User talk:Star Mississippi/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Star Mississippi. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

→

Falan Andrea

Hi Star Mississippi, I see you have creation protected Falan Andrea back in December. A new user, Maxluc91 (talk · contribs), has created Falan Andrea Jansen yesterday. I am not sure, whether it meets WP:G5 seeing the original creator Nirdis (talk · contribs) is blocked for sockpuppeting. Any thoughts? Cheers. Chanaka L (talk) 02:25, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much for flagging this @Chanakal. I suspect socking and will file at Nirdis' SPI and link back here Feel free to add any additional info you may be aware of. Star Mississippi 02:41, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Are there any similarities in their edits to suspect sockpuppetry? Patachonica (talk) 02:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The entirety of the Draft's history is Socks/UPE. I'm not 100% sure it's a SOCK, but there's very little innocent history there. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nirdis/Archive for some of the background. I'm not tagging it as G5 yet and it's not close enough for G4 so if this ends up being Meat, we'll likely need to go to AfD. Star Mississippi 02:46, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

I've already tagged them as G5, is there anything wrong with that? Patachonica (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Not at all. Was a not yet from me rather than incorrect. I'll weigh back in come morning (EST) if this hasn't been resolved as I'm about to log off for the evening. THanks both. Star Mississippi 02:59, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

and I see @Girth Summit took out the trash overnight. Thanks all. Star Mississippi 13:32, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Francois Lensely

I think this one should have been closed as No Consensus. No one directly addressed the sources I added (Sarie and the SABC show Pasella) or the argument that he met GNG. It's interesting that the momentum shifted on the Stan Schmidt AFD (whose keep outcome I agree with) after I added the Herald Sun as a source, despite it not necessarily having a sterling reputation in Australia, and many South African sources being at least its equal in reliability. Editors discounting sources that they haven't heard of, or are "third world" seems to directly contradict WP:WORLDWIDE. Park3r (talk) 03:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Good morning. I read it as @Scope creep rebutting your sources, and no one stepping forward to agree with you. There wasn't a strong consensus, but there was one for a redirect. The history is under the redirect so what I'd suggest is seeing if you can find additional sources and then spin it back out. Thoughts? Star Mississippi 13:46, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

If it was a rebuttal, it was fairly vague and non-specific, and didn't address my assertion about the subject of the article meeting GNG. As for no one stepping forward to agree with me, there are lots of relistings on South African AfDs for a reason: most overseas editors don't (and wouldn't be expected to) be familiar with South African sources, so prudent editors probably steer clear. South African editors don't participate in AfDs, or increasingly, Wikipedia in general (there is a serious electricity crisis, and I suspect most editors use their precious hours with power to more important things than edit Wikipedia). One doesn't have to be familiar with a place to participate in AfDs, however one does need to be familiar with the sources, in order to weigh their credibility. Park3r (talk) 00:07, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

I think a related issue is summer holidays in the northern hemisphere that have a lot of regular contributors not spending as much time online as they would otherwise. That, volume of AfDs is high and the power cuts you reference is a bad trilogy. I have re-read the arguments and don't see how I could have closed this any other way, unfortunately. No issue at all if you prefer to take it to DRV. Star Mississippi 00:42, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Hannah Corbin

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:02, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Stephen Bay

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

A summer smile for you!

I send you a gift of a smiling plum tomato from my tiny urban garden! (Freshly picked yesterday morning), the tomatoes and jalapeños survived despite my being gone for weeks. Thank you for being such a wonderfully helpful fellow editor; I have learned a lot from you and for that I am grateful! Enjoy the rest of the summer. Netherzone (talk) 17:08, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, friend! I've enjoyed working with you on so many articles. Apologies for the belated response, I was off frolicking in nature. Exit Glacier in the Kenai Fjords may be my new favorite place. Have you been? If not, highly recommend it for the next time you're escaping summer. Star Mississippi 16:08, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I've never been to Alaska - the photos of Exit Glacier and the Kenai Fjords look absolutely gorgeous. My bucket list is long and just got longer, ha ha! It sounds like a marvelous trip. Netherzone (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

They are truly otherworldly. I expected Denali to top them, and in some ways it did - but there's something about seeing something with no expectations vs. holy cow, the Big One! The photo on Exit Glacier is good but in general I found neither a camera nor my phone could even come close to my eyes. See also, the otter alongside the boat. Just something different to the lower 48 even in a parks sense. Star Mississippi 16:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

I wasn't sure what you meant about the otter next to the boat, but I found it -- what a magnificent creature, so much intelligence and focus in the eyes, wise and confident, and those whiskers! Moving forward looking back while swimming like a pro. What a wonderful world! Netherzone (talk) 02:02, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Help me in Draft:Govind Dholakia

i have made changes in Draft:Govind Dholakia with regards to reference, more and more neutral content and all reputed source i have cited for the subject. please have a look into this and share your suggestion and needful action further to same to make it live as article. Thank You.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brakshit23 (talk • contribs) 04:57, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! It was rejected and will not be considered further. Please find another subject to edit about. Star Mississippi 13:38, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Philip Bunker

Hi - not sure how to handle this, I'm still somewhat unfamiliar with how admin-in works in WP. You may recall that User:Bunkerpr was blocked from editing his own page. Well, the page Philip Bunker was recently edited by an anonymous IP user, and a review of this IP's edits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2607:FEA8:BDA0:13F0:F16A:69BD:184A:2153) shows that it only edits the same pages that Prof. Bunker used to edit. Thus, he appears to me to be editing the page anonymously. How can this be addressed? Thanks for any advice. Qflib, aka KeeYou Flib (talk) 21:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for flagging this @Qflib. As it was only one edit, there's no sanction yet but I've warned him on both pages. I'll try to monitor, but please feel free to flag anything else. Star Mississippi 00:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Mikheil Lomtadze

Hello @Star Mississippi!

