBN and I know personally the founder. You wrote that there was a questioned notability. Here is why NBN should have its own Wikipedia page: It is connected to OUP, Princeton UP, Amherst College, LitHub as well as the many guests we've had who are very notable (e.g., Jered Diamond, Francis Fukuyama, etc). NBN is the only "crowd-sourced" podcast project. Our hosts (500 of them) are volunteers, just like editors on Wikipedia. It is worth mentioning that Marshall Poe was inspired by Wikipedia when he created NBN. Besides, it is the largest podcast enterprise in the world in terms of the number of episodes it has produced and does produce. There are no other podcasts that have produced > 9500 episodes or any that publish 50 episodes a week. On Wikipedia, there is even a separate section for podcasting companies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_podcasting_companies - I believe that NBN should have a spot here. Please share with me your thoughts, I hope we can find a solution. Many thanks.

Best regards, Mabl2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mabl2 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

About page 1ST

Hello, a page that I created about SixTones' studio album, 1ST, was gone, and it leads to SixTones' page instead. Since you're the one who reviewed the page, I was wondering why does it is gone. Is it gone, or just moved. Either way I'm left without a reason.

Thank you in advance. --Yukinotane (talk) 12:34, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Mats J. Stensrud

Hello Onel5969, apologies for this random message. I've started reviewing drafts at AfC for a few days and came across Draft:Mats J. Stensrud, which cites a lot of academic journals as sources. I have seen you in several AfD discussions, so I wanted to drop by and ask whether this passes WP:NACADEMIC, and can be safely accepted. I'd appreciate your opinion. Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 15:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Ashleyyoursmile, Never apologize for asking questions. This is an interesting case. They certainly don't seem to pass WP:GNG, but you're right in looking at WP:NSCHOLAR. They have an H index of 11, which is not high, and their citation count is anemic. Of the 8 criteria at that SN, he doesn't seem to qualify for any of them. That is, except for the possiblity of #5. And that hinges on what is meant by the term in the lead, "head of the Chair of Biostatistics at the Deparment". Being the head of a department doesn't meet the criteria, but if he does hold a named chair, then he does. Unfortunately, I can't discern if it is an actual named chair or not. I'll ping David Eppstein, who is my go-to editor on NSCHOLAR questions, and see what they have to say. Onel5969 TT me 15:28, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. WP:NACADEMIC, like a few other subject-specific guidelines, seems a bit tricky to me which is why I wanted to ask for a second opinion. I'll leave the draft for another reviewer to review for now. Thanks for taking a look. --Ashleyyoursmile! 15:37, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
I left my evaluation as an AFC comment on the draft. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
David Eppstein, Thanks. Do you have any thoughts on his position, would that qualify as a "named chair"? Onel5969 TT me 18:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
He's an assistant professor. So no. The "named chair" part of WP:PROF only applies to chairs that mean another step beyond full professor. When a chair means something else (I think here, that he's an independent head of a research group, something that is automatically true of most assistant professors in the US) then it doesn't count for that criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
David Eppstein, thanks again. That was what was causing me indecision. Onel5969 TT me 18:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
David Eppstein, thank you very much for the comments. Ashleyyoursmile! 20:26, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:New pages patrol/School

Hello, I want to participate as an apprentice. Are you available tutor? ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Ok, sorry. I will look for another tutor. Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
A.WagnerC, sorry I haven't responded, things got a little backed up for me in real life. I am going through my first NPP school right now. Would you mind holding off for a few weeks until I finish that one? Onel5969 TT me 15:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Oh.. Sorry. No problem then. I can wait. Best regards and thank you for reply. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 16:15, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
A.WagnerC, hi. Hopefully, you're still interested. I feel I have enough of a grasp to take on a second student. So if you still want to proceed, I've created your NPP School page, you can find it here: User:Onel5969/NPPSchool/A.WagnerC. From this point forward, anything to do with your NPP School, we should talk about on that page, or its talk page. That way we won't have to wade through a bunch of other comments. Welcome aboard. Onel5969 TT me 21:32, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Hii

Hi today https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deniz_Unay My article has been approved I want to say the following about the article I have been working on this article for more than 4 months I took into account all rejections and also got information and support from editors in wikipedia support chat You can see developments on this subject on the Talk Page In addition, the other day, this article was rejected in the form of a copy, and this error was corrected, now the article has been unfairly deleted. There is no charge for this article I don't know how to defend myself on this issue I also added the best resources about Deniz UNAY, if you look at google searches, dozens of valuable resources can be found. Please don't be so cruel and unfair I hope you can help greetings — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emremer (talk • contribs) 20:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Eight Verses of Bernard of Clairvaux

