User talk:Domdeparis/Archive 7

A year ago ...
creating deletion; discussion page
	... you were recipient; no. 1937 of Precious,; a prize of QAI!

This is an archive of past discussions. 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 1

←

Re: SM Supermalls Edit

The reason I edited the information especially with the 21’st SM Supermall which is SM City Valenzuela is I live near the proximity of said mall and based on my own eyewitness account and personal knowledge, the edit is truthful. I only follow the pattern on the page which made you say that I have knowledge in editing a page. By the way I am new here. NTV2K17 (talk) 08:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

@NTV2K17: as per WP:NOTYELLOW we do not include lists of store locations in a wikipedia article unless individually they meet notability requirements as per WP:GNG. Future malls that are being built are not notable unless there has been extensive coverage in reliable sources for exemple because of major accidents or protests or something else that is newsworthy over and above routine coverage about the works. --Dom from Paris (talk) 09:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Re:SM Supermalls WP:NOTYELLOW

Hello! The edits have been reverted. Please bear with me even if I'm a year old here in Wikipedia, I still have a lot to know regarding editing policies especially the notability guideline WP:NOTYELLOW. Thank you! Wikieditorph (talk) 06:52, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Help me

Hi Domdeparis,

I need help regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingemar_Macarine.

I saw that his wikipedia has this:

This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

This is a confusion. I am NOT paid to edit his wikipedia page.

I edited his page but I am NOT PAID in doing that. Ingemar Macarine is an accomplished athlete in Philippines. He has lots of documented swims that needs to be added in his wikipedia page. Unfortunately, he does not know how to edit it by himself. So he requested me to do it and I gladly accepted it FREE OF CHARGE.

Please help me resolve this.

Thank you in advance.

JeynerGil (talk) 02:42, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

advice wanted

@domdeparis If I wanted to include information about Shah Salim Khan's arrest and long running property dispute with his mother. How would I do this? Would it require a new section or should I include it in the existing section on politics? There are sources on the event. https://pamirtimes.net/2018/06/08/ex-mla-shah-saleem-khan-arrested-on-mothers-complaint/ https://pamirtimes.net/2018/03/29/prince-shah-salim-khans-recent-arrest-and-history-of-hunza-palace-intrigues/ https://pamirtimes.net/2018/03/29/mir-ghazanfar-urged-to-withdraw-fir-against-sons-resolve-property-dispute-in-a-traditional-grand-hunza-marka/ https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/03/25/gb-governor-has-sons-arrested-for-forging-property-papers/ https://www.dawn.com/news/1413111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purple flowers by default (talk • contribs) 13:58, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Edits on the Italian invasion of France

Hi, i've noticed that you reverted my edit. I think that the reference to the second battle of the Alps can't be true, here's my arguments: -Aosta Valley was, indeed the main objective of the french operations, but it was abandoned by Italians only on the 8th of May, i've read two books about it:Soldati e Spie by Gino Nebiolo and La Seconda Battaglia delle Alpi by Maurizio Costantini. I've also viewed the documentary listed on the article of the battle in the "Depiction in media" section. Based on these sources, i'm pretty sure that the invasion of Aosta Valley was a french practical failure, however they had some gains in Liguria and Piedmont. Sorry for possible grammaticals errors, i'm not an english native speaker. Grav-Leo02 (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I am afraid this is false. The Italians surrendered on the 2nd of May in Turin and the French occupied Suse Val d'Aoste and Tende after having entered Italy. They were obliged by the Allied Powers Europe to quickly leave Suse and Val d'Aoste and after a month Tende. I am pretty sure you are not a new user to Wikipedia and editied under another name. I shall be asking for extended protection on this and other articles to prevent this kind of tendentious editing. Thanks. Dom from Paris (talk) 21:27, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I don't know how write properly here but i think here should go. Could you give me the sources where you took your statements? I've heard from various sources that the last Italians surrendered on the 8th of May at La Thuile, not far from the franco-italian border, and they left the town undefeated, and they surrendered to the Americans not to the French. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grav-Leo02 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 8 November 2018 (UTC) It is me again. I've just watched your edits on the Second Battle of the Alps article and i find it strange that German forces are counted in the infobox while partisans, both french and italians aren't mentioned, i've also saw that you keep reverting good-faith edits, with actual sources as a support. Obviously some edits like the one that changed the french casualties into 10,000 deserved to be removed but the others made kinda sense to me. Also i can't view the book where the quote "the french forces penetrated deep into Italy" is supposed to come from. Could you hand me some link to an online scan of the book? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grav-Leo02 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Read the page on the second battle of the Alps the sources and the talk page it's all there. Dom from Paris (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi again, it seems that i'm being accused by you of sockpuppetry and i should be the user Kuru666, before accusing people like that, i suggest to have a good talk with them. Also no, the sources don't say that, change them or i will remove them, i want this to continue peacefully, let's not ruin the mood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grav-Leo02 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Is this your first account on Wikipedia? Dom from Paris (talk) 23:35, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I had one account like two years ago but it was made just to correct an error i saw on an article of an album of the band Pink Floyd (i tought you needed to access to edit lol) but i lost it like two days later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grav-Leo02 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, i've noticed that you also kept changing other articles involving Italy or Italian states, sometimes even deleting the italian state (like the article of the Battle of St. Quentin (1557) denying his role in the action/war. Before deleting it again, talk about it on the page discussion. Anyway i'm going to revert your edits, make me notice if i did something wrong, instead of accusing me of sockpuppetry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grav-Leo02 (talk • contribs) 13:34, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

