User talk:Legacypac/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 → Archive 10

Blocked

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Legacypac (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

See post below the block notice. Legacypac (talk) 11:54 am, Today (UTC−4)

Accept reason:

The general sentiment is that the block was too harsh or unneeded. However, you need to realize this is the second time this year you've been blocked for harassment (other block was also lifted) so your communication style is definitely attracting the notice of admins in not a good way. NeilN talk to me 18:21, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I am absolutely NOT harassing Springee in any way shape or form. I simply reverted a controversial edit that went against an RFC that had just closed - an edit that removed good sources and longstanding text that were negative to the NRA. [1] I don't track Springee's edits or care one wit about what he is doing - I only watch that article because I've edited it a few times. We established that "Whitewashing" is a perfectly acceptable word for what the edit was. Your Admin action here is not appropriate and needs to be reversed immediately User:JamesBWatson.

Since this was not specified - for the benefit of talkpage stalkers I have been blocked for 1 week for a single edit [2] restoring the status quo which Springee than reverted me on [3] and User:MrX promptly reverted back to the original version I had reverted to [4].

The charge that I am harassing anyone is baseless and a serious malignment of my editing. I require an WP:ADMINACCT of this action and an unblock. Legacypac (talk) 15:52, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

JamesBWatson has indicated he'll be away until the beginning of May. How do you want to proceed? A post to AN? --NeilN talk to me 15:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Admins really need to quit blocking editors and then taking extended absences. I have some comments about this, but I will wait to see if this goes to AN for a block review.- MrX 🖋 16:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I have to say I was astonished to see what he had been blocked for, he certainly didn't appear to be harassing Springee, User:Legacypac will be seriously missed at WP:AFC. Theroadislong (talk) 16:26, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
He's been blocked for a week, not indefinitely. Primefac (talk) 16:29, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
A week is a VERY long time at WP:AFC Theroadislong (talk) 16:30, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Not really, but a debate about the reliance on AFC on a single editor is something best debated elsewhere. Primefac (talk) 16:39, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
I'm having trouble seeing the need for this block.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Dlohcierekim, if you see no need for the block, and/or feel the unblock request is acceptable, you are allowed to unblock them. That's the whole point of an unblock request. Primefac (talk) 16:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't know User:NeilN. What's the best way to proceed in your opinion? If someone wants to just unblock me I'll have a discussion with JamesBWatson when he returns. It's a little unfair that Admins can just block an established editor but there is very little recourse against a bad block and the next admin cites the last bad block as justification for their own action. Legacypac (talk) 17:13, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I personally will not unblock in these types of cases without consulting the blocking admin or hearing the opinions of other uninvolved admins. Primefac did not indicate if they favor an unblock. Pinging Seraphimblade, who closed the ANI thread, for their thoughts. --NeilN talk to me 17:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
The ANi from some time ago this relates to did not even suggest sanctions on me. My previous actions were so mild I ignored the ANi and JamesBWatson closed it. Then Springee insisted it be reopenned and made me respond because it appears he thinks I think whitewashing is something other than "an attempt to stop people finding out the true facts about a situation" (Cambridge dictionary). Removing negative well sourced info on the NRA article is exactly whitewashing. This is all very strange. Legacypac (talk) 18:04, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

@NeilN: @Dlohcierekim: I closed that ANI the way I did due to the bickering and overall poor behavior of many editors. Legacypac was one who needs to change their approach (and even in this instance, focus on the edit, not the editor), but he was far from the only one who needs to do so. A week's block for saying "whitewashing" seems way over the top to me. That's far milder than a lot of the other bickering that's gone on in this area. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:09, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

@Primefac: Would favor discussion first in case I missed something. It looks like I'm the only one who has come close to saying "unblock" straight out. Also, cannot say for certain I am unbiased toward Legacypak.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 18:14, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank-you User:NeilN for the unblock on a very surprising block. I may take this up with User:JamesBWatson when he returns. The allegations he made are quite serious and deserve scrutiny. All editors should be more careful Legacypac (talk) 18:52, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I can see where James is coming from. About six or seven years ago I used "whitewashing" in an edit summary and was chastised by another editor for not assuming good faith. They had sort of a point. Everyone needs to choose their words more carefully when editing in an area covered by discretionary sanctions. --NeilN talk to me 18:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Go away