If I counted everything correctly, then today is the last day of discussion of the article on Lomtadze before making a decision. As you know, I worked on the article, tried to rewrite it in prose, and also replaced most of the sources with English and independent ones, based on the WP: GNG, WP:SIGCOV, WP:RS. As for me for today, the article meets the requirements of WP:BIO. I believe that the significance of the person and his contribution to the development of Kazakhstan has been proven. At the search request of Mikhail Lomtadze, we see that more than 35,000 publications made over the years are published, which indicates public interest in his person. Please leave the article, I will try to refine it as independent facts are discovered and I think that many other authors will be interested in this, given the expansion of his business in Ukraine and Azerbaijan. Deviloper (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Deviloper. An admin or other established editor will determine consensus as it relates to notability and close it when they feel the discussion is settled. It could close at seven days or run longer. What I think we all want is to avoid having a 3rd discussion about him down the road, so it's important to settle it correctly vs. quickly. I would not be the one making the decision since I nominated it as that wouldn't be fair to any involved in the article or the discussion. The article is improved, but in my opinion the underlying issues remain. That doesn't necessarily mean the community will agree. Star Mississippi 12:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia section for presidential nominees

Hello @Star Mississippi

You seem to be much more well versed in Wikipedia then I am. I was looking for some help regarding presidential nominees for federal judgeship. Is there a way to have a wseperate section within Wikipedia just for pages on presidential nominees for federal judges? There are a lot of people that use Wikipedia to read up on nominees prior to them being confirmed. If you could help me understand if & how this can be accomplished so we can continue using this great site to read up on nominees, I would really appreciate it.

MIAJudges (talk) 19:34, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @MIAJudges. While there isn't specific policy as it relates to nominees for a federal judgeship, I think the best guideline is politician which requires the person to attain the position (appointee, electee, etc.) rather than just be a contender for the role. I believe this would also cover someone like Brooke Jenkins who was appointed by London Breed without an immediate special election. What you and others working in the area can do is incubate them in draft space until they are confirmed by the Senate at which point they could be moved to article space. You could also raise an RFC about getting the guideline adjusted, but I'm not sure that would work given the fairly solid consensus about political candidates. I know you raised this at the Teahouse, but if you're looking for more input you could also look at the Proposals section of the Village Pump to workshop a potential RfC. Let me know if this is helpful. Star Mississippi 01:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I will put something together to get the guidelines adjusted on RFC. Thank you

MIAJudges (talk) 04:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Happy to help. While I'm not super familiar with RFCs, ping me with any questions and happy to try and help you find the answer. Star Mississippi 14:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I have another question on a totally different subject if you have a minute. I have been putting a lot of pictures of federal judges in their profiles. All of the pictures I put you can see when you're looking at ethe entire list of judges on a particular court when I am on my computer & hover my mouse over their name. I notice a lot of the older pictures that have been posted you cannot see their pictures when you hover the mouse over their names. You have to open their profile in order to see the picture. For example, on the page for the 9th circuit (United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - Wikipedia), every active judge has a picture in their profile. If you hover your mouse over the names of M. Margaret McKeown, Kim McLane Wardlaw & Ronald M. Gould you can see their pictures come up without opening their page. But when you hover the mouse over the names of Mary H. Murguia, Johnnie B. Rawlinson & Consuelo Callahan you cannot see the pictures of the judges. But when you open their profiles, they too have profile pictures.

Any idea why some judges' pictures show without opening their pages & others do not?

MIAJudges (talk) 04:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Quick answer as I'm about to be offline and can't look at the pages right now. But from when I am on my computer & hover my mouse over their name it sounds like you might use Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups. I wonder if it has to do with when those images were uploaded. Will look into this when back online in case that page doesn't answer it. Star Mississippi 12:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. I reviewed the page but that really didn’t help. I don’t have it downloaded but I can still see not just all of the pictures I have personally uploaded, but also I can see many others as well. So I will just wait for you to get some free time & can take a look at it. I hope you have a great day.

MIAJudges (talk) 19:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll see what I can dig up or possibly try Help Desk on your behalf if I strike out. Feel free to ping me if you find an answer in the mean time. Star Mississippi 22:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

This AFD?

Hi there Star. I was wandering what your thoughts are on this AFD? I was just going through the old discussions and was curious why no admin has closed this as keep. However there are indeed many, many votes from new or rarely used accounts, and many IP's. Also, a good chunk of the voters have not formatted their comments or signed their post. Some have also voted "wait". This means most of the voters are likely inexperienced with Wikipedia, and it is unusual to have so many newbies at an AFD. I am not here to get you to close, I am just interested to hear the perspective of an experienced administrator/AFD closer and what you would do in this situation? What do we do in a situation where the numbers are overwhelming on one side, but a good chunk of the numbers seem suspect and almost all votes contain no policy based argument or substance. Obviously a deletion is not a vote, but what do we do here? I've never seen such a popular AFD apart from Killings under Communist Regimes. Would love your thoughts. Have a nice day. MC MaxnaCarta (talk) 05:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I saw that last night and realized I was definitely not awake enough to read through it. I think that's an issue, especially this summer. Many of the admins active at AfD appear to be east coast and between the bank holiday this week, vacations and the time they re-set to old, it's late. If I were closing this, which I'm likely not going to, this is more or less my process. Disregard the obviously canvassed votes as they carry little weight. They're not policy based as you mention, nor do they actually explain why they're voting. That said, we have some experienced participants on both sides. I think this is a kick the can down the road no consensus. There was another, also tied to the Russian invasion, of someone in the news because he'd been abducted. I closed that one, but expect it will be bak when the news coverage settles. Is that helpful at all? Star Mississippi 17:10, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Very helpful. Thanks Star. You may recall some of my closings earlier in the year received critical feedback. Well after waiting a few months, I’ve tested the waters and have closed a few keeps with a note for anyone wanting them undone to ping me. All gone smoothly so far with no issues. However I will not close anything that’s potentially controversial especially as no-consensus. Hopefully an administrator takes a look at some stage. Yes - there does appear to be an admin backlog in a few areas at present but oh well, there’s no rush! Hope you have a nice day Star. MC MaxnaCarta (talk) 07:07, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Willoughby Kipling