il a coûté cher

Of course it means human cost! It means expensive in human lives. You objected to "bit" because it had no French equivalent. I object to a translation that has no equivalent for cher. It makes no sense to say that "cost" can include non-monetary things but "expensive" can only ever refer to money. How about "costly"? Srnec (talk) 18:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Costly is fine for me. It was the "a bit" that was not in the French version. And thanks for removing the apostrophe I'm on my smart phone and sometimes the autocorrect takes over! Dom from Paris (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Request for reply from User:TomCat4680

@TomCat4680: last try to engage in an exchange with you. Can you please answer my questions about reviewing. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:25, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

I already did. TomCat4680 (talk) 10:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Kazu Makino

Hello, I got this message today...."Hello, I'm Domdeparis. I noticed that you removed topically-relevant content from Kazu Makino. However, Wikipedia is not censored. Please do not remove or censor information that directly relates to the subject of the article. If the content in question involves images, you have the option to configure Wikipedia to hide images that you may find offensive. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Dom from Paris (talk) 13:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)" But I've actually haven't removed or edited any text from Kazu Makino, I haven't login in wikipedia since a while. Can you please explain? Thank you Stefanofileti (talk) 13:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Stefanofileti: hi I was refering to this edit you made back in February of this year when you removed sourced information from the page saying that the subject of the article did not wish for this information to be included. Unfortunately it is sourced information from an interview with the subject in a reliable source and there was no reason to remove it as it does not contravene the policy on biographies of living people . Also as a person who claims to be representing the subject you have what we call a conflict of interest and as such should not be directly editing the article. Dom from Paris (talk) 14:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I got it now. Maybe it was me. I don't remember clearly, but we are the management of this artist and this is a request coming from her. We'll see what happen when she'll see it. Probably she'll want us to remove it again. I'll let you know. Thank you Stefanofileti (talk) 09:51, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

The page has been nominated for deletion as not meeting the necessary criteria for notability so the problem should disappear anyway. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:06, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Help me Improve my Article Afetsi Awoonor

Hello Domdeparis,

Thank for the information regarding the article i recently created for Afetsi Awoonor. I will be really glad if you assist me on what i should do in order to improve the article. Thanks for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abuswain (talk • contribs) 15:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Need help

Hey there. I followed your advice about multiple RS in JKT48 6th Single's Members Election but this Onel guy keep insisting the sources are promotional fake news, albeit they are famous for its reliability and independence. Now he uses the power given to him as "AP, ECo, EM, N, Rv, Ro" to delete the article. Please help in discussion here. I really appreciate if you stand for keeping the article. Thank you. – Flix11 (talk) 04:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@Domdeparis: How about my suggestion in the AfD? Is one page entitled JKT48 Members Election for all 5 elections can be received? If so, I can accept that. Thanks. – Flix11 (talk) 17:57, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Wonderful life

NOW IT SAYS “BRING THE HORIZON”, BMTH WAS BETTER, I REPLICATED MY OWN PAGE BECAUSE OF THE SPELLING MISTAKE Noob boi (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Wonderful life put 2