Pleas edo not post on my talk page. You keep showing up on article pages where I edit and harrassing, and its creeping me the fuck out. If you do not stop, I will report you for wiki-stalking. Please consider this your only warning. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 06:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Many Admins watch this talkpage including User:DeltaQuad, User:Nick and others. I posted a well justified warning on your talk page. You keep accusing me of stalking you - even calling me a "creepy stalker" on User:Beyond My Ken's talk section "Could you please stop?" (Sorry hard to link, reading the section is important) I've requested evidence but the only response is more accusations. Which article pages [5] have I followed you too exactly? Why are you ignoring the words of PMC? User_talk:Legacypac#Please_remember_AGF Legacypac (talk) 07:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Did I stutter? The next time you magically appear in an article discussion where your sole connection to it is your butthurt about my past behavior towards you will have some fairly dire consequences. Weigh my previous warning very carefully, and go do your thing - whatever it is - elsewhere. Do not poke this particular bear, or whatever metaphor you need to create to inspire you to leave me the fuck alone.
For my part, I will not post again here unless it is to inform you of impending discussion elsewhere. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 17:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Everyone is welcome on my talk page. You have not substantiated your accusations. Please do so with diffs. 18:23, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

PERM: User:ATZNA

Nice catch! Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, but it was not me that did the catching. Legacypac (talk) 18:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Portal MFDs

I would recommend you stop linking (rhetorically) your portal MFDs to the more general RFC (e.g., "Exactly why we need to shut down portals generally"), as that potentially makes your nominations at WP:MFD begin to look somewhat POINTy (and may tend to steer the discussions in less useful directions). As mentioned elsewhere, I also recommend limiting such nominations to just a handful of egregious cases. You have now nominated a handful of portals. It might be time to consider stopping for a while to see how these nominations play out. Of course, you don't need to take my advice, but I think it may avoid future problems along these lines (i.e., actually being accused of POINTiness). - dcljr (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

I've done 5 as examples that need to be deleted regardless of the RFC result. I'm not planning to do 100 at once. I see no problem neutrally linking them from the RFC page as that notifies interested editors and few people are watching these portals. A couple of editors immediately linked them to the VP discussion anyway and tried to shut down discussion. Legacypac (talk) 23:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Admittedly, a fair point. (No pun intended.) - dcljr (talk) 00:47, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article on Otto Heinrich Röttcher Barry Ne (talk) 05:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article Northlink College Barry Ne (talk) 16:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Hello Legacypac, thank you for approving my article, wish you the best. Mathias Shaw (talk) 21:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Request on 22:00:58, 22 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Mattklettner


What is meant by "Might justify a mention of East Carolina University, but not much" Thank you


Mattklettner (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Cyrene Quiamco

I think it needs some sort of link to the old AfD, I've never added one myself. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cyrene quiamco. Doug Weller talk 19:40, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

there is a bot that does that but I've posted a link to the talkpage. The AfD was 2009 which is a long time ago in internet fame. Legacypac (talk) 19:43, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
I added the {{old AfD multi}} template in Special:Diff/837772035. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:27, 22 April 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article on Eversdal Bellville Barry Ne (talk) 07:54, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for the review, I will work on your suggestions and resubmit. Thanks once again. Mal. Yahai (talk) 08:17, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

List of Japanese supercentenarians

Every couple of years some 'bright spark" wants to delete this page. Why? It is a never ending battle to keep this page. Japan has one of the largest populations of supercentenarians and is number one per capita. They deserve to have their own entry and we will fight to keep this page open on Wikipedia. Crveni5 (talk) 08:42, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
Thank you for recognising that the sources provided on the article I submitted proved that the article subject was noteworthy by Wiki's standards. I appreciate your diligence. Danielle2017! (talk) 11:23, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

16:40:17, 23 April 2018 review of submission by 2605:E000:1906:C3B4:0:3266:2924:7174

Requesting a re-review because there is an approved article in German and this is only a translation request. Why is this approved in German but not in English?

2605:E000:1906:C3B4:0:3266:2924:7174 (talk) 16:40, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Because each language operates under it's own policies. If you wish to move the page to mainspace yourself there is no technical block. It will then be subject to mainspace notability critera. Legacypac (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Sophie Martin

Dear Legacypac, thank you for your opinion. I don’t see how can I improve Sophie Martin in the Scottish Ballet artical as it only lists the names of the dancers. I believe Sophie Martin should be an individual arrival as she is well known and awarded dancer regardless being an employee of the Scottish Ballet and I named many references to show that. I will much appreciate your help if you could let me know what should I do next to make it better. Idotu2 (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Will reply on draft talk. Legacypac (talk) 21:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

09:34:32, 24 April 2018 review of submission by Patrickanaylor


Thanks for reviewing my draft article on Dereverberation. I plan to revise the draft in the near future. Whereas 'Reverberation' is a physical acoustic property, 'dereverberation' is a branch of signal processing technology. Accordingly, they are different in nature and therefore justify separate pages. I understand that I didn't make this clear in the draft article. I will try to do a better job in the revision. Patrickanaylor (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Portals work

Dear Legacypac,

I've been running into your clean up work in the portal namespace. Good job on catching those redirects and other speedies (P1 A3).