Hi Onel, just curious, because you added a refimprove tag to this page today. What is it that you think needs better referencing? --Melchior2006 (talk) 19:22, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Melchior2006, none. That was a misclick on my part. Thanks for asking, I've removed it. Onel5969 TT me 19:45, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
thanks! Glad I asked. Melchior2006 (talk) 20:20, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Alberto Souto

Hi, I'm sure you'll know the answer to this... I recently received a notification that you had reviewed this page. However, the history shows that I did not create it but that I moved a previous draft from a sandbox leaving a re-direct. The 'owner' of the sandbox has then come along and removed the re-direct (see history) and started a different new draft for which I get the credit (or the blame) and often receive messages in respect of items I know nothing about... And the creator does not. This happens quite frequently even though I am reluctant now to move drafts from sandboxes. Is there a simple solution to this? I have seen reviewers moving items from sandboxes without leaving a re-direct? Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 15:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Eagleash, yeah, it has to do with the page mover right, take a look at Wikipedia:Page mover. With that, you can move pages without leaving a redirect. This also comes in very handy when doing round robin switches. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 15:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks that's much appreciated! I'll look into 'page mover'. Eagleash (talk) 16:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Walter Baily's Motor

Hello,

I have just received a message for speedy deletion of Walter Baily's Motor, although the message doesn't appears on the article-page. There are several version of Polyphase Electric Currents and Alternate-current Motors on Internet Archive and one is in Public Domain (at least that how the book is described). What the case when there are many different versions, free and non-free to use, of same source material?

Thank you, Marino108LFS (talk 23:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Marino108LFS, yeah, I wasn't sure about the copyright status, since you simply cut and paste from the source, but an admin checked it, and it apparently is ok. Onel5969 TT me 21:19, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I need help for a merge

Hi, I saw that you reverted my edits. I'm sorry if I made some mistake but I really don't know the procedure to merge the 2006 Russian march article with Russian march. Could you please help me? Thank you very much.--Mhorg (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

There is also this article, but I don't understand how it works: [1].--Mhorg (talk) 12:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Mhorg, Hi. The issue is that the article appears to only be about the 2006 event. So moving it to a generic term doesn't seem to make sense. Do you have sourcing to expand the article to cover multiple years? Onel5969 TT me 17:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
I just added the 2017 and 2020 russian marches, do you think it's ok now to make the merge? Next days I will add infos of other russian marches, as soon as possible.--Mhorg (talk) 20:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Mhorg, yes, but I'm not exactly sure of the exact correct process. Most likely a histmerge should be done. I'm going to ping some admins to see what they think. Pinging Primefac, Anthony Appleyard - the articles in question are 2006 Russian march (the current incarnation of the article, which has history), and Russian march, which is currently a redirect to the 2006 page, but also has history, since that page was merged. Thanks for any input. Onel5969 TT me 21:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you @Anthony Appleyard:, so, couldn't we just delete the [Russian march] redirect and then move the article from 2006 Russian march to "Russian march"?--Mhorg (talk) 08:43, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Michelle M. Pillow

I have contested the proposed speedy deletion tag from Michelle M. Pillow because she is a notable author and I believe the page would be beneficial to readers. She was recognized by the Romance Writers of America (RWA) for a prolific career writing over one hundred books. She's multi-published by various traditional publishing houses, with some works out of print, and independently published. I've referenced her notability via sources such as the New York Times, USA Today, and Authors Guild. She's also listed on IMDB. I also listed all of her works and referenced the Internet Speculative Database. What part of the article is it that you have an issue with or feel is an advertisement?

Thank you,

User:Jmgamble1981 (User talk:Jmgamble1981) 11:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Jmgamble1981, Hi. First, it's written in a non-neutral tone. Phrases like "award-winning" are only inserted in articles in attempts to puff up the importance of the subject. Inclusion of a list of non-notable awards is also an indication of promotionalism. When you combine that with the lists of works, it reads like a promo brochure. If you re-write it in a neutral tone, then the lists are simple lists of works. The strongest claim to notability is her bestselling status, but that would need citations from independent, reliable sources to verify. Hope this helps. Would you like me to move it into draft so you can work on it? Onel5969 TT me 17:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Yes, please move the article to draft rather than deleting it. I will revise it. Thank you! User:Jmgamble1981 (User talk:Jmgamble1981) 12:50, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Jmgamble1981, Done. Good luck. Onel5969 TT me 18:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

ČSD Class T 211.0 moved to draftspace

Hello Onel5969. I had partially translated the Czech version of this page in the same format, generally referring to 'Malý atlas lokomotiv 2007'. The German page is also the same. I've now included a second source and used it to reference several facts in the English article. Can you make any other suggestions? Wkmdjay (talk) 19:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Wkmdjay, hi. Yeah, articles with a single source, unless they meet an SN automatic notability criteria (e.g. like a populated place, or a state senator), are ripe for deletion. When you add that second source, it makes it easier to remain in mainspace, but that article still needs more sourcing. For example, in the lead you mention 627 were made, but that isn't in either of the 2 sources. You need to provide a source for that, along with any other currently uncited assertions in the article. If you got that from the German article, and it was unsourced there, it should be removed from our article, unless a source can be found. Other WP's don't necessarily have the same standards of sourcing as English WP. Hope this helps, and don't hesitate to ask me to take another look. Onel5969 TT me 21:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Ricky Meinhold