Thank you for changing the name, I’ll change any links to the page, how can I improve upon the page? Noob boi (talk) 10:52, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Noob boi: Not a problem I have moved the page to Wonderful Life (Bring Me the Horizon song) which is coherent with their other pages such as Count Your Blessings (Bring Me the Horizon album). That said you really need to find more sources to show that this song meets WP:NSONG because at the moment a redirect to the album would be more appropraite. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:55, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Domdeparis “The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for music. Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted” how many sources do I need? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noob boi (talk • contribs) 15:21, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Noob boi: have you read WP:NSONG? --Dom from Paris (talk) 15:24, 16 November 2018 (UTC) (p.s. please remember to sign all comments on talk pages)

Jim Love

With the article created for Jim Love (Rugby League) due to the fact the player existed along time ago (Nearly 100 years) it is hard to find an article that solely exists talking about him. Rugby League Project is the only major source you can get for a lot of the older players not unless they were really famous. For the most part I have never had any issues with just using Rugby League Project as a source so this is all new to me like.Sully198787 (talk) 16:07, 16 November 2018 (UTC)Sully198787

The trouble is that the site does not say where they get their information from apart from contributions from individuals. They say nothing about fact checking. I have created a thread on the reliable sources noticcboard to have an opinion from other editors. Dom from Paris (talk) 16:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello Domdeparis,

Community Wishlist Survey – NPP needs you – Vote NOW

Community Wishlist Voting takes place 16 to 30 November for the Page Curation and New Pages Feed improvements, and other software requests. The NPP community is hoping for a good turnout in support of the requests to Santa for the tools we need. This is very important as we have been asking the Foundation for these upgrades for 4 years.

If this proposal does not make it into the top ten, it is likely that the tools will be given no support at all for the foreseeable future. So please put in a vote today.

We are counting on significant support not only from our own ranks, but from everyone who is concerned with maintaining a Wikipedia that is free of vandalism, promotion, flagrant financial exploitation and other pollution.

With all 650 reviewers voting for these urgently needed improvements, our requests would be unlikely to fail. See also The Signpost Special report: 'NPP: This could be heaven or this could be hell for new users – and for the reviewers', and if you are not sure what the wish list is all about, take a sneak peek at an article in this month's upcoming issue of The Signpost which unfortunately due to staff holidays and an impending US holiday will probably not be published until after voting has closed.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}18:37, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

COI

"stretching the truth. " The truth wasn't stretched. You do know what "special to the Chronicle" means, don't you? It means the photo belongs to me and not the Chronicle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmunddantes (talk • contribs) 22:01, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

@Edmunddantes: Look like I said I don't see any kind of real COI going on at all but you are, or were, at least semi professional. Maybe you worked pro bono for all of them but your photos were used for a newspaper a magazine and a film company so this makes you more than just an amateur who took snapshots on the street. You did a portrait of someone that was used as the cover of a magazine, you were asked onto the set of a film to take press shots and you took photos that were published in a major daily. This is not a problem and may well be all in the past but it's a little difficult to reconcile that activity with the statement that you just take snapshots and 1 roll every 5 years. That is why alarm bells were set off with User:Ronz. We deal with literally thousands of blackhat editors who missuse Wikipedia as a way of earning money and we are on the lookout for conflict of interest editors in an effort to keep the integrity of this project intact. It's an uphill struggle and your statements that were out of sync with what we were seeing on commons, made our Spidey sense tingle. I hope you get that and understand our concerns. Dom from Paris (talk) 03:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

COI

ok, I lied. I haven't taken a photo since 2003: that's 15 years, not 5. I assure you that no money exchanged hands. Sincerely, Edmunddantes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edmunddantes (talk • contribs) 19:42, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Hey it's not a problem it's just to explain why editors are wary. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Domdeparis. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Domdeparis. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Tobias Elwood

I’m going to assume that you don’t realize the difference between random tweets found on twitter not being verified source and that specific accusations of malfeasance by a verified account in a matter before the courts and congress and the press, which most certainly are verified sources. Even if the accusation is false (very unlikely since daily telegraph reporting strongly points that way) it is most definitely newsworthy and Wikipedia worthy Alterrabe (talk) 10:18, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alterrabe: I am afraid this is an unfounded accusation from a twitter account. Do not add this again until you have a reliable source. Please read WP:BLPREMOVE and WP:BLPGOSSIP. If you have the telegraph source add it. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

sorry. Your claim of fact is simply not true. Wikipedia DOES ALLOW the quoting of tweets under certain circumstances. “Only include links to social media if the subject is particularly known for using that social medium, and when the link provides the reader with significant unique content, and it is not easily linked from another link included in the article.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Twitter