I understand you are helping to increase the quality level of the encyclopedia by trying to get rid of crap.

I marked the following portals for speedy deletion (and they are now gone):

  1. Portal:Cider
  2. Portal:Construction
  3. Portal:Cricket World Cup
  4. Portal:Indigenous languages of Australia
  5. Portal:Mayotte
  6. Portal:Premier League
  7. Portal:Spanish Philippines
  8. Portal:Televisa
  9. Portal:Yerevan

I agree quality must go up, and that the crap and uncompleted stuff must be disposed of or moved somewhere else until it is ready; or delinked...

Delinking portals

I noticed you've been delinking scant/crappy portals (from other portals, etc.) that aren't ready for prime time.

If you delink any that don't have Category:Portals under construction on them already, please add it. That way, we can find it easier later, to work on it, or get rid of it.

Just a heads up, in case you weren't already aware of it.

Thanks.    — The Transhumanist   07:54, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank-you for not trying to run interference on all my efforts. You may wish to reconsider your posts at MfD. Legacypac (talk) 07:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
How about this instead: you withdraw your nominations in those. Then we'll see if anyone wants to work on them (that is, I'll ask around). Abyssal, for instance, wants to userfy Portal:Belemnoids. He's a bit of a paleontology buff, and has done a lot of work in that area on Wikipedia. If he has plans for portals in his subject area, my inclination would be to let him have at it. I mean, take a look at his contributions: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Abyssal&offset=&limit=5000&target=Abyssal
It's true, he has either overextended himself, or is working on a very large long-term project. (Look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3APrefixIndex&prefix=Paleontology&namespace=118&hideredirects=1).
But he works on it non-stop. Who knows what part of all of that he'll finish, or if any other paleontology buffs will join him (wiki magic). We should leave him to it and be grateful for whatever results he produces for the encyclopedia (including portal space).
The WikiProject has been dormant for years, leaving editors on their own or in small groups working on the portals without central collaboration. Now that it is up and running again, you could post the portals you are concerned about on the WikiProject's talk page.
We've got a newsletter now, reporting the areas that need attention. I find that waiting for people to visit a WikiProject talk page is problematic, so I bring the page to them. :)
What do you say?    — The Transhumanist   09:34, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
I believe that portals should be shut down - waste of effort - confusing - stale - disregarded by the readers etc. I'm happy to help trim the worst because they need to go anyway even if portals survive the effort to remove the entire space. Legacypac (talk) 09:39, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Well, you could look at them as a pile of crap. Or you could look at the essence of the situation, and see portal space as a skunk works for subject-themed mini-websites and the encyclopedia pages of the future. We've been provided an opportunity and an incubation space by the Wikipedia Community for non-standard Wikipedia pages. Portal space has been exempted from the formatting requirements of articles, and can include graphical layouts, etc. That's cool. It's a laboratory in which we can experiment. Currently, portals have one main framework, but it is not mandatory. That's what most people don't realize. Portal design is left up to the imagination and innovation of their developers. So far, nobody has pushed the envelope, but the community has expressed a desire for change, and there is interest amongst the technos to go beyond. The questions I'm interested in, are: what can we turn these into? What new types of portals can we design? And what features can we dream up that would make users go "wow!"?
So, what I would like to do, is clean up what we have, and explore and experiment with the possibilities.    — The Transhumanist   11:15, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

King King (Band)

Dear Legacypac,

Thank you for your review of the draft for King King(band). I have taken on board what you say regarding sources and have added six sources from UK national magazines, as well as details of a national TV appearance on Vintage TV. As to the question of meeting WP:NMUSIC, out of the twelve categories I would argue that King King meet seven of them, which I can go into detail for each category should you wish. As as example, for category 11, they have been on the playlist for BBC Radio 2 for several years now. Here is a link to their playlist page:- https://www.bbc.co.uk/music/artists/c6175350-0452-4bc0-9d15-ba755d0d5584. Finally, there has been a King King page on the German version of Wikipedia now for the past three years, which has been accepted by the editors without any problems. So I hope that this re-edit will be suitable this time round.