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Willoughby Kipling. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Miraz

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Miraz. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Jontesta (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Mikheil Lomtadze

Hello! I was expecting a resolution on the Talk Page, I didn’t see anything like that, but the article was deleted. Can you explain what process? And is it possible to transfer the article to my personal space for improvements?Deviloper (talk) 11:39, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Deviloper. @Sandstein's close reads clear to me. If you have questions, you can ask on his Talk, although I've pinged him here. My personal advice: given the prior AfD, DRV closing as delete I would recommend against another DRV at this stage and that you just accept that there is currently consensus against this article existing and continue to edit in other areas. Have a great day Star Mississippi 23:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Viewing deleted article

Hi, could you please let me see this Adler's Appetite (2005) article. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi! To my knowledge, I never edited that page. While it was a PROD that can be restored upon request, pinging @Explicit who processed it in the event there's a history I'm un aware of that isn't clear at a scan of the logs. Star Mississippi 23:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Administrator help

Hi Star, I'm still seeking help on this issue with Skyring and since you commented on my thread on the AN I thought you might be able to help. Thankyou. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Persistent_disruption_and_harassment_by_User:Skyring All the best Poketama (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Mikhail Gorbachev

You closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Mikhail Gorbachev as "no consensus". However, deletion discussions should usually be relisted before being closed as "no consensus". FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 02:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

They made it pretty clear in the close why it was closed as no consensus rather than relisted. I also had a chuckle on the guidance provided to someone who had closed more AfDs than the advisor has edits. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Good morning @FAdesdae378 (and hi @ScottishFinnishRadish!) The outcome after another seven days was also going to be no consensus. That is what nearly always happens when it's a high profile in the news subject and people have strong, policy based opinions on both sides of the issue. There isn't going to be an agreement and a relist just clutters AfD for another week. It would be different if there weren't enough input to form consensus, but that wasn't the case here. You're welcome to take it to DRV if you believe I was wrong. As @ScottishFinnishRadish indicated, I think I made it pretty clear why I closed it as I did so I'm not sure what I could add. Happy to discuss further though. Star Mississippi 13:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is ‎Standard offer - JGabbard. Thank you. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 16:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Avalon Daggett

I would be happy to have help with this entry if you or any of your talk page watchers have interest. Thanks! FYI Draft:Louisiana Sovereignty Commission is an interesting subject. FloridaArmy (talk) 11:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Looking into this. Thanks so much for flagging. Star Mississippi 14:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

and done. Special shoutout to @PigeonChickenFish who got to LSC before I did.

I'm curious whether Avalon Daggett should be about her or her company, but that can be sorted in mainspace. Thanks, as always, for flagging. Star Mississippi 14:33, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Avalon no Kagi article

Hi I think this article can stay up on Wikipedia, when similar titles like Quest of D, Dragon Treasure and World Club Champion Football are too Dop55 (talk) 10:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dop55. Because Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avalon no Kagi was a soft delete, I have restored it. I am notifying @The_Banner and @Bungle as a courtesy since they were involved in the discussion. However you should be mindful of WP:OSE as that's not relevant to whether Avalon continues to exist. Star Mississippi 13:27, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

List of fugitives from justice who disappeared

Should people like D. B. Cooper and Jack the Ripper be on the List of fugitives from justice who disappeared? All entries like them have been removed from the list. I would say that fugitives like them did in fact disappear, so they DO belong on the list. Davidgoodheart (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Davidgoodheart. This isn't an area in which I edit, so I'm not sure of current consensus. I'd suggest opening a discussion on the Talk page to get consensus. If there isn't enough discussion there, you can try Wikipedia:WikiProject Law Enforcement for more input. Star Mississippi 03:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Match wagon (disambiguation)

May I please discuss your close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Match wagon (disambiguation). I believe you have misinterpreted the consensus. Disambiguation pages are required to adhere to MOS:DAB: in this case specifically MOS:DABMENTION: "If the topic is not mentioned in the other article, that article should not be linked to in the disambiguation page". 2 contributors stated an opinion of "delete". @MB:'s comment is for redirect, but they say "match wagon" should redirect and not "Match wagon (disambiguation)". "Match wagon (disambiguation)" should not redirect to Barrier vehicle because that target is not a disambiguation page. Only editor @Peter Horn: expreesed an opinion for keep, but this is not substantiated by evidence: he removed his own edit [1] which would have implied that "match wagon" might mean "flatcar". I don't therefore believe your assessment was correct, but I though I'd discuss before WP:DRV. Thanks, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Shhhnotsoloud. Thanks for your note. At the moment I do not have time to re-read the !votes and reassess my close. If it's time sensitive, feel free to open the DRV and I'll reply there within the next few days. If not, happy to respond here as soon as I'm able. Am fine if you opt to go a prompt DRV though. Star Mississippi 20:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - this is routine and not at all urgent. It can wait! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding & patience. Will come back to you hopefully tomorrow. Star Mississippi 21:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Had a quicker than anticipated opportunity to re-read this. Where I still see this landing on a lack of consensus is the history @ChromaNebula: pointed out to in the nomination, as well as the EngVar that Mangoe alludes to. While you're absolutely correct in the MOS element, it seems like in this particular instance, the community wasn't sure how to proceed. Coupled with low participation, I don't see a different outcome unfortunately. I have two possible suggestions: DRV as you originally proposed, or given that it's been two months since the close, just nominate it again. That's not too soon for a n/c with low participation. Personally I think the latter is going to be smoothest as I'm not sure how DRV would handle this given time since closing. No objection whatsoever if you think DRV is easiest. Star Mississippi 13:59, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for your efforts. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Always happy to discuss a close I made. Ping me at any time. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 01:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Match wagon (disambiguation) (2nd nomination). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Am I jaded?