This is a developing story and the Elwood angle with him explicitly being named has yet to percolate into the press. The daily telegraph mentions the British government and “counter terrorism;” Elwood is responsible for counterterrorism.

your complaint of it being an “unfounded accusation” holds no water, as other disputed accusations are mentioned in the article. Moreover calling it “unfounded” rather than “unproven” is blatant editorializing. You have ZERO evidence that papadopoulos’ accusation is untrue, nor does quoting Papadopoulos imply that it’s true.

Attacks on American democracy, be they allegedly by the Russian government or the British government need strong scrutiny. If you insist on your interpretations, it’s time for Wikipedia’s dispute resolution services.Alterrabe (talk) 10:44, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

you are correct on the rules about citing social media about third parties.Alterrabe (talk) 10:48, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alterrabe: Thank you for the above message. I am not talking about the information itself or the accusations I am simply explaining why you cannot use a tweet to justify this addition. I hope this cleared it up for you. But I must say your accusation of WP:EDITORIALISING is curious because for one it only applies to what we write in an article, in a talk page we can give an opinion and secondly unfounded and unproven are synonyms according to the following dictionnaries Collins Oxford. --Dom from Paris (talk) 11:00, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Domdeparis: “I think these accusations are unfounded” = opinion. “These accusations are unfounded” = statement of fact. Using unproven claims that the accusations are unfounded to edit contributions = not good.

per your citation of Collins: synonym of “unfounded:” “false;” (Papadopoulos claims may well yet be proven to be true .) “unproven” leaves open whether or not there actually is proof; unfounded doesn’t. There is overlap, but while all unfounded claims are unproven, far from all unproven claims are unfounded.Alterrabe (talk) 11:39, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alterrabe:We are in a very fine analysis of semantics and I did not say that the person that wrote it did not have any or a solid basis but that the accusation on twitter was unfounded it says (I have removed the names as this may be judged as libellous later)

"It’s not really a secret who the British “sources” were that were illicitly spying on Trump and me and others. They are fighting to keep this private. I will lay them out here: 1) ***** 2) ***** 3) ***** 4) ***** 5) ***** 6) *****"

The foundatation for this accusation is not stated it simply says "It's not really a secret" which is heresay and therefore there is no sound basis expressed he doesn't even say that he has seen any proof. Had he said "I have seen a document that shows who the...etc etc" then it could be described as being founded on something and so I would not have said unfounded but the simple fact of saying that it is not a secret is clearly an unfounded accusation. This accusation may later be shown to have been founded and but as stated it is unfounded. Even if the same accusation has been repeated elsewhere with a solid basis this particular accusation is unfounded. Hope this clears up what I meant because I have no opinion whatsoever on whether there is a sound basis or not for these accusation and you are misquoting when you write "These accusations are unfounded" = statement of fact. because I never used the plural I wrote this is an unfounded accusation from a twitter account. I try to be as precise as I can when I write but like anyone I can make mistakes but here I do not think I did. Dom from Paris (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2018 (UTC) (p.s. no need to ping me on my own talk page as I receive a notification for each new message)

we agree; I’ll wait for a reliable source. To my ear, as a native speaker with a vocabulary in the top 1%, one uses “unfounded” when one wishes to indicate that not only is an accusation not true, but that there is no evidence to support it. To my mind this is more than a small difference when you compare it to “unproven.” In any event, it’s not particularly important; have a good day.Alterrabe (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Commonwealth of Dracul Wiki

I've tried to make the wikipedia article as accurate as possible, yet you keep tagging it as a hoax. I've explained in my talk that it is not a hoax and should not be labled as such. I have provided cites and website links in the article to show its accuracy and legitimacy. Thank you for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coastiestevie (talk • contribs) 11:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

@Coastiestevie: this is clearly a hoax, just because you have created a web page for this does not make it any less of a hoax. Do not create the article again or you will certainly be blocked from editing. --Dom from Paris (talk) 11:36, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Coastiestevie (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC) Perhaps you should delete all the other micronation pages as well, such as this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Molossia if you feel its a hoax. As I've stated multiple times, it is not a hoax. You clearly have not done your research to understand what it is that was being discussed. I will be certainly speaking with the wiki administration, to report your inaccurate dealings and failure to verify with this article. Do not threaten me ever again with bans, when you have not done your due diligence. Let this serve as your warning. Thank you for your understanding.