Yours Poollight Poollight (talk) 11:38, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article on Fairmont High School Barry Ne (talk) 14:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

SMILE! 23 April 2018

Hello Legacypac, Me-123567-Me has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing! Me-123567-Me (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Request on 03:53:10, 26 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Iacesista


Hello I'm having trouble with getting my Wikipedia article accepted. I've been told to use reliable secondary sources, which I have done so in my last edit. I also checked if primary sources can be used as references. It says there you can as long as there will be no interpretation. Initially, I used a CV which was written by the organization that my subject (in the Wikipedia page) works for. I also used his page on Researchgate, Google scholar and in the University to support some of the information in my draft. I really need to know which one in my reference list is unacceptable

Iacesista (talk) 03:53, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

deja vu

Special:Undelete/Draft:Hearty_Mart naaaah. It's possibility.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Article yor declined: Draft:Hearty-Mart

Hi Legacypac, Could you please ellaborate what we need to do on our page so that it gets accepted? JP2300 (talk) 18:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Indeed a space vs a dash. Thanks. I suggest you write on a different business that is bigger and more notable than a 13 location chain of convenience stores. See WP:CORPDEPTH applies. Hint: WP:LISTED on a major stock exchange is a good indicator of notability. Legacypac (talk) 18:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Don't you think a company which has an international case study on its name is a notable company? Hearty Mart is an international case study for business students in India and Europe. People will not be writing a case study and a book on it if it wasn't notable. JP2300 (talk) 04:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Business is my area of expertise. No, being used as a university case study or being featured in a book is NOT enough to make the business Wiki notable. Why do you care so much about this one business getting a page? If the business becomes notable someone without an agenda will write about it. Legacypac (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I have no agenda behind writing this page and I am just familiar with the concept of Hearty Mart and so wanted to contribute by writing about it on Wikipedia. It seems that you cant get your head around the fact that someone wants to write about an organisation just for the sake of contribution and may not necessarily have an agenda behind it. Have a good day!JP2300 (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

12:03:51, 26 April 2018 review of submission by Greenvintageshoe


Thanks for your useful feedback! I've now added the references list, and properly formatted the references. Should now be ok. Thanks, Caroline.

Greenvintageshoe (talk) 12:03, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I'll let another reviewer take a look. Thanks Legacypac (talk) 15:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) 'LGP' I've declined it also, as the new 'refs' are pieces written by Galsworthy and are not about him. I've no doubt you'll let me know if you disagree. :P Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


moving portals into other namespaces

Please do not simply move portals into the draft namespace, it messes them up completely thanks to the complicated transclusion / subpage structures. Moving Portal:Eurypterids to Draft:Portal:Eurypterids without moving all subpages and fixing all transclusions makes it appear broken while it isn't. It is not a very good portal, but please do not make it worse. I have reverted your move. —Kusma (t·c) 15:48, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

No you should not revert my move. I've been removing the few inbound links. There are few subpages to that draft portal (maybe two) Legacypac (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
There have been enough people complaining about your various activities regarding the portal space that I highly recommend you lay off, at the very least until the RFC is closed. Primefac (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
threatening me again Primefac? Well how does one move a Draft portal from Portal space exactly? This one has a single DYK, some links to equally Draft portals and a intro that links to a different broader topic. It's clearly a Draft. Legacypac (talk) 16:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
I don't particularly care what you do or where, provided you don't do anything stupid. In particular, I don't give a rats ass about the portal space. I do, however, know how quick people are to take you to ANI over relatively minor things that could have easily been avoided if you had just backed off whatever it was you were doing a little earlier.
So no, I'm not threatening you. I'm just saying that if you keep it up I won't be surprised if someone else takes you to ANI. You and I both know that it will be a drawn out affair that just pisses everyone off when we could all be doing something more useful. Primefac (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Please don't do anything daft, Leg. We need you for some other important stuff. It won't help if you're slumbering in Wikijail or get a lot of people pissed. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Moving Portals to draft is pretty stupid. There are many better options. Archive all of Portal space at once, de-linking from mainspace. Archive by moving portals under WP:WikiProject Portal, while replacing them with auto-portals now in development. What do you think can happen with them in draft space? —SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

16:53:25, 27 April 2018 review of submission by Goldmaki


Hello Legacypac, thank you for your message. I didn't mean the article about Reinhard Gammenthaler to sound like a personal advertisement; since English is not my first language it's a little difficult for me... could you maybe help me and point out the passages that I should edit? Thank you very much! Sincerely Goldmaki (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review

Thank you for reviewing my submission. I appreciate the feedback. --Mfrerich (talk) 19:25, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks from me, as well! This was an excellent learning experience, and I feel like I made a grade I'm happy with. Jam today, jam tomorrow 15:40, 23 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Everydayjam (talk • contribs)

Hi, thank you for the tip!