To me this is all the evidence of trolling needed to indef at this point. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:57, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

100%. I'd have done it, except we have a history in AfC. I'm sure he'll keep it up and walk right into an indef, or site block. Star Mississippi 22:58, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Given that he's new to Wikipedia, an indef block would just seem a little too harsh, so a temp/partial block was better in order. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I love your optimism. He's been edging around disruption all month, so I'm not sure he gets that Wikipedia isn't a game. Would love to be wrong though. Star Mississippi 23:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I hope soon once his partial block expires, he'll learn that, but if he continues to edit-war as he did on the HIT Entertainment article, I'd either suggest semi-protecting it to teach him a lesson or extend his partial block slightly longer if further disruption continues. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

He's autoconfirmed, so semi won't help. I'd be hesitant to use extended confirmed as it would keep other productive editors from working on it, when he's the only one disrupting. Let's hope it's a non issue though. Star Mississippi 23:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

I meant semi as in extended confirmed. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

On an unrelated note, grilled cheese with pesto and rabbit and tomato soup canned fresh from the garden for dinner tonight. A nice autumn meal. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Meanie! But I'm quite enjoying my taramosalata and Tirokafteri too. Hope the worst of Ian's rains stayed off shore from you and you're safe. Star Mississippi 23:42, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Got some showers yesterday and some wind today, but nothing to worry about. Thanks for the concern, though. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Edits to Scorigami Page

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that your edit on the scorigami page caused formatting issues, specifically, citation-related source code is visible on the main article. It’s likely an easy fix, but I’m editing on mobile and unfamiliar with formatting, so I’m not the best-equipped to fix this. I wanted to let you know so you could edit the page when you had a chance! :) Nordberg21205 (talk) 01:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks so much for the heads up. cc @PizzaKing13 who was also trying to clean up my mess. Star Mississippi 02:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work as always, whether on content, AfD, or seems like pretty much anything else. You are truly a bright light in the encyclopedia. Keep it up! Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

TCG's p-block

Hi Star Mississippi, hope you're doing well. As of now, I believe TheCurrencyGuy (talk · contribs) is partial-blocked from editing Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/incidents, which is a redirect page, rather than the intended Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents‎ (with a capital "I"). DanCherek (talk) 02:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Ugh, thanks so much for the heads up. Let me try again to see if I can fix this. Star Mississippi 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Who is star Mississippi?

Deleting without giving reason, when no other person has disputed the article I think is in appropriate. I have a feeling star is in that group of wanting to be paid for edits only that he uses another name here and another on like wikimedia. This has to be investigated. William Echenyu (talk) 22:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

I have investigated and discovered that they are an autopatrolled user and administrator, with an account 15 years old, and 42,689 edits. Last I checked they weren't a crypto paid editor. — ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 22:49, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @ScottishFinnishRadish. I actually had no idea I had that many edits. As 42 is the meaning of life, I must be extra wise. @William Echenyu you're welcome to "investigate", however I'm sure I'd have company in deleting content such as Balaam Barugahara Ateenyi's love for business and marketing started when he was still a young boy and he recalls selling sweet bananas to fellow kids while still in primary. and discussions of his orange t-shirt. I will leave your re-submission for someone else's review, but if you have a connection to Mr. Ateeny, you're required to disclose it per WP:PAID and I'd recommend you read this advice on writing your first article. Star Mississippi 23:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Wait a minute now, I thought Star Mississippi was a star cluster in the shape of the Mississippi River surrounded by cosmic stardust! Netherzone (talk) 23:49, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

And I thought they were referring to a string of star lights strung along the length of the Mississippi River. You never know! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

@Liz@Netherzone@ScottishFinnishRadish thanks for the creativity. Way more fun than the actual inspiration. @William Echenyu, please let me know if I can help in any other way. Star Mississippi 01:18, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @ScottishFinnishRadish for the feedback about @Star Mississippi.

Thank you @Star Mississippi for the good job William Echenyu (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hoax articles

Hey, Star Mississippi,

Do you have much experience with hoax articles? I deleted a PROD'd article today that the tagger said was false. When I looked at the talk page and the page history, editors over the years have said that the article is a hoax. I'm not sure whether to bring it over to list it at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia. How can you verify that some event didn't happen?

The article is International Drift Championship Racing if you want to check it out. The only article I ever listed on the hoax page was clearly a hoax because the title was a bad pun on a popular song. But this one, I can't tell.

