User talk:Phil Bridger/October 2022 – December 2022

My draft WP:AFD write-up for for Tenkai palm

This article (created in 2005 by an editor who stopped editing a long time ago) would appear to have a somewhat vexed history. References have been requested, supplied, questioned... but has never been tested for notability through a deletion discussion. In the Wikipedia:BEFORE process, I can see that there are any number of YouTube videos about this card trick, any number of mirrors of its Wikipedia content, and any number of card trick fan websites (with no doubt input by both Stage Magic enthusiasts and professionals). It would appear to me the question to be answered here is: is the term or technique "Tenkai palm" one that has significant coverage in reliable, secondary and independent sources? As always, please do prove me wrong. Pete AU aka

Your thoughts about this? User:Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:15, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

I have cited two such sources in the article. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Removal of WP:PROD from Coffman's attack page

Hello there, I admit I am new to this thing. Apparently I tried to submit a removal request for this page incorrectly? How does one go about raising a complaint about this sort of page with the powers that be? Thanks! SquireJames (talk) 06:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

If you have a problem with that page it would be best to communicate with K.e.coffman first at User talk:K.e.coffman. If you can't come to any agreement then the way to request deletion is to start a discussion at WP:MFD. Phil Bridger (talk) 08:03, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Alrighty. Given what i've seen of Coffman and their behaviour, there is zero chance of them taking that page down. Looks like a request is in order. Thanks for the information! SquireJames (talk) 09:12, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Well thanks for nothing I guess. I've tried my best to follow the instructions and you just keep reverting my edits. You also apparently refuse to help me because quote "I don't agree with you that fighting Nazi apologisers is a bad thing"

Coffman is not fighting Nazi Apologisers. Ironically, by deleting information they arbitrarily deem "not important", pushing their POV and generally censoring anything they deem "objectionable" they're goosestepping right in the footsteps of the people they claim to fighting.

But, again rather than actually assist someone who is new to all this extreme confusing procedure. (I just want to raise a complaint. THAT'S IT) you'd rather refuse and push your POV as well. Well done. Slow clap there. Aren't you an amazing individual. SquireJames (talk) 22:10, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I am just a volunteer here with limited time. I choose where to use it. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

@the OP's "goose-stepping" comment -- just wow. --K.e.coffman (talk) 22:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

K.e.coffman, Phil Bridger, since positive feedback on WP is rare, I wanted to mention that I greatly appreciate both of your contributions. Thanks for the work you continue to do here! — Jacona (talk) 20:34, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

PROD on Shujaat Ali Quadri

A new user Lionfox0909, added Notability and PROD tag to it, please have a look at it. Thank You. If someone harm a good article then it is very bad. I am also a new contributor here. ----- Bishtt Solanki (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Anyone, including you, can remove a WP:PROD tag from an article if they do not think it is an uncontroversial deletion candidate. The article cannot then be deleted unless a consensus is reached in a discussion at WP:AFD. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

@Phil Bridger as i read about Notability, the subject is Notable so i am going to remove the PROD, after understanding this from you. thanks. ----- Bishtt Solanki (talk) 20:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

And both of these editors were sockpuppets. Maybe they seek each other out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:11, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thank you for your contribution at the AFD for Christmas in Uzbekistan pointing out that when an editor wants to merge an article it's not appropriate or necessary to nominate it for deletion. It would save us a lot of time if people understood this! Jahaza (talk) 17:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Issue

Thanks for your comment. Is there a way to delete history if I edited not logged in? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=1119657702&oldid=1119657196 and afterwards ? Thanks. --Ransouk (talk) 19:01, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't see any need to delete the history. Just make a logged-in edit saying that you are responsible. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Discussion - Deletion of Committee on Sustainability Assessment

Hi Phil Bridger appreciate you taking time to reply, always good to go through the arguments before such a decision is made. Prior to adding the AfD tag I reviewed the sources and in particular, those connected to academic journals. I found little evidence to support the organisations notability.

My central arguments for deletion are as follows:

• In terms of scholarly impact, the organisation in mentioned in a few academic papers but almost always as an example of "Sustainability Frameworks" for comparison purposes and within these articles, COSA has insignificant coverage outside of internally published documents. See WP:LOTSOFSOURCES.

• The article listed with the highest citation impact for COSA was published internally and not affiliated with any high impact journals (as per "impact factor" metric). See WP:RS/SPS.

• Of those articles citing COSA, there is limited if not insignificant coverage of the organisation and lacks independent analysis and commentary by scholars unaffiliated with the organisation. See WP:MULTSOURCES.

Please specify your sources which support your view that the page should not be deleted as per WP:BURDEN.

Sadke4 (talk) 10:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

DYK for John Cooper (New Jersey politician)

On 10 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Cooper (New Jersey politician), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the home of American revolutionary leader John Cooper was used by General Lord Cornwallis as his headquarters during the British occupation of Woodbury, New Jersey, in 1777? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Cooper (New Jersey politician). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, John Cooper (New Jersey politician)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Mass contest WP:PROD deletion

Hi, your massed contest of the WP:PROD deletion I did means that these pages have to go to an AFD unless you revert your own edits. These pages were as a group were specifically discussed on the administrators noticeboard and the user agreed to stop creating them before they were eventually blocked. [[Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1064#Mass-creating_articles_based_on_one_unreliable_source and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing. If all these articles go to AFD it is taking a lot of time away from a large group of editors instead of wiki being cleaned up. Notice in the first notice that was a major concern. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 09:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

No, I will not self-revert. The Lugnuts arbitration case contained:

4) Proposed deletion (PROD) is a streamlined process for nominating an article for deletion. It should only be used for obvious and uncontroversial deletions where no opposition is expected. Proposed deletions are subject to the deletion policy, which requires that alternatives to deletion are considered before nomination. A prior search for more sources to establish notability is not required but considered good practice when the main concern is lack of notability or sources.

You have not been following this. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I actually have followed the procedure as outlined in quote you included in your reply but we can go through the AFD process even though AFD is already overworked with too few editors. KeepItGoingForward (talk) 09:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Admiral William Brown for deletion

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

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

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

Epa101 (talk) 13:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)