Thanks for the review and all the hard work you put into wiki --DrDebo (talk) 15:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Request on 09:25:41, 26 April 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by VickyStarship


Hello! You made a speedy deletion request for mt draft article vTime Limited yesterday and the submission had already gone before I could grab the final version. Is there a way that I can get the copy back for reference? Also, could I have some feedback for the reason for the deletion? I made the changes suggested by the previous reviewer, taking out all of the sections that they felt were contentious. Thanks so much for your time. VickyStarship (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

VickyStarship (talk) 09:25, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm not an Admin so I can't help but maybe a watching Admin will take up your request Legacypac (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
You should be an admin so you can help :p Dial911 (talk) 21:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article on South African Ultra long distance running Barry Ne (talk) 02:57, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

ANI notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulmcdonald (talk • contribs) 04:58, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Diyal

Hi there, I appreciate your review but can you clearly tell me about the section of my article for submission that doesn't have the proper sources? Thank You reply soon and review the article please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don.chaudhry (talk • contribs) 12:41, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposed TBAN

Hey, Legacy. I think Bugs has earned a TBAN after that, but I'm concerned that the current proposal is too broad to realistically pass. The entire WP namespace includes all Wikiprojects, uncontroversial reporting mechanisms, dispute resolution mechanisms, etc. AFAIK the problem is only limited to the Refdesk and ANI. Perhaps the scope should be limited and the proposal re-made. Swarm ♠ 07:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

  • Huh, it's getting some support. I guess we can wait and see. Swarm ♠ 07:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
    TBH I think his conduct here is more emblematic of a general problem. I'm not sure if he'd be positive at WP:AFD etc (considering his (lack) of knowledge of even basic stuff of V). Maybe allow him to use AIV. I suppose a tighter wording could be proposed/uncontroversially amended in if that becomes a problem. Galobtter (pingó mió) 07:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Will see. The idea is to channel him exclusively to content. He might do something to swing the vote before it ends too. Legacypac (talk) 02:17, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

02:48:17, 2 May 2018 review of submission by TheGreatAaronCaper

Hi Legacypac, I'm hoping you can offer some guidance as I'm new at this. My draft was declined and think I understand why, but I'm not completely sure that I do. I'm unsure how to fix it. What should I be looking for to make it acceptable? I felt I had enough because it was proven he worked with some notable people on music, film, and television. Many people he has worked with have Wikipedia pages (which is how I found him). Mentions in credits are what this vocation allows and working on notable music is what the job is. I've seen other pages with less credits than he has, so I'm so confused and would appreciate help. Thank you! TheGreatAaronCaper (talk) 02:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I Need Your Opinion.

I need your opinion on something. First of, thank you for reviewing my draft on MIMI ELSA and moving it to the article space. I really appreciate. But it was tagged for deletion few minutes after it was out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamnvna (talk • contribs) 15:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Iamnvna, unfortunately the AFC process is not a "magic bullet" to completely inoculate a page from being nominated for deletion, it just means that it was good enough to maybe survive one should it be nominated. If you feel the page should be kept, I encourage you to comment on the deletion discussion stating your reasons for keeping the page. See WP:AFDEQ for more information. Primefac (talk) 15:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Request on 19:14:22, 2 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by DunComm


Hi Legacypac, The reason you gave for not accepting the article "Dunlap Institute for Astronomy & Astrophysics" was that "the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia." You are likely referring to the article for the David Dunlap Observatory. To clarify, I am creating a page for the institute because it and the observatory are two entirely distinct entities. They share a history (the "Dunlap" is the same family), but there is absolutely no organizational, financial or operational relationship between the two. The observatory is in Richmond Hill and is run by the City of Richmond Hill and amateur astronomy volunteers for public outreach; the Dunlap Institute is a research institute established at the U of Toronto in 2008 with astronomers who conduct current research. (Dunlap Institute astronomers don't use the Dunlap Observatory as it ceased to be a research instrument many years ago.) The article for the Dunlap Institute is needed for this very reason: to distinguish between the two and minimize confusion. For example, a Google search for the institute will give correct results pointing to our website and related sources, but it will also mistakenly give the Wikipedia page for the observatory (I'm guessing bc of the reference in that article to the institute--which, once our article is hopefully approved, I will request be deleted). I hope that makes sense. Cheers.

DunComm (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Please put the comments on the talkpage. I recall the suggested title is a redirect - if so you can just put your page directly on the existing title. I don't believe there is an issue with page beyond it being covered already. I'll not have time to look at this again for a few days. Legacypac (talk) 21:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Help

Hello. I need you help. How do I report a user anonymously. I have been victim of bullying by multiple users (some I think are admins). I used the admin attention section but because they are admins I assume they just removed it. Thanks. Makro (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