I removed your proposal template to delete the article over concerns on notability. Check my edit summary for the reason. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Deprodding of Ekaterina Dranets

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Ekaterina Dranets, which you proposed for deletion. Her WTA appearance came in a WTA tier IV event, which is a WTA event that meets the WP:NTENNIS requirements. 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! Iffy★Chat -- 10:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Institute of/for Community Studies

Hi there.

Can I ask why you reverted the flip between titles of the two pages, "Institute of Community Studies" and "Institute for Community Studies"? Does it not make sense for the title to reflect the current name of the Institute, not its pre-2005 name?

Thanks.

Streathamhill. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Streathamhill (talk • contribs) 13:58, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Streathamhill, as I said in the edit summary, that's a cut and paste move, which is not allowed in WP, since it hides the attribution history. See WP:CUTANDPASTE. If you don't have the page mover function, you can make the request at WP:REQUESTED MOVES. Even if you do have the page mover ability, you might not be able to, since the redirect is blocking the move. In that instance, you'd have to request the redirect be deleted to make way for the move through WP:G6 first, then move the page. The first thing you should do, however, is provide a citation showing that the name has indeed been changed. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:26, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that does help. The citation is easy enough from their website: https://icstudies.org.uk/about-us/introducing-institute-community-studies

Would a better approach be to revert the "Institute of Community Studies" entry to its 15 November 2017 version and to replace the "Institute for Community Studies" entry with the new material? That way there would be one entry for the pre-2005 Institute and one entry for the post-2019 Institute. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Streathamhill (talk • contribs) 14:41, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Streathamhill, I don't think so, there's no need for two stubs, especially if the later organization is simply a reincarnation of the earlier one. In reading the ref you provided above, it's clear the organizations are related, so they should stay the same. I think you should add a paragraph in the article which, in your own words, summarizes the contents of the above ref, and insert that reference as a footnote (see WP:CIT on how to format citations). If you do that, I can do a round-robin switch for you, which will result in the same thing you attempted, but keep the history intact. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Onel5969 TT me, I'll do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Streathamhill (talk • contribs) 14:57, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Streathamhill, round robin swap completed. Onel5969 TT me 17:41, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and guidance Onel5969 TT me! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.214.20 (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

No worries. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Message from Phoenix7119

Hi Onel5969. Thanks for reviewing my Wallace Rasmussen article. Since I'm relatively new to Wikipedia, I don't know much about the Review Process. But I plan to read more about it in the days ahead. Thank you for your time. Phoenix7119 (talk) 04:33, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Phoenix7119, you're welcome. Good luck editing on WP. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 12:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

L32 Zeppelin burial site Great Burstead

Hi @Onel5969:

I saw you moved the article Leslie William Bills to draft space a couple of days ago. Would you mind taking a look at L32 Zeppelin burial site Great Burstead, which was created by the same editor, please? The article in question relates to the former grave of the crew of Zeppelin LZ 74, which crashed in Essex, England in September 1916. (The remains of the crewmen were moved and reburied elsewhere in 1966, so the grave is now empty.) I did propose a merge of the two pages, which the editor concerned rejected and the article has now been untouched for over a week. In my opinion there are several violations of WP:NOT and the referencing is very poor.

Could you take a look at L32 Zeppelin burial site Great Burstead and, if you feel it's appropriate, move it to draft space please?

Thanks Mertbiol (talk) 15:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Mertbiol, there were quite a few issues with that article, and I agree that draftification was warranted. But not only due to the poor sourcing. The main issue is WP:COI. That editor was using WP as an advertising platform. I've moved it to draft, but if you look at the article, it indicates that they have created videos about the site, which are now posted on YouTube. Thanks for the heads up.
On another vein, have you ever thought of doing NPP work? Onel5969 TT me 15:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Onel5969:
Thanks very much for your rapid response. It's always a shame to have to jump on new editors, who are full of enthusiasm and want to do new things, but I think the actions you have taken were appropriate in this case. I don't feel I'm ready to commit to NPP work, at the moment, but thank you for asking. If I come across any similar problems, I will give you a shout!!
Thanks and best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 15:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Marios Philippides

Per WP:NSCHOLAR, Marios Philippides is one of the leading scholars of the Byzantine Empire working today. He has written, edited, or translated 7 books and is a Professor Emeritus at one of the top universities in the United States, the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. In addition, he recently appeared on screen and was a historical consultant on the Netflix series, Rise of Empires: Ottoman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdalageorgas (talk • contribs) 02:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Deprodding of Yared Negu