Hope your life is going well! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Liz. Unfortunately i don't have much experience with the hoaxes either, but my gut is List of.. is for more high profile hoaxes. The talk page discussion at Wikipedia_talk:List_of_hoaxes_on_Wikipedia#Why_isn't_every_single_hoax_article_archived? doesn't make it clear though, so I guess you could since it lasted long enough. Sorry to not be more helpful. Star Mississippi 17:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Star Mississippi,

That makes sense, why didn't I see that discussion myself?! Thanks for offering me your opinion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:42, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Gremlins. That's my usual explanation. Any time. Star Mississippi 01:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

H. Terry

Hi, you recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry John Terry as redirect. However, in the close, you did not address the legacy redirect H. Terry (which was the title of the article at the beginning of the AFD). The future of this redirect was discussed in the AFD (seems like an obvious delete). Could you please revisit to look at this? Thanks, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:48, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging. I have amended and deleted. Closing too close to bed time. Star Mississippi 12:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 12:23, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Draft:Tiffany M. Cartwright

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Draft:Tiffany M. Cartwright. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Iowalaw2 (talk) 22:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. I'll respond there to keep the discussion centralized. Star Mississippi 01:16, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Comment at AfD of Bouchaib Benlabsir

Hi - I noticed your comment on not editing political bios much. For your information, I wrote this: WP:NSUBPOL. You might find useful as a resource for checking presumed notability of NPOL at subnational level. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

thanks so much, I'll definitely read this. The backlogs are fairly full of u/npoorly sourced articles due to the subject matter being people in/areas where English isn't primary, political bios among them. I'm sure this will be helpful. Thanks for flagging, and closing that AfD. Star Mississippi 20:37, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

self-promotional userpage

Hi, coming over from Commons I want to notify an admin about the completely self-promotional userpage of User:Aash Gates, which seems to violate Wikipedia:User pages#USERBIO. WP:ANI seemed a bit overblown, so I notified you as a recently active admin to consider appropriate action. From today's experience on Commons, this user shows very little insight. Regards --Túrelio (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Túrelio for flagging that. You're correct that ANI would have been overblown and likely taken longer. I have deleted it under en Wiki's guidelines against user pages masquerading as biographies. Thank you again Star Mississippi 20:35, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift action. --Túrelio (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Wow the Audacity of this Dying Website 🤣🤣🤣, Aash Gates (talk) 20:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Query

Just a question for someone more experienced than I at closing AFD discussions. Suppose you close an AFD with the closure of "Draftify". And you move the article to Draft space. And then, it immediately gets moved back to main space of the project! I moved it back to Draft space but I don't want to move-war. What is the protocol here? Just nominate it again for a second trip to AFD? The article was "draftified" but the participants in the original AFD discussion who suggested it certainly didn't expect it back in main space 24 hours later.

Of course, in light of just being informed about a Deletion Review discussion (oh, joy), this pales in comparison but any advice you can offer would be appreciated. Thanks and have a good weekend! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi! If the move to mainspace was done immediately by the creator or someone who voted to keep it, I would consider them in the wrong and depending on the factors of the discussion, protect mainspace to enforce AfC as there is some expectation from !voters that there will be improvement about the issues raised. An immediate re-nomination would likely not be helpful and I believe an AfD with a consensus to delete/draftify offsets WP:DRAFTOBJECT, which would give the creator license to restore it. Is that helpful?

I actually don't mind this particular DRV. Cartwright has engendered a lot of discussion and it would be ideal if we get final-ish consensus and/or the Senate confirms soon. This is one of those She will be notable, but isn't yet scenarios and if I had seen this AfD as an editor and not a closing admin, likely would have argued to keep it based on process wonkery. Happy weekend to you as well. Star Mississippi 02:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that is a very helpful suggestion, I didn't think to protect the main space page. I'll look into it.

I haven't had much of a positive experience at Deletion review even when my deletion decisions have been endorsed. I've had my actions that seemed straight-forward called "despicable" and had my competency as an admin called into question. I've been an admin since 2015 but had never been brought to DRV before 2022 and now I've had 5 decisions debated there. I guess going to DRV more often comes with closing AFDs which I didn't do much of until this year.

If the discussions could focus on the article and the deletion decision/discussion, that would be fine but, in my experience, the talk has often gotten personal and I've seen that happen with other admins as well. I've seen some admins state on their talk pages that unsatisfied editors should go directly to DRV and also announce they wouldn't participate in discussions on that noticeboard so it's not just me. Of course, it completely depends on who turns up to offer commentary. I think some folks who don't care for me must have the page on their Watchlist! Any way, I hope a productive discussion ensues. As in all things on the project, it helps when complex cases receive more clarity through a productive discussion that comes to an acceptable consensus. Thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, there's definitely some unnecessary aggressive behavior (see two threads down) that really has no place in discussions between human beings. Things that shouldn't be taken personally are and things that should be, are deliberated to death across six forums (the recent RFA !vote/de-sysop).

When it comes to DRV it's especially ridiculous when what we all want is the correct outcome. We're not closing it because we're passionate about an article subject. There's no need to turn a difference in opinion on notability into a personal attack. I think that's where I've lucked out -- the DRVs I've been involved with are far more "I disagree with your conclusion" vs. I disagree with you as a person. I hope the tide turns for you as well. I see you were just a on G13 clean up. Thanks for the housekeeping. When I first started working in AfC I forgot to unwatch drafts I actioned, so it's nice to see them pop up now so I can unwatch. Hope you're having a good evening. Star Mississippi 02:32, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, I hope things go better at the next DRV I'm summoned to. Like many things on Wikipedia, it all depends on who shows up to participate. I think there will always be another DRV case for anyone who closes AFDs that are not unanimous. But some of my CSD deletions have been questioned as well. I remember a particular nasty case involving a CSD G4 where participants went out of their way to support an editor who was furious that their article about a busty, B-movie actress had been deleted. The decision was to restore it as a draft but then it went directly back into main space where, I think, it went to its 2nd AFD. I could see it coming and a couple months later, the editor was indefinitely blocked for all of the drama they caused on the project, they protested every action that could be perceived as action against their edits or articles. Sometimes, the squeaky wheel gets the grease but if you are a continual source of outrage, other editors soon tire of it and get impatient with antics on noticeboards.