You can tell if someone is an Admin or not - go to their userpage and looks to the left for View User groups. I'm not an admin. If you feel someone is following you around try [6] to build a case. I've been harassed a few times but I kind of doubt multiple editors are doing that to you at once as its pretty rare. Legacypac (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
It's definitely 3 editors (at least one is an admin). How can I get around that. I try to contact Wiki but they ignore. It's like they dont care about their users. Makro (talk) 09:36, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
It's exceedingly hard to deal with regular abusive editors and virtually impossible to stop an Admin from abusing you. Your ownly defence is perfectly clean hands and really good luck. There are over five million pages to edit. Ignore whoever is bothering you and find an area or two to get really good at. Legacypac (talk) 10:28, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I'll just ignore them but keep evidence in case it escalates. Makro (talk) 10:41, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
User:Makro - I am a little late to comment, but I see no evidence that you are being bullied by admins. I see no evidence for two reasons. First, you follow the permitted but less-than-desirable practice of deleting your talk page rather than archiving it, and this makes it hard to see what you are complaining about. Second, in looking at the history, it does appear that you at least should have discussed the issues rather than deleting them and then claiming that you need to report admin abuse anonymously. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
By the way, there is a way to report users almost anonymously, anonymously to everyone but CheckUsers and Arbs, which is to report them logged out. It won't do you any good, and it is only your own nose that you will be sticking the beans in. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
User:Legacypac is apparently less adverse to complaints about bullying by admins than I am, but his talk page is a semi-public place, and for every real case of bullying by admins there are at least 25 cases of combative editors who consider cautions directed to them to be a form of bullying. Some of them get sanctioned. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Legacypac is a bit jaded as experience has shown. Makro Wikipedia is an open environment. We like it that way. By editing anonymously you will only attract scrutiny of your own behavior and make yourself look bad. There are no secrets here and no secret running behind someone's back. Have you considering replying to your alleged abusers and asking them for clarification? Have you tried posting a "helpme" template on your talk page? Can you cite examples of the so called abuse by providing links to said abuse? As Robert says, by removing talk page comments you make it hard to evaluate others' comments. You also make yourself look bad. Robert is very wise and will steer you in the right direction. Was it abuse, or information you did not want to hear? Await your apply.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Legacypak, telling him to ignore the comments of others was not a great idea. Just a quick review shows there have been several problems. He may or may not have addressed them. From the post here, I guess not. Makro, just a quick review shows that you need to heed the the advice and warnings others have given you. I've seen no abuse, just genuine concerns with your editing. I won't enumerate here, but really.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:17, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Philip Key, Genevieve Hofmeyr and Moonlighting Film Production Services

Hello Legacypac (talk)

Recently, I noticed that you rejected several of my articles because you deemed them not to be notable. Moonlighting Film Production Services has produced or co-produced a number of the world's biggest blockbuster feature films, e.g. "Avengers: Age of Ultron", "The Dark Tower", "Mad Max: Fury Road", "Safehouse" to name a few, major television series, e.g. "Black Sails", "Homeland", "24". Wikipedia has articles on American, Canadian, even Zimbabwean producers that have produced films and TV series that are much less notable and in fact obscure. Genevieve Hofmeyr and Philip Key and their company Moonlighting Film Production Services are in fact the most successful and most prominent film production company and producers on the African continent. I have rewritten the articles, made them much shorter, too. Could you please revisit them and reconsider accepting them please? Here is a link to the company's website so that you can see for yourself their incredibly long, notable and prestigious history of international film and TV production: http://www.moonlighting.co.za/

Kind regards, Mockby 123 (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Please post this info on the Draft talkpage and another reviewer will consider after you resubmit. Legacypac (talk)

Draft:Elnaaz Norouzi

I think Elnaaz Norouzi is notable enough to accept as she got three main roles in notable films. What do you think about it? L293D (☎ • ✎) 16:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my articles on Stellenberg and Karl Bremer Hospital Barry Ne (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

14:03:40, 4 May 2018 review of submission by 2601:5C5:8301:ACE:2980:65D3:7580:5F7A


Hello and thank you for your recent review of my submission located here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mobile_Surveillance_System . Your comment stated that "the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at {Surveillance system} instead" I see that the Wikipedia subject of "Surveillance" exists (not Surveillance system), and covers an extremely wide range of topics relating to that field, however much like the Wikipedia reference to "Home" covers many types of homes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home, Wikipedia also contains the subject of "Mobile Home" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_home, among others. A Mobile Surveillance System, in my opinion, is different and unique in the same way and I submit that it should have its own page. I think that Wikipedia users appreciate when they can find more specific information on subjects, and having a link from "Surveillance" to more specific content relating to "Mobile Surveillance System" will only improve a Wikipedia users experience. I do appreciate your efforts and hope that you will reconsider to allow acceptance of my submission. Thank you! 2601:5C5:8301:ACE:2980:65D3:7580:5F7A (talk) 14:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Not even close?

At Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Blu-ray, you said: "No "keep" voter here has even come close to advancing anything but a perceived procedural reason not to discuss deleting any specific portal page group." That is completely untrue, as two days before your comment my "Keep" !vote was entirely based on what I saw at the portal itself (and other, directly related pages) and did not even mention the RFC or similar "procedural" matters. (And, as you can see in my comment 3 hours prior to my "Keep" !vote, I explicitly stated that, IMO, the MFD could go forward while the RFC was going on.) In the future, please try to avoid such cavalier mischaracterizations of the "other side" in discussions. - dcljr (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Moonlighting Film Production Services & Phillip Key (Film producer)

Hi Legacypac

Thank you for reviewing my draft articles mentioned in the subject above. I understand that they were declined because the few sources that I originally included did not demonstrate notability in a sufficient way. I have spent a couple of hours finding adequate sources to demonstrate the notability of both subjects. Could you please have another look at them and accept if you think they are now sufficient? Below are the links to the articles for your convenience:

Moonligthing Film Production Services: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Moonlighting_Film_Production_Services#History Phillip Key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Phillip_Key#Biography

I apologise for not doing it adequately originally - I am new to Wikipedia and still learning.

Thank you very much. Mockby 123 (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Often I let another reviewer do the next review. You should post this on the Draft's talkpage for everyone to read. Legacypac (talk) 18:18, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thanks so much for accepting my articles. I appreciate it Barry Ne (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Good effort

You were certainly right to try this (I think consensus for it should have been clear from the already-offered statements), too bad it didn't work out. --JBL (talk) 14:00, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

A shameful abusive close [7] Legacypac (talk) 14:20, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review and acceptation

Thank you for reviewing my submission. I have two questions, please: I wish to add photos that I find on the athlete's wiki pages but it seems I don't have the permission? At this point, should my page be moved/renamed? Thank you again. (talk)—Preceding undated comment added 16:20, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks for getting back to me about the article! I appreciate the kind message rather than a blunt "that was bad, try again" :) cheers! Lamblings (talk) 16:47, 7 May 2018 (UTC)Lamblings

17:53:31, 7 May 2018 review of submission by Aislinn.tucker


Hi Legacypac, my submission for the company Anacrusis was recently declined. I am making updates, but I am confused as to what changes would make our page sound less like advertising. I based the format off of other similar wikipedia pages, such as Secret Road Music Services or Trap Nation. Do you have any suggestions as to what we could remove or add in order for the page to be approved? Thanks!

Aislinn.tucker (talk) 17:53, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

You should not be writimg about your own company WP:COI Legacypac (talk) 17:55, 7 May 2018 (UTC) already answered here [8] Legacypac (talk) 17:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Please, note what is wrong?

Hello Legacypac. I am confused about what is wrong again and as to what changes need to make. I based the format on other similar wikipedia pages. Thanks! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:AxxonSoft — Preceding unsigned comment added by AzretTeberdiev (talk • contribs) 18:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Heads up

Thought you might be interested in the general direction of the Portals WikiProject. It looks like we will be able to obsolete up to 130,000 of the 150,000 pages in portal namespace (or maybe even more), by migrating excerpts to portal base pages via selective transcription. Personally, I'd like to see all the subpages go, leaving just the 1500 portal base pages. We're working out the details of the migration on the WikiProject's talk page.    — The Transhumanist   10:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

over stretched

I think you've over stretched that there rubber band. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Soubhik Das

Well, well. That case of interfering with the AFD wasn't just disruption. It was sockpuppetry, and apparently undisclosed paid editing. Thank you for reporting it in the first place. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:27, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I smelled a rat. Glad it worked. Legacypac (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Khan long hin

This was previously an AfC submission bt was moved from draft to mainspace by Paul 012. Is this action allowed? Anything that afc reviewers can do about it? This is bypassing AfC submission right? Plus, I declined the draft as it contains a list of its process. EROS message 17:45, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

AfC is optional so we can't stop it. You can PROD or AfD it or tag problems. I've not looked at the page so just answering generally. Legacypac (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
I see, thanks. EROS message 17:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict)There isn't anything wrong with another person seeing notability in a draft and moving it (there is no "bypassing", as AfC is not mandatory). Also, just having a list of processes does not mean it violates WP:NOT, heliosxeros - if a problem can be fixed by a quick removal of a section etc then there's no need to decline on that basis. Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:50, 8 May 2018 (UTC)(talk page watcher)