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Yared Negu, which you proposed for deletion. I do not believe the article has such a problem. 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! - Yitbe A-21 06:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Asking for help for Draft:ESam

@Onel5969: Hi dear Onel5969, Unfortunately, Draft:ESam article declined again by Worldbruce. I would be grateful if you could guide me. Ahassannezhad (talk) 11:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Ahassannezhad, Worldbruce gave a world-class assessment of the issues with the article in their comments on your draft. Look at the Source assessment table they created for you. It's simply outstanding. In order to count towards notability, each source should have green in all three columns. For example, the first source is independent and reliable, but it doesn't cover the subject in depth. If that article had gone into depth about the subject, it would have counted towards notability. If you had two or three of those, than notability would have been shown. Your 6th source is reliable and in-depth, but as most of the information comes from the company, through an interview, it is not independent. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 13:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Onel5969, So should I look for other sources anyway? Ahassannezhad (talk) 18:47, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Ahassannezhad, absolutely. If you feel he's notable enough, by all means do more research. However, if you think you've already done a thorough job, it might be better to turn your attention to another subject of interest. Onel5969 TT me 18:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Onel5969, Thanks for your help. Ahassannezhad (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Patrol school

When you are available, please let me know. Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

A.WagnerC, hi. I think we can start at some point next week. Are you still interested? Onel5969 TT me 00:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 00:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Whiteguru. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Vegyn, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Whiteguru (talk) 00:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Whiteguru, hi there. Any particular reason? Onel5969 TT me 00:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Onel5969 Confusion. When I got to the page, it was not marked as reviewed. I went off reading the references (which are excellent) and when I got back to the page, I clicked it and the button went grey and stayed grey and I was wondering if an (edit conflict) had happened. It should be marked as reviewed, now. Let me check. It is, I clicked it back to reviewed. As I said, confusion. --Whiteguru (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Whiteguru, no worries. That happens from time to time. I always like to check to make sure I didn't miss something. Onel5969 TT me 00:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
For Distinguished Service in Redirect Reviewing. 220 of ßorg 02:37, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
But wait, there's more! ;-) 220 of ßorg 04:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
220 of Borg, thank you! Onel5969 TT me 22:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

afc reyhane parsa

do you mind accepting this Draft:Reyhaneh Parsa, this page was built by someone else.Baratiiman (talk) 18:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Baratiiman, hi. If I were to review it, I would probably decline at this time. With only a single significant role (from what I can tell from the sourcing), they do not meet WP:NACTOR. And then there's the sourcing, about half of which is from unreliable sources (ISNA, Mehr, and Magiran), and of the other sourcing, I'm not sure of it's reliability, but they all seem to focus on her hijab controversy, so that would fall under WP:BIO1E. The one decent article and source is the Radio Farda article. If you can find more sourcing like that, it would be good to go. Onel5969 TT me 22:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Live in Berlin 1991 Vol. I & II Deletion

Hi there, it appears yourself and User:Whiteguru have decided to speedily delete my pages for Live in Berlin 1991 Vol. I & II. Would it be possible for you to allow me to retrieve the information on these pages? I spent a considerable amount of time on them and had made them for my father. The warning I had been given was that they did not meet the WP:Notability (Music) guidelines for reliable references, despite all other studio albums pages by this artist having less references than both of my pages and no information on why the references I had provided were not suitable. I was under impression that I had fixed these issues. Thanks, iangpark (talk) 21:31, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Iangpark, hi. All the information is still there, the pages have simply been turned into a redirect to the group. If you go to your contributions page, and click on the link for each of the albums, you'll see that they are now redirect pages. If you then click on that redirect's history page, you can see that all the information is still there in history. I redirected them as an WP:ATD, since they are a credible search term for someone looking into the band. If you look at WP:NALBUM, you can see what the criteria are for albums (the big ones are did it chart; was it certified gold; or has it been nominated for one of the 4 big music awards (they're listed there). If it has done any of those things, it would most likely be considered notable. But you have to provide a footnote for any of those things. Also, if there are several reviews of the albums in reliable venues (not blogs, fansites, etc.) that would also work, again, you'd have to provide the necessary refs. Simply because a group has made an album or recorded a song, doesn't necessarily make it so. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:34, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

onel5969 OK that's great - thanks for your help! iangpark (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Iangpark, no worries. And if you do find the sourcing to show notability, and want me to take another look after you add them in, let me know. Onel5969 TT me 23:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Cassiopeia. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Julian Marquez, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Cassiopeia(talk) 00:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Silvia Kal

Hi, Onel5969, I hope you are having a good day. I just saw that you nominated for elimination the article of the model and actress Silvia Kal. While it is true that she has done some minor roles in important films and has been featured in other medium-sized productions (although there are about twenty film and television appearances in total, and that's something to take into account), I think her work as a model ensures her presence in the encyclopedia. Appearing in the pages of Maxim, Vogue, Elle, Men's Health, Esquire and GQ magazines, independent and undoubtedly important media in the fashion world, is enough to prove her relevance in my humble opinion. You can check the references, where its presence in these magazines is demonstrated. In addition, being considered by artists like Snoop Dogg or David Bisbal to star in some of their music videos further highlights its importance.