By the way, Association of Translators and Interpreters of Saskatchewan was de-PROD'd because it had already been part of an AFD nomination and deleted. I think there are templates to notify editors when this happens but I don't know where they are located. Hope you had a good weekend. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:25, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks re: Saskatchewan, I'd somehow missed that. Good to know I'm not the only one who sometimes can't find templates that I know exist.

I wish we could completely ban COI editing. I know we can't, but the 5% of editors who can comfortably and politely edit where they have a COI and/or make use of the edit request process don't outweigh the time sink, drama of the other 95%. And yes, outrage fatigue is real, but as is drama fatigue. I think that while Lugnuts' behavior wasn't any worse this summer than prior ANIs, people and/or ArbComm finally had enough. There's a limit to how much we can manage. Have a great last few hours of your weekend Star Mississippi 02:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

My favorite place

Hello, Star,

Looks like you were not notified so I'm suggesting that you look at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 October 19...not unexpected. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Unfortunately I saw that one coming and don't anticipate that to be as pleasant as Cartwright. Cartwright is getting lengthy and complex, fitting given there isn't clear consensus around N:POL, but is still polite discussion for the most part. Hope you're having a good day. Star Mississippi 15:53, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Well that certainly took a left turn. Thanks again for the heads up and reminding them to notify me. Star Mississippi 20:58, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Soccer DRV/ANI Discussions

Notice of Deletion review discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 October 19 regarding you deleting 5 articles with a 1-0 consensus in a two weeks discussion span voting AfD nominated by the same user and supported in erasing by the same 1 user subject B the 10 AfD discussions. The thread is ‎1994–95 season articles. HugoAcosta9 (talk) 14:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I've responded there to keep it central. Star Mississippi 15:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you are involved by a Jim Crow pattern' in your acts. The thread is ‎Racism_against_a_200-articles-Mexican-editor .HugoAcosta9 (talk) 18:21, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

I mentioned you at ANI

I mentioned you at the ANI discussion WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#AFDs for top Mexican football league. (even though I think the close was correct, based on the information provided in the AFD).

Thanks for the note at WP:Articles for deletion/1994–95 Club América season, I hadn't read the bickering between the main two parties much, and hadn't realized that there was an ANI discussion, and many more examples that had already been closed! Gosh, and until seeing above, I hadn't realize there were DRV discussions going on. How can a productive user like User:HugoAcosta9 be so correct (other than their claim of racism), and create so much damage by not remaining calm and pragmatic during the process. What a mess ... Nfitz (talk) 22:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

What a mess indeed, and of course no issue with the ANI mention. (I responded there to the substance of your question to keep it central) Your handling is more or less the same as mine when I brought Fram/The Banner AfD conversation to ANI to try and have all of the pieces in one place for whichever poor admin ends up having to close it. I figured based on your note that you hadn't seen the back story. Even aside from the poor quality nominations, the discussion scattered across the 18? nominations made it impossible to follow and realize it was a broader issue than one or two season articles.

I actually had begun to feel bad for HugoAcosta9 and was hoping for a return path until they blatantly socked. While I think jumping to racism was an overreaction, I can understand the frustration coming from a) confusion that their articles had been reviewed and b) facing nearly twenty deletion debates where they felt their points weren't being listened to. We've both been here approximately forever and while we know better where to channel frustration, that doesn't mean we find the work easy especially when there's process wonkery. This issue reminded me that we (collectively) need to figure out a better way to convey that approved/reviewed doesn't mean "untouchable" as I think that's a point of understandable confusion to newer editors. Star Mississippi 22:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Everyday Chemistry

You recently made an edit to the article for the remix album Everyday Chemistry, cutting out the part where it lists the samples. I'm not sure why you cut out the information, but I would like to come to some sort of understanding regarding it. Eagle617 (talk) 23:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Eagle617. I disagree with its inclusion especially as its poorly sourced, but not enough to stay invested. If that has been you restoring it, please remember to log in. I have not removed the latest restoration. Please let me know if I can help in any way. Star Mississippi 00:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

SeaQuest Interactive Aquariums issue

I am messaging you since you have made edits to the above page before. The issue arises from the merge that you did, so hope you can correct and revert the issue. Please check Talk:SeaQuest_Interactive_Aquariums#Removing_Amman_Covino Sincerly. 100.40.189.211 (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for the heads up. Someone will respond to your edit request when they're able. Star Mississippi 20:08, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Minor point

Your block of Doug Coldwell's secondary account is tagged as "clearly not here to build the encyclopedia". Taking the criticism of his editing 100% at face value, I don't think that's a fair or accurate assessment. (You blocked the main account for "disruptive editing", with which I have no quibble.) I dunno if this is a thing that can be changed, but if so I think it would be a kind thing to do. -- JBL (talk) 22:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Totally valid point. I'll reblock accordingly. I sometimes wish there was more nuance possible as we don't have an option for "unwilling to edit collaboratively" because it's not CIR either. Thanks for flagging. Star Mississippi 23:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! JBL (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Hohoe(hoe)

Hey, you closed this AfD and deleted Royal Humanitarian Order of the Kingdom of Gbi Traditional Area Hohoe, but left the other one listed with it, Royal and Dynastic Order of the Eagle of Hohoe. Don't know if you forgot or just haven't got around to it yet, but either way I thought I'd gently nudge you (apologies if you were going to do this anyway!). Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you/apologies. Must stop clerking before sufficient coffee. This one was particularly special as I had the tab open, but do you think I hit submit? Have a great day. Star Mississippi 14:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries. And I know what you mean... except in my case, I forget half the things even after the coffees. :) Have a great one yourself, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Deletion review for Bobby Witt (disambiguation)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bobby Witt (disambiguation). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:00, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Commented there to keep it central. Star Mississippi 14:16, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, Star of the mighty Mississippi. I expect you know about Tuhin Sinha's lawsuit against the WMF ("and Wikipedia adminstrators") over the deletion of their bio? See Special:Permalink/1119273567 and compare the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuhin Sinha (2nd nomination), which you opened (and I closed). But I'm not sure if you were aware the article has been recreated? Discussed on Talk:Tuhin Sinha. Bishonen | tålk 16:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC).