The article that you mention above was nominated twice for deletion and kept each time. You article is clearly a prank I had a look at your web site and there is a rather silly photoshopped image from here or elsewhere there are dozens of sources that use this photo. [1]

I have requested that this name be salted and have reported your account to the administrateurs. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

DM !ban

Yup, I'm up for drafting some arguments on this. I'll try to do something tomorrow lunchtime UK time. FOARP (talk) 14:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Edits to University of Mount Olive / Notable Alumni /

@Domdeparis: can you clarify your comments regards the removal of the alumni Robert L. Tillman from the University of Mount Olive page? You cited WP:GNG, and stated that both articles are related. One of the articles is a citation from the Securities and Exchange Commission on Tillman's retirement from Lowe's. Other citations of his being the Chairman of the Board and CEO exist, but this one would suffice for the time being. The other is a citation of a yearbook, which is a secondary source, and is designed to intentionally recount an accurate history of events. In this case, Olive Leaves is the yearbook of the Junior College Tillman attended. Robert Tillman meets the notability tests and the sources indeed are considered secondary sources that are in fact independent of the subject, Robert Tillman. If you disagree, please help me understand where you see this not meeting WP:GNG. Otherwise, I'll revert the changes as meeting WP:GNG. Cc09091986 (talk) 19:33, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Yearbook is not a secondary source as is the retirement notice also not a secondary source they are both affiliated and are not independent. Please do not revert without adding other sources. Dom from Paris (talk) 23:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Questions about Sources on Draft:Lennie Peterson

Hi Domdeparis, my friend and I worked on translating the Lennie Peterson article from the German Wikipedia into English. We did our due deligence and found as many sources as possible, as the links and the references in the German Wikipedia article were not functional. We were just confused because the references we found were valid sources, and we keep turning up blank when looking for other "valid" sources. We were wondering if you could have a look over and assist us in publishing the page, as it is important for our class. CarmenRRida (talk) 09:41, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @CarmenRRida: the 2 sources that were present when I moved the article to draft space were not sufficient to show notability. I'll have a look at the new ones when I get a moment. Also you can add foreign language sources to English wikipidia article, they don't have to be in English. Dom from Paris (talk) 10:01, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Plaqad

You nominated an article I wrote for speedy deletion

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Plaqad&action=edit&redlink=1

Can I find out what I need to work on the article as I have already removed all forms of advertising in the article and would need guidance to make it advertising free as well

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladispeaks (talk • contribs) 17:12, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Ladispeaks. What I would suggest doing is going through a draft submission via WP:AFC, this will allow experienced editors to help you to get it up to standard especially if you have a conflict of interest. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:16, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I do not even have a conflict of interest.

I would just submit it as a draft then.

Ladispeaks (talk) 17:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Moldova in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2011‎‎

Quick check re this and the 2010 version: there are extant articles about 2015 and 2013 (I believe), which I'd assume shows that the topic is considered notable and that this doesn't have to be specifically demonstrated here anymore - still missing sources, of course, but these clearly exist (it's Eurovision, every national tabloid will have written its collective ass off about it...). So I'd actually suggest reinstating those from the redirects. - Not too bothered either way though, I do actively dislike the topic :p --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:44, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Elmidae: thanks for the message, this is the junior version of the Eurovision song contest and country and year specific pages are not likely to be notable unless the country gets a good placing. Here In France I had never heard of it before this year and that was only because the French singer got second place. If you look at the article for this year Junior_Eurovision_Song_Contest_2018 it is very very heavily sourced but 48 of the 59 sources are eurovision websites and the rest are almost exclusively from the TV channels that aired it itunes for the album and routine annoncements. Have a look at the Poland's page, the country that won, there are no independent in-depth sources Poland_in_the_Junior_Eurovision_Song_Contest_2018. Even for the winner of the main competition Israel_in_the_Eurovision_Song_Contest_2018 the sourcing is 50% from a blog, 13 sources, a social media site specialised in the eurovision, 6 sources, an official eurovision contest site, 4 sources another official eurovision site 2 source. So there are literally no sources that would go towards showing GNG. I'm not saying they don't exist but not one of the 30 or so editors involved have thought of adding one. I'm pretty sure in saying that the chances of there being much independent in-depth coverage for a country that came in 6th is pretty slim. This is really just WP:FANCRUFT and the site is now overflowing with this kind of crud and sports stats. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:18, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