Is there anything else I can do in the article to make you reconsider your decision? I have just added a handful more references to strengthen her relevance. Best regards! Darthvader2 (talk) 18:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Darthvader2, hi. While being a working model is a good thing, it doesn't satisfy WP criteria for notability. You need to have several in-depth articles about her, from independent reliable sources in order to show notability. Hope that helps. Onel5969 TT me 16:41, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your answer. If you look at the references I have included in the article, you will see extensive notes about Silvia Kal in GQ, Esquire and Maxim, magazines with years of tradition and worldwide recognition. Other references used such as Expreso, Official Press and Diez Minutos have recognition in Spain and in the Latin community. In addition, I consider that appearing in more than twenty film and television productions gives her relevance, too. Darthvader2 (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Dry humping

Why did you reverted Dry humping? is is not the same as Non-penetrative sex אלטר (talk) 13:49, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

אלטר, the concept is covered in the target. Please see WP:CFORK. Onel5969 TT me 13:55, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
It's mention only shortly as Frottage (which doesn't exclude fluid exchange) but Dry humping is more broad sense and the article is more elaborating. It's also exist in other Wikipedia as separate article. אלטר (talk) 14:01, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Do you have any objections to restore the article? אלטר (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
אלטר, sorry, but it's simply a fork of the target article. If you don't feel it has adequate coverage in the target article, feel free to expand that. Onel5969 TT me 16:41, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Undiscussed merger of Brookfield Residential

Hi Onel5969. I'd like some clarity on the situation at Brookfield Residential and Brookfield Asset Management. Here is my understanding: MrsSnoozyTurtle merged Brookfield Residential into Brookfield Asset Management without proposing or discussing this action first. This violates WP:MERGE, which states that merges must be proposed and discussed first unless the merge is uncontroversial (which is not the case here). Consequently, I reverted the merge and suggested that a discussion be initiated first. It seems to me that the appropriate next step per WP:BRD would be to discuss the merge on the Talk page, not to re-revert.

As for the actual question at hand, you and MrsSnoozyTurtle suggested that Brookfield Residential is a content fork. I think it is a legitimate WP:RELART, and I'm sure other editors would agree. Brookfield Residential is a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management, but it is also a notable company in its own right, and the two Wikipedia articles have existed independent of each other for almost nine years now. That isn't to say that an argument couldn't be made in favor of merging, but to eliminate a well-trafficked nine-year-old article without even the slightest Talk page discussion seems unreasonable. As such, I would greatly appreciate if you would restore the status quo - the unmerged version - so a proper consensus on the merge can be established first. Thank you, Dvruthven (talk) 13:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Dvruthven, sorry, but you have a coi issue in this area. The residential aspect of the asset management company is handled adequately in the parent article. That business portion does not need to have its own article as per WP:SPLIT. Onel5969 TT me 21:12, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Can you clarify what my (properly disclosed) COI has to do with this? WP:MERGE is clear that a disputed merge should not be done without proposing and discussing first. The matter should be opened on the Talk page, after the premature merge is undone.
Also, to clarify, Brookfield Residential is not the residential aspect or the business portion of Brookfield Asset Management. It is a standalone company that operates independently of its parent company. Happy to share additional detail if and when the merge is undone and a discussion on the Talk page is started. Thanks, Dvruthven (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Dvruthven, there's no dispute among non-COI editors. WP is not an advertising platform. Feel free to start a discussion on the parent article to see if you can gain enough support from non-COI editors to warrant a split from the parent article. Onel5969 TT me 14:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Debate

Hello, I would appreciate if you could please keep the debate 'merger proposal (1)' open: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Kepler_exoplanet_candidates_in_the_habitable_zone A user named SevenSpheresCelestia keeps closing the debate but no consensus has been reached after several months and editors involved. In any case, I personally believe the debate can be closed as 'consensus for 3 out of the 4 mergers proposed, and not consensus reached for KOI-4878.01'. SevenSpheresCelestia is being totally disrespectuful by attempting to merge something for which consensus hasn't been reached, and for which several editors including me have spent much time working on. Thank you for your time. Cheers. ExoEditor 19:02, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I will note that the discussion was closed and consensus determined by uninvolved editor User:Onetwothreeip. See this diff. ExoEditor is disruptively reverting this and removing my comment from the talk page. SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 19:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Česko Slovenská SuperStar (season 2)