Thanks @Bishonen. I had seen a mention on your Talk but had missed the latest developments. Will go catch up, thanks so much for flagging. Star Mississippi 17:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Firey

Hi there. Thanks for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firey. I hope you don't mind, but I just started a surname page at that title. Does that work for you? If it does work, do you think the protection level should be changed? - Eureka Lott 04:08, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi! That makes total sense, and apologies for the delay. I'd like to give it a little longer to be sure the Battle for Dream Island disruption settles. I was going to drop it to extended confirmed, but it looks like your creation already did so? I think that's fine for now and if the disruption returns one of us can protect the DAB-ish page. Does that work for you? Star Mississippi 01:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

It looks like the protection was against recreation, so that's a moot point now. The page is currently unprotected and there haven't been any issues, but I'd be fine with requiring extended confirmed access for a little while, just to be safe. I'll keep the page on my watchlist for a bit, too. - Eureka Lott 03:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Sounds like a perfect plan. Feel free to ping me again if it needs any attention. Have a good evening! Star Mississippi 03:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Louisiana Tower

Hello, could you please consider restoring Louisiana Tower? I've found newspaper sources that don't appear to have been considered in the deletion discussion.

Thanks Garuda3 (talk) 10:19, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Good morning and thanks for your note. I don't have time to evaluate your sources right now for a straight restore, so restored and relisted for the discussion to continue. Feel free to discuss them there. Star Mississippi 14:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Babes of Carytown

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Babes of Carytown requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a club, society, or group that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DHSchool2003Student (talk) 00:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. I contested the deletion on the Talk, but will improve it in draft space if needed. Star Mississippi 01:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Request on 22:57:27, 15 November 2022 for assistance on AfC submission by Abu Wan

Abu Wan (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Janice Griffith (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi! Thank you for reviewing the aforementioned page that I'm trying to create. Since I'm new at this, I'd really appreciate it if you let me in on the problems that you found with it so that I can work on them to make the page acceptable for publication. Any help in this regard will be highly appreciated.

ETA: I just saw the errors that you cited in my citations; I hadn't seen them before so sorry for this message. Nevertheless, I'd love some pointers on how to improve the article even more if you have some.

Abu Wan (talk) 22:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries, glad you found the answer in the mean time. Given how many times Ms. Griffith's article has been deleted, I suspect another reviewer will ask for more sourcing. We cannot use YouTube, IMDB and similar for an article about a living person. Let me know how else I can help. Star Mississippi 00:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for Undeletion of Groww's Wikipedia Page

Groww's Wikipedia page was created to give our readers genuine information about the company. Our principal purpose behind forming the page was to provide credible information backed with relevant sources on the reliable source of Wikipedia.

In order to dodge any presence of the wrong information doing the rounds on the internet, we would like to request you to undelete Groww's Wikipedia page. We request you to kindly reconsider the undeletion so that the readers can avail of only the reliable information about the company.

We assure to adhere to the guidelines of Wikipedia and take proper accountability to provide trustworthy and genuine information about Groww along with relevant sources and references. 163.116.199.115 (talk) 09:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP 163. I will not be undeleting the article as consensus at the AfD was clear and you do not understand the role of Wikipedia. the readers can avail of only the reliable information about the company has no bearing on the companies who have articles here. If you feel my close was incorrect, you're welcome to file a Deletion Review as @UtherSRG advised at Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Groww, but the case you make there and here doesn't show the close was wrong and is unlikely to be successful. Star Mississippi 15:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Orientation due to article rejection

Hello Star Missisippi!

My Wikipedia article (LatamReady) has been rejected multiple times and I have been trying to understand why. Please, could you guide me so I can understand the flaws of my article? This is my first article in Wikipedia.

The message says that the issue is related to the sources used in the article; but I don't understand quite fully what is the specific flaw about the references. Thank you in advance for your kind orientation!

Erpconsultantlr (talk) 14:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Good morning @Erpconsultantlr. For companies, the sourcing needs to meet WP:CORP or WP:ORG. We need more about what LatamReady does, but you're off to a good start. Looping in @Storchy if they have any additional feed back. Star Mississippi 15:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

I'd also add that none of the sources are independent, reliable sources. They're primary sources from the companies involved, and a "contributor" reference from Forbes: see WP:FORBESCON for more information on what that's unlikely to be a reliable source. Independent, reliable, secondary sources are needed to establish notability. Storchy (talk) 15:18, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Life (UK organisation)

Hi, the deletion seemed a little harsh to me: I felt NORG was established and that GOOGLEONLY was particularly significant for an organisation set up so long ago. Perhaps I should have spelled out the coverage in the material I did add. Still, I'd be grateful if you could let me have a copy of the deleted article to keep as a usersace draft, in case I can drag up some more info from (in pacticular) hard-copy sources and newspaper archives, with a view to recreating if there is more material. Best regards, Springnuts (talk) 17:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Springnuts. Apologies if you felt it harsh, I certainly didn't mean that. I've re-read the discussion and while I think consensus is clear, I've restored it to Draft:Life (UK organisation) for you to work on and (possibly) restore if you feel that sourcing you're able to identify crosses N:ORG barrier. Let me know how else I can help. Star Mississippi 17:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Appreciated; many thanks. Springnuts (talk) 08:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks I am very very impressed; and way over my head!