You might have the better overview there... I suppose I've at some point come to the conclusion that all these national Eurovision topics are regarded as generally notable, based on the profusion sitting in mainspace. Also there's quite a raft of exact equivalents to the redirected articles - every country in this table has one, and while the sourcing may be crappy, I foresee trouble if we were to try and argue that Moldova in particular isn't allowed one based on the same type of references. Let's see what happens, but if equivalent refs materialize we may be on shaky ground with repeatedly reverting this. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:10, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree, I'm not going to go on a one-man crusade to get rid of them but at least I can legitimately restore the unsourced articles back to a redirect as per WP:VERIFIABLE. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:34, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Ogoe

Don't worry, I added citations. Arumdaum (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Monday

Saw your note on the NPP talk page. Just wanted to wish you luck on Monday. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:19, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Onel5969: thanks, much appreciated, it's not a big thing I'm just in for the day fortunately and then a couple of weeks rest at home. Cheers. Dom from Paris (talk) 17:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Corpus Christi Roman Catholic Church, Maiden Lane

I have added a couple of further references. Is there anything specifically that you think is missing a source? AndyScott (talk) 10:55, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Occitania

Hello DomdeParis. Yes I think you made a mistake about the municipalities of Haute-Vienne because they are part of Occitania (there are Occitan signs at the entrance of each town and Occitan Limousin is the local language). Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occitan87 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Occitania is an abstract concept and does not have a universally recognised character. It is not an official region so for it to be added to the pages there must be reliable sources that mention this. Be careful with these additions because it could be seen as WP:ADVOCACY because this is only area you are editing in. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

So the Occitan language we speak fluently, Occitan symbols in our villages and the fact that we are Occitan are abstract? I really do not understand Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occitan87 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Occitania is not an officially recognised region with clearly defined borders and is the subject of nationalist ideas. If you have sources that make specific claims about these towns being part of Occitania then it can be added otherwise please do not continue as this may be seen as disruptive. Dom from Paris (talk) 21:15, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

A map of Occitania or a panel of the town in Occitan would it be enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occitan87 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

No what you can do is add it to the regional languages. I believe you were warned on French wiki for these same edits we have similar standards here. You are aaWP:SPA and It looks like you may have a political agenda and that is not conducive to neutral point of view editing. Dom from Paris (talk) 21:25, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry but It's absolutely not political. Occitania is a CULTURAL area, and Haute-Vienne is in this area and we learn this at school... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Occitan87 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

As the french page suggests this is a debatable definition of a region "L'idée que toutes les personnes qui parlent occitan appartiennent à un « espace culturel commun188 » a soulevé et soulève encore des oppositions chez ceux qui y voyaient soit une menace à l'unité nationale française189, soit la négation d'une identité régionale (notamment en Auvergne, Béarn et Provence). Parallèlement au terme langues d'oc, ces militants ont récemment introduit la notion de Domaine d'Oc190." The map on the Occitania pages includes Auvergne and I doubt if most people from there would consider themselves from Occitania. Some people consider that Gascon is a seperate language so the Bearn is not universally recognised as part of Occitania hence the need for sources. In any csse this shouldn't be in the lead. Dom from Paris (talk) 22:11, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy new year

	Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2019!
	Hi Domdeparis, Sending you a warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019 and may this new year bring you joy and laughter. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 15:49, 13 December 2018 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

Hello Domdeparis,

Reviewer of the Year

This year's award for the Reviewer of the Year goes to Onel5969. Around on Wikipedia since 2011, their staggering number of 26,554 reviews over the past twelve months makes them, together with an additional total of 275,285 edits, one of Wikipedia's most prolific users.

Thanks are also extended for their work to JTtheOG (15,059 reviews), Boleyn (12,760 reviews), Cwmhiraeth (9,001 reviews), Semmendinger (8,440 reviews), PRehse (8,092 reviews), Arthistorian1977 (5,306 reviews), Abishe (4,153 reviews), Barkeep49 (4,016 reviews), and Elmidae (3,615 reviews).
Cwmhiraeth, Semmendinger, Barkeep49, and Elmidae have been New Page Reviewers for less than a year — Barkeep49 for only seven months, while Boleyn, with an edit count of 250,000 since she joined Wikipedia in 2008, has been a bastion of New Page Patrol for many years.