Well feel free to delete all 6 seasons then. Season 2 was 10 years ago and has everything what season 1 and 3 has on their pages. I put lot of my time to bring all seasons to wiki and i will not spend another hours on google to find something about 10 year old TV show. And even if i would then someone could delete season 1 or 3 and i dont have time to spend hours on them. So if season 2 breaks rules then season 1, 3 and probably 4 too. And if i could not have all here then my works is for nothing and i will not care about new seasons which are planned. Especially when web about SuperStar is new after all seasons and web about season 2 is long gone. Dancer1313 (talk) 16:14, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:The Actors of China Awards

There are now more reliable references, please review the article. Thanks! Puchicatos (talk) 02:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Corrosion monitoring

I reverted your revert at Corrosion monitoring. I've been working with the main author of the draft and think this is the best way to introduce the article without overwriting the history of a previous article at this title. I have requested a histmerge from the draft although it is largely the work of one author plus some cleanup from me. I have also unreviewed it, to be treated as any other new article. Lithopsian (talk) 14:45, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Lithopsian, cool. I saw your revert, and suspected you were going to request a histmerge. Thanks for reaching out. And thanks for all your hard work. Onel5969 TT me 14:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback on corrosion monitoring article. I will correct it.Shahramrashidi (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2021 (UTC)* Please check changed bare URLs. Is ok?Shahramrashidi (talk) 19:22, 19 February 2021 (UTC).
Shahramrashidi, yes, they are ok. Onel5969 TT me 20:46, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion - guardians of the Castle

I note your objections. When I have a moment I'll rewrite the sentences that you suggest need to be "in (my) own words". If I don't manage to get round to it it as "speedily" as you wish, then I suppose the page will have to go. Thanks. Arrivisto (talk) 17:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Arrivisto, the "speedily" has nothing to do with me. WP takes copyvio issues pretty seriously. Onel5969 TT me 19:02, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
You are welcome to make some changes yourself. It's not "my baby"; I dont WP:OWN the page. Arrivisto (talk) 11:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Arrivisto, the article has now been deleted (not by me), but I just noticed this discussion. Onel is correct, we cannot host copyright violations in any publicly accessible part of this project - not in articles, drafts, or even article histories. If you want to copy material and work it up afterwards in your own words, please do that offline and only post it here once you're confident that it's sufficiently different from the original. There is more guidance at WP:COPYVIO. Thanks GirthSummit (blether) 12:06, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, you jus tagged the article Parvatadvaraka dynasty created by me for speedy nomination for deletion. This is not my first article, I have created at least 16 other articles and kinda experienced at this platform for a 11 year old kid (I am 11 yrs old). I said it in my own words all right. I don't know which sentences were totally copied from the website. 😑

Elsa Fermbäck

Hi. Hope all is well with you. Could you have a look at this one. Thanks. --John B123 (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

John B123, the stub is a basic one, pretty crappy. Looking at the single source, she has won several races (outside World Cup), and that combined with her 21st place finish I think would survive an AfD. I'll mark it reviewed, but add a single source tag to it, which is what I would have done if I simply reviewed it in queue. And dammit, don't slow down! . Seriously, thanks for all your hard work. Onel5969 TT me 22:19, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, but I think you're efforts are greater than mine. My problem with the article was that the creator kept removing the {{BLP sources}} tag I added. Cheers. --John B123 (talk) 22:23, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
John B123, I saw that. That's why I added the single source tag. Unless more sources are added, there's reasonable rationale for removing that. Onel5969 TT me 22:26, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
A neat way around the problem. Cheers. --John B123 (talk) 22:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

DangerKids

Hi Onel5969. You applied the speedy deletion to this article the other day. I understand this page was deleted once before, but I'd argue the TOOSOON label no longer applies. Six years have passed, the band have put another album out and they're still a going concern. Both of their albums have made it onto the Billboard charts. If people want to discuss the deletion again that's fair enough but just reverting the page to a redirect, to the page of a record label they're no longer on, seems wrong. C i d 14:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by C i d (talk • contribs)

Hi C i d - I understand your reasoning, and left the article for another editor to review, which now has been done. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 20:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Canadian Investment Manager

You reverted one of my edits for Chartered Investment Manager (formerly Canadian Investment Manager)

perhaps you can assist. Currently, the link redirect from Chartered Investment manager TO Canadian Investment Manager.

it SHOULD be the other way around. the new and current one is called Chartered Investment Manager. Wikipedia should reflect the official title.