I actually have come to think that it is a good thing when unsuitable drafts are moved to mainspace because the full set of CSDs, AfD, and PROD becomes available to us where we are very limited with deletion tools on Drafts. No Index in Draft is the same as No Index in mainspace. User:Insertcleverphrasehere may have more thoughts on this. Legacypac (talk) 17:55, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

support Quek157 (talk) 19:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

20:08:43, 8 May 2018 review of submission by Literarum fan


Hello, Thank you for the time and energy you spent on the submission and for your comment. That is kind of you. In fact, a major number of references and notes come from other sources and not from the author's works. They are from secondary sources. So it would be really kind of you to reconsider your decision. Should you have any comment to improve the page for this author who really deserves it and I am writing my PhD dissertation on his works, I will do my best to apply them. Best, Rastin (Literarum Fan) Literarum fan (talk) 20:08, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok - that also gives me confidence he is notable. Legacypac (talk) 20:12, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Ciera Rogers

Hi LegacyPac, you recently declined a submission I left for Ciera Rogers because there were some social media links that were used as references by mistake. I have since made the adjustments are you able to check the re-submission? thanks so much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ciera_Rogers

Christinagirgis (talk) 00:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

G13 Eligibility Notice

The following pages will become eligible for CSD:G13 shortly.

Thanks, HasteurBot (talk) 03:01, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Infant Annihilator

Protection's been dropped. Primefac (talk) 13:51, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

I did not do analysis because it needed Admin. Legacypac (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Right, which is why I dropped the protection. Primefac (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Request on 15:09:34, 9 May 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Jkclements


In response to your comment: "I already suggested this topic would be better handled as a section in the Skyway bridge page." I respectfully disagree. The Cooper River Bridge Run, Seven Mile Bridge Run, Crescent Connection Bridge Run, and many others have their own individual pages. Why can't Skyway 10K have theirs?

Jkclements (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

The existence of other pages is irrelevent. This run does not have enough coverage to justify a stand a lone page. We can have coverage on the bridge page and a redirect for the run name. Legacypac (talk) 17:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

AFCH note

Just as a note, when you put in the url param into the AFCH decline for copyvios, please just include the URL(s) of the websites; you've included the entire earwig URL a few times now and is functionally useless. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 17:50, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok very good Legacypac (talk) 18:33, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
As an update to this, I've noticed a fair number of your |cv| declines and G12s in the last few days have no URLs in them. The URL is really helpful for a starting point, especially if an initial search doesn't turn up anything. Cheers, Primefac (talk) 19:52, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

19:50:46, 9 May 2018 review of submission by Deadalus13


This is one hundred percent my own words. This content is original and appears nowhere else. It is extensively cited. Please reconsider your decision.

Thank you

Deadalus13 (talk) 19:50, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok well fix the formating and resubmit. Legacypac (talk) 19:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

19:57:04, 9 May 2018 review of submission by Deadalus13


A follow up on the article you declined, "The Kapustinsky LED Pulser" - while the words are my own, I did copy and paste them from another doc onto the editing platform, could that be what you are seeing? Again, however, the content is 100% original, hence the need for the article to exist.

Thank you.

Deadalus13 (talk) 19:57, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


Fixing Kapustinsky LED Pulser Article

(Yes the lines don't flow properly. Legacypac (talk) 20:01, 9 May 2018 (UTC))


Thank you for your help, could you clarify? In source and visual they appear ok? Deadalus13 (talk) 21:02, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Publishing Minority Enterprise Development Week with AFCH 0.9

Is there any reason why in publishing an article the script doesn't remove the AFC / sandbox tags? This happened here when you published the article. I do keep an eye out on the Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space for copy-paste moves, but more than half of them just appear to be incomplete publications via the script. Cheers — IVORK Discuss 06:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Rob Halligan review

Hi thanks for reviewing my article

The main reason for creating it was to have a page to link to from the After the Fire page where he is mentioned as the current lead vocalist and guitar player. Its the fact that he is listed on this page that I felt made him noteworthy rather than the rest of his activity. The references etc that are listed on his page are mainly there to support the facts that were stated rather than evidence of being noteworthy.

Is there anything specific you can suggest that may help get the page sorted.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisphunt (talk • contribs) 08:46, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for the review and a question!

As a first time submitter, I appreciate your review and feedback! I would like to continue to improve the sources, but a significant amount of the person's work was covered, noted, awarded in the 1980s and 1990s and there are not adequate online links to them from the original sources. How do I manage that? Also, The work was also heavily cited in academic work but I don't see a place to note that in order to substantiate criteria #1 in WP:PROF Again, thank you! SherCh (talk) 01:43, 11 May 2018 (UTC)SherCh

SherCh, offline sources are perfectly acceptable for use; just make sure that you include enough information so that an interested user can find the source (in a library etc). See WP:REFB for more. Primefac (talk) 12:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Legacypac/Archive_6&oldid=1140437785"