Seasonal Greetings!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019!

Hello Domdeparis, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019.
Happy editing,
★Trekker (talk) 09:42, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Merry Christmas

	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2019!
	Hi Domdeparis! Thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into Wikipedia. God bless! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:36, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Delete

Hi! Your argument here doesn't make sense. Just look at List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at Basin Reserve. ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:20, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

ANI notification

Hi, the thread is not about you, hence I didn't notify you first. I think that a notification is justified anyway. You may like to see WP:ANI#Eddiehimself. Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Civility Barnstar

		The Civility Barnstar
		Awarded to Domdeparis for maintaining a stiff upper lip in the face of withering sarcasm and repeated incivility. Loopy30 (talk) 22:45, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

Delete

Heck List of international cricket five-wicket hauls at the Riverside Ground is FA. ImmortalWizard(chat) 18:51, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:The Greatest Generation which affects an article which you have previously participated in a discussion about. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you! Kolya Butternut (talk) 03:24, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Ingrid Levavasseur

Hi. Any assistance you can provide with Ingrid Levavasseur and the French language issues would be appreciated. The French and English sources I read suggested that women's participation in the Yellow vest movement was very high, upwards to 40% and they have had their own women's marches on Sundays following the main event on Saturday. It just did not appear to be mentioned in the Yellow vest movement despite women's efforts obviously playing a critical role and many women being notable.

I do not understand the coat racking reference here? If you can assist in making it less that or explaining what you mean more clearly, it would be great.There are a large number of sources about her clearly demonstrate notability over a sustained period of time. And women activists have played key roles behind the scenes and in the media so having good articles about major players would be fantastic. --LauraHale (talk) 16:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Article review: Sabana Grande (Caracas)

Hey. The Wikipedia article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabana_Grande,_Caracas has been vandalised by Jamez42. 100,000 characters have been deleted and several quotes/sources from relevant authors and academicians.

Please, I kindly ask you to review the article.

--QuinteroP (talk) 09:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@QuinteroP: Why did you write to 14 editors and didn't ping me? The edit was not vandalism, and you have already opened a peer review of the article. --Jamez42 (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

Hello Domdeparis,

News

The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.

Discussions of interest

Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
{{db-blankdraft}} was merged into G13 (Discussion)
A discussion recently closed with no consensus on whether to create a subject-specific notability guideline for theatrical plays.
There is an ongoing discussion on a proposal to create subject-specific notability guidelines for chemicals and organism taxa.

Reminders

NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.

NPP Tools Report

Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
The NPP flowchart now has clickable hyperlinks.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828
Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Fabienne Wohlwend

Hello Domdeparis. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Fabienne Wohlwend, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: WP:G4 would appear not to apply, as the article is quite different from the deleted version, and improved in assertion of notability. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 09:39, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Domdeparis. I note that this article was previously deleted via this AFD in 2017, which WP:BUNDLE-d a number of (then) non-notable motorsports BLPs. Please feel free to re-nominate the article for deletion if you think it still doesn't pass notability in 2019. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Domdeparis,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

NewgateNG808 (talk) 15:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi Domdeparis

Firstly apologies for my very slow reply, I have only just seen your talk message (and worked out how to reply!).

I believe in October you flagged Newgate Clocks (now redirected to Newgate - Company) as 'This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments' due to some edits I made on the page.

It is true I do work for Newgate and have previously made edits to some out of date information on the page (mainly updating the logo and the website URL, and adding in the manufacture of watches alongside clocks as far as I can recall). I'm afraid I'm a complete newcomer to editing on Wikipedia and didn't realise this would be classed as a conflict of interest - I thought it was correcting inaccurate information! - but I'm very sorry for not fully researching the correct procedure (I really did try but find Wikipedia's guidelines of use very confusing - will definitely leave to the experts in future!) so thank you very much for alerting me to my errors.

I've now updated my user page to make my association with the company clear and will refrain from making any further edits on this page.

Can I ask if it is now possible to remove the 'This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments' banner from the top of the page? I feel very bad that it is my ignorance which has put it there!