that is what i was trying to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asadqureshy85 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Asadqureshy85, what you are attempting to do is called a cut and paste move, which is not allowed for attribution reasons. See WP:CUTANDPASTE. What you have to do is "move" the article to what you feel is the correct title. If you cannot do that due to your not having the right permissions, you can request the move at WP:REQUESTED MOVES. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Post-Impressionism with Canadian Post Impressionism

I have read the page on Post-Impressionism and it seems to suggest dropping the term except for use in France. I removed the marker intending to merge the pages provided by you, and don`t know what to do now. Sorry. Maybe drop the article??? If you leave it, it would be useful for Canadians I think. Your call.Joan arden murray (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I`ve got your marker back. Could you tell me what to do next? I see that you have vast experience with Wikipedia and I appreciate the help.Joan arden murray (talk) 18:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Joan arden murray, no, I wasn't suggesting to delete it, simply to merge it with the existing article on Post-impressionism. I agree that the content is pertinent, but feel that it is better for researchers if it is all kept in the same article. It would be different if the PI article was too long, but it isn't. If you don't have any qualms about doing that, I can take care of the merge. Onel5969 TT me 20:32, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Oh, thank you, would you do it? I get so nervous I may do the wrong thing. Have to admit I am 78 years old and find wikipedia daunting sometimes.Joan arden murray (talk) 20:35, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Joan arden murray, lol.... I'm not that far behind you. Sure, I'll take care of it. And it can be daunting even for experienced editors. Don't ever hesitate to ask questions. If you're polite, which you've given every indication you are, most editors will take the time to explain stuff to you. Keep on editing! Onel5969 TT me 21:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Spendid job! Thank you! And thank you for the encouragement.Joan arden murray (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Joan arden murray, no worries. Us old folk have to stick together . Onel5969 TT me 02:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


Page review help

Hi @Onel5969:, I saw you on the Page review newsletter! Can you please review my articles? Ashley Connor and Erēmīta (Anthologies) (2021 film) I have included tons of references for both. For the film I even included review(s) and will continue to do so as it comes out this week.(Kelly L23421 (talk))

Hi Kelly L23421. Usually I'll get to articles as they come up in the queue, I work on the older articles, and am up to the end of January. But I did take a look, and both articles pass notability criteria, so I did mark them as reviewed. However, could you please go back to the Connor article. It needs a bit of cleanup, there appear to be some extraneous words, and some awkward sentences. Thanks. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 13:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Onel5969 Thank you so so much!! Okay yes will do! Thank you again, and next time I'll wait till it comes up rather than reach out (Kelly L23421 (talk))

Leisure (band)

Hey mate MASSIVE confusion on the band regarding deletion bro. It's being confused with some obscure 2000s band from who had their article deleted in 2006 (and share a name with the entirely unrelated New Zealand band of which the new article focuses on). The New Zealand are very popular, with over 1,000,000 monthly listeners on spotify, and do deserve an article; honestly, it's utterly bizarre they didn't have one for so long. You can see their success here- https://open.spotify.com/artist/7b04D0yLktCUpvxQBhmG7R I've taken the liberty of attempting to end the confusion, as deleting an article of something important with the same name as an irrelevant one would be rather unfortunate. Cheers bro, --Aubernas (talk) 09:25, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Aubernas, hi. There's no confusion. It was quickly pointed out that the earlier article deletion was about a different band. And on WP there is a difference between being popular, and being notable. The issue is that this was tagged for notability a month ago, and no improvements were made in the article. Please see WP:GNG for what constitutes notability in general, and more specifically, WP:MUSICBIO, to see the special circumstances which would make a band notable. In order for the article to be kept, you should find sources which support their meeting those notability requirements. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 11:46, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

The Journalists (1822 Play)

I have added a number of references to this entry and resubmitted it, but I would just like to point out that the article was translated from the German Wikipedia - and was presumably accepted there. It's not very encouraging when a 1:1 translation is set to draft! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TriodeFollower (talk • contribs) 15:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

TriodeFollower, sorry, I know that following rules and guidelines can be discouraging. Remember, simply because an article exists on a different wiki, doesn't mean it is notable enough for En wiki. Each wikipedia has their own guidelines and policies. That being said, I felt that the subject was definitely notable, just did not have enough sourcing to meet WP:VERIFY, which is why I moved it to draft, rather than suggesting it for deletion. I would approve it, but would remove the uncited sections (Film adaptation and Radio Plays), since they are still wholly uncited. VERIFY is one of the core policies of English WP. Onel5969 TT me 15:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation. I will try to conform with any translations I make in future. I have found a reference to the film adaptation, so I have left it in, but I have removed the Radio Plays section. TriodeFollower (talk) 15:51, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

TriodeFollower, no worries. Nice job on the article, moved back into mainspace. Thanks for your contributions. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 15:58, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Olivia Sanabia