Thanks for working on Curb Your Dog and taking an interest in Walter Kacik who is new to me and very interesting. I am going to post some notes in Walter Kacik talk. I think Helvetica or Walter Kacik Helvetica is pertinent.

Personally, I am having a great time here on wikipedia even though I am way over my head. (I thought the editing would be fun, it turned out I am rubbing shoulders with some great people.)

Also I saw you are interested in theater; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Westcoast_Black_Theatre_Troupe

Flibbertigibbets (talk) 04:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Ooh thanks for that link @Flibbertigibbets. I do indeed love theater.

Don't worry about getting in over your head. Everyone here is happy to answer questions and working together makes it way more fun. I've been here 15? years and I'm still asking. Both the signs and Kacik's work are fascinating. Star Mississippi 13:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Molly Steinsapir

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fauldhouse Amateurs F.C.

Are you sure you got that right? Five for delete, only three for a redirect, when the redirect, will that really work? A redirect to a redirect, it looses consistency. I am not sure this actually will no longer work. And you made a mistake by removing a different AfD tag on the league page still at AfD. Can you please review again. Thank you. Govvy (talk) 21:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I think I did, but cannot dig deeply into this given my available time and don't want to leave an error, so I'll relist. Thanks for the heads up. Star Mississippi 14:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ryan Buggle has been accepted

Ryan Buggle, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

S0091 (talk) 17:13, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Errol Musk

Hi and I hope you are well, I'm seeking your advice...

I want to make absolutely sure I'm doing the right thing here and as you closed the AfD and did the redirect...here's the chain of events:

I created Errol Musk. An AFD about it ended in redirect. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Errol Musk

This is one of two articles that I maybe created WP:TOOSOON. The other being BJ Dichter. Both subjects have since attracted more press. I therefore tried to figure out the proper process here. Wikipedia:Deletion_review#BJ_Dichter. Fortunatly for me, you opined there that the correct process was actually a talk page chat.

So I'm giving Talk:Canada_convoy_protest#Benjamin_Dichter more time, meanwhile my question at Talk:Musk_family about recreating Errol Musk has met no objections (or comment, or approval).

In this context, would you consider that I have the community green light to recreate Errol Musk? CT55555(talk) 16:00, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @CT55555. Just noting I've seen this and will be back to you within a day or so with a more full response. At a quick glance at the AfD, I'd say you're correct in bringing the discussion to the Talk as factors have changed, possibly making the deletion discussion moot. It certainly wouldn't be a G4 so you'd be fine in recreating it. You're experienced so obviously don't need AfC, but that could be a path to getting more eyes on it than the Talk page if you think that would be helpful. More to come. But stating here explicitly should this discussion be pointed to, that I have no objection to you undoing the redirect if there's sufficient sourcing that makes Errol Musk notable. Star Mississippi 15:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Skorpion Show

Hello, Star Mississippi,

Because of a previous PROD, this article isn't eligible for Soft Deletion. Can you change your closure?

Thanks! I hope you are having a good week. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Good morning! I've always actually operated the opposite. It's not eligible for PROD because it must be discussed, but if no one is !voting, there's no one opposing it so worth just treating as a PROD since it wasn't a contested deletion. It's IARish so I've updated my close per your request. Have a good day! Star Mississippi 13:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello

Are you free to check Draft:Patuakhali Government College again? InfoShahriar (talk) 06:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I do not believe it's ready for mainspace so will leave it for another reviewer @InfoShahriar. Star Mississippi 19:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I have written it from neutral point of view and what inpendent sources say about it. It's my first article I am working on and learning about the English wikipedia rules. Can you help me what's wrong? @Star

InfoShahriar (talk) 19:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

You have not explained why the school is notable, just that it exists which isn't sufficient for an article. Star Mississippi 19:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

@Star Show me a school/college page which describes why that school/college is notable. I will gain from it. InfoShahriar (talk) 19:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

It looks as if @Theroadislong has declined it. I recommend looking around the project to see what schools say, but be aware that other articles may have concerns of their own. Star Mississippi 20:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

strange

Hi. We should have edit conflicted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prem Dhiraal. I started to add unsigned template when it was still open, but when I saved my edit, you had closed the AfD. My save was a few seconds after you, not even minutes. But strangely, there was no edit conflict. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

so weird! Do you need me to back out the close, or do you want to edit through the close to sign it? I'm fine with either. Star Mississippi 00:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

It already happened. Nothing more to do :-) —usernamekiran (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

OK that was doubly weird. The script didn't watch the AfD for me so this edit didn't hit my watchlist. Gremlins aplenty today! Star Mississippi 02:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Behzad Qasemi's article was completed

Hi @Star Mississippi, Thank you for your advice. I read the tutorial content of the wiki. I completed Behzad Qasemi article according to Wikipedia's writing principles. Thank you for checking the article and publishing it if approved. Because I eagerly want to start writing the next article. Garshaasp (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Garshaasp.

I see you have added a lot of material. If you feel he now meets WP:BIO and overcame the deletion discussions, please press the blue re-submit button and another reviewer will be along to assess it. I try not to assess drafts twice to give the writer a chance for another set of eyes. Just to note, you don't need to wait until it's reviewed. You can begin a new draft at any time. Let me know if you need any further info, happy to help. Star Mississippi 17:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I will definitely do this and I will pay attention to your instructions. Thank you very much for guiding me. Have a good time and be healthy. Garshaasp (talk) 17:21, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You as well. And re: your earlier question here. If an AfC reviewer deems Qasemi notable, the main title will be unprotected. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 17:23, 11 December 2022 (UTC)