Thank you very much Amy - NG808 — Preceding unsigned comment added by NG808 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

Hello Domdeparis,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important.

QUALITY of REVIEWING

Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR.

Backlog

The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever.

Move to draft

NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations.

Notifying users

Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging.

PERM

Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway.

Other news

School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Back to ANI achives

Regarding this ANI archive, it seems that @Cavalry.charger: (I'm notifying him) is still adding unsourced materials (see also Special:Contributions/Cavalry.charger where it seems that none of his ten last edits gave new references). The added information is correct but lack a reliable source. I don't know what to do since he is acting in good faith. --Le Petit Chat (talk) 07:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@Le Petit Chat: could you supply specific problematic edits that are unsourced? Have you checked out to see if what they have added is not included in the sources already in the articles or asked them where they got their information from? --Dom from Paris (talk) 09:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

They are no problematic unsourced edits. However I did check some of the sources and the details he added were not mentionned. So it would mean we have to search for new references to source each of Cavalry.charger's edits. Maybe I should just add citation needed tags.--Le Petit Chat (talk) 10:18, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

hi @Oshwah: in the above mentioned ANI closure you asked me to let you know if User:Cavalry.charger was continuing to make unsourced edits to articles. They seem to be continuing with that. They don't seem to be communicating with User:Le Petit Chat. Is there anything you can do to help? Cheers. --Dom from Paris (talk) 10:28, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Domdeparis, and thank you for keeping me up to date regarding this user. I've applied an indefinite block on the account, and explained that the user will need to appeal their block and explain things in a manner that will satisfy an admin's concerns before they'll be unblocked and allowed to edit again. Please let me know if I can be of assistance with anything else. :-) Best - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:48, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

User:De la lombertie

Hi Dom, Thanks for the heads up on that IP sock of the globally banned user De la lombertie. If you look at the global contributions, he has also edited on both French and German Wikipedia today. At this diff, he has changed names to Klow9. I have filed a sock-puppet report on French Wikipedia here but there are often many days, or even weeks before the report is actioned. As he has recreated a page on Albert Chaminade, I hope that it can be deleted before any other users add to it. Any assistance that you can provide on either French or German Wikipedia would be helpful. Loopy30 (talk) 00:16, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Stephan Lehnstaedt

I find your comment regarding Stephan Lehnstaedt's notability controversial and destructiv.Xx236 (talk) 06:19, 22 July 2019 (UTC) I believe you have removed my page about ulica Świdnicka in Wrocław. Please look for another victim. Xx236 (talk) 06:20, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

hi @Xx236: which comment would that be? Dom from Paris (talk) 06:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I am not sure which article you are talking about but a year ago I moved this Draft:Świdnicka Street, Wrocław unsourced article that you had created to draft space to allow you to add the necessary sources to show notability. This draft was deleted as being stale (no edits in 6 months) by an admin. If that is what you define as victimisation I am not sure I can help you. As a new pages reviewer I have dealt with literally thousands of articles and these 2 popped up on the feed. Dom from Paris (talk) 07:22, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

from: Sam Perkins

Hi, Domdeparis -- I saw your post regarding my contributions and your concerns about my account. Is this the best place to communicate with you? I'm a retired editor/writer with a wide range of interests who contributes to Wikipedia with just one Wiki account, which I keep in my name. I'm not that experienced with Talk pages. Where should I post background about me? I lived (9ème and 18ème) and worked in Paris for many years, btw, and went to school in Chambéry. Sam Perkins (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

The Zanuck Company

Hi. I noticed that the page that you redirected to Richard D. Zanuck page, The Zanuck Company was re-created as The Zanuck Company (Film). Having checked Google Books, I actually think that the company is notable, so maybe it makes sense to start a discussion at the talk page before deleting/redirecting it again. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:00, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

@Bbarmadillo: Thanks for the heads up. Do you think that the company is independently notable from Zanuck himself? If not there is really no need for a WP:SPINOFF. From what I see the company is just a legal vehicle for Zanuck. Dom from Paris (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I am no expert in film production but there are several book mentions that are specifically about the company like 1 or 2, 3. Probably, at Google Books and Google News there are a lot more sources to prove its independent notability as a production company. --Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello. Please do not delete the page "Pune International Literary Festival. It is a legitimate festival. I am Nitajk. Nitajk (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2019 (UTC)