FYI I unreviewed Olivia Sanabia because of an RfD that restored it from a redirect without prejudice to AfD, as it probably now wants another look. No criticism of your action reviewing it, just so you're aware! ~ mazca talk 23:57, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Mazca, no worries, I marked the redirect as reviewed, without any opinion on the notability of the subject. Thanks for all you do on the project. Onel5969 TT me 00:21, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Jerry N. Jones

Received your message. I did added three references to his bio. Please note that he is not a living person Smithcotton76 (talk) 17:29, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Max Emden was a translation of a German Wikipedia article

@Onel5969 the Max Emden article that you removed from mainspace to draft was an English translation of the German Wikipedia article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Emden . (I did not know how to create this language link in draft.) I've added major sources (Spiegel, The Art Newspaper, the Germany Advisory Commission on Art Seized by Nazis, and improved the structure and style. With these changes I've moved it back into the mainspace and linked it to the German Wikipedia article. I hope this fixes all the issues. Eli185 (talk) 07:56, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Eli185, hi. Yes, excellent work. Thanks for your efforts. Onel5969 TT me 12:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969, you redirected an article to "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tom_Clancy%27s_Rainbow_Six_Siege" with in-depth coverage. Several characters of the same game feature on Wikipedia with the same amount of content as Thatcher. One such example includes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibana_(Rainbow_Six_Siege). And https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caveira_(Rainbow_Six_Siege) are two notable examples. This article could be stub or starter class, but definitely not enough to be taken off mainspace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanzla Sajid (talk • contribs) 16:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Hanzla Sajid, that's an WP:OSE argument, which is really irrelevant. There is zero in-depth coverage of real world notability about this character, just simple blurbs in fan magazines. Onel5969 TT me 16:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Jonathan Wheatley deletion page

Hi can you please delete that page as it has no references or content and it was accidentally created, sorry for any inconveniences.

Hi Ralphster7 - First, please remember to sign your comments with the four tildes (~~~~). I'm not an admin, so can't delete pages, but I added the CSD tag so that an admin will take a look at it in a relatively short time. Onel5969 TT me 17:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Matthew 8:15

Hi there, I was wondering what references you were looking for in terms of the Matthew pages. Bobdole2021 (talk) 17:48, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Bobdole2021, hi. Well, not sure I can answer that. But each of these stub/start articles you've created is only referenced from a single source. It would be nice to have several sources. Onel5969 TT me 19:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
I see your point, they are a little short on references. I was sort of hoping somebody else would add more to them. Bobdole2021 (talk) 22:25, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Bobdole2021, no worries, that's why I tagged them. Just means that someone might feel interested in providing better refs. Onel5969 TT me 00:10, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Hubert Pollack

Hi, can you please explain what references you are missing in this article, and why you decided to move it out from its standard location? Ophirbaer (talk) 18:38, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Ophirbaer, Well two of the sources do not go in-depth about the article's subject at all, and the third is from an historian's blog, which therefore does not meet WP:RS. What you need are several in-depth references from reliable, independent sources to show that he passes notability. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 19:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello again Onel5969, I added page references from three different books that tell the story of the Wilfrid Israel -Frank Foley - Hubert Pollack triangle. Unfortunately those three people were not only extremely modest about their achievements and activities, but also most confidential about them. Hence it took quite a while to even reveal their secrets. But having said that, I believe that there are enough sources mentioned now to avoid pushing their stories and memories back into the dust and forgetfulness. Please review the article and put it back where it belongs.--Ophirbaer (talk) 15:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello again Onel5969, this is to notify you that since I saw no further reply from you (I appreciate you're being busy), I took the time to further investigate on the WP:GNG and making sure that this article indeed has all it needs. Once completed, I also learned how to move it back to where it needs to be. Thank you for making me improve the article and better fit it for the Wikipedia standards. --Ophirbaer (talk) 06:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

BAS (accounting)

You put an "This article needs additional citations for verification. "-tag on the article, and it is hard to understand what it refers to?

  • Please specify, what is not verified in the article and we try to supply it. (I might be too much in the accounting business to see whats missing, tell?)
  • Is it publicly related to, google "bas kontoplan" (BAS Chart of accounts) and there will be a massive hit-list
  • Intersting for an English reader in accounting, yes. What Gaap is used and how it is defined in different countries are one of the main issues in relations between companies from different countries.

--Zzalpha (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

"Jews against Zionism" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Jews against Zionism. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 27#Jews against Zionism until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jontel (talk) 16:32, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Stay Close

Hi, can I please ask what I did wrong at Stay Close that resulted in you adding what you did? I'm not too sure and would like some clarity to prevent it happening again. Thank you! - Peterpie123rww (talk) 19:53, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Peterpie123rww, sure thing. The premise section of your article was either a direct copy/paste or too close paraphrasing from the Netflix site. See WP:COPYVIO. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 21:23, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969/Archive_87&oldid=1137157051"