User talk:Alex Shih/Archive/2017-3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 (Page 2 3 4) | 2018 Page 2 3) |

User:HowardHugues2

Hi. I just wanted to give you a heads up about conversation I am having about an article that a new user, HowardHugues2, might want restored. The conversation is here. Regards, 05:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Steve Quinn: Thanks Steve. The subject might have had some notability (hardly) but it was far too promotional, possibly undisclosed paid editing. Thanks for the heads up. Alex ShihTalk 05:55, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Pending Changes Review Permission

Hello, I would like to know why my pending changers reviewer was revoked. You said that he maid a "(legitimate complaint about your patrolling)" when this was not a page that had Pending Changes Protection on it. It was a vandalism issue and I believe that should not constitute my pending changes reviewer permissions to be revoked. Mdriscoll03 (talk) 18:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mdriscoll03: I already explained to you. To be even more clear, it's removed to protect Wikipedia from possible misuse because you are continuing to exercise questionable judgement, which is demonstrated by another example here. The only time you should be blanking anything on non-article space is when it's applicable to WP:BLANKING. Alex ShihTalk 00:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@Alex Shih: I'm going to be completely honest with you, I have never read the WP:BLANKING. But I'm just asking you for a second chance, now I understand what to do and what not to do. I promise you I will never do anything like this again.

FYI

[1]. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@Kudpung: Thanks for the note! Alex ShihTalk 02:53, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

PM

You seem to be processing most of the page mover permission requests. I'd like to ask that you be a bit more critical in it. I see several users who have this user bit but who have a long history of seriously problematic behavior at RM, like tagteamed obstructionism, tendentious !voting against consensus to try to blockade routine moves that reflect exactly the same moves as long series of successful previous group RMs just because they didn't like the outcome, CIVIL/NPA/AGF abuse of RM as a grudge-matching battleground, and even pointedly declaring that they agree with the rationale for a move but oppose to just to stick it to the nominator. This is a powerful and fairly dangerous tool. (I don't have any issue with any of your approvals/rejections in particular, and defended your decision with regard to In Ictu Oculi despite a naysayer. You just seem to be PM-central, so I'm raising the concern with you first. :-)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  09:26, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: Noted. I think my extended response to the IIO thread reflects my approach to page mover access. If you have concerns with any particular user with the page mover access demonstrating the behaviour that you are describing, let me know anytime so I can spend the time to investigate with other admins/editors and remove the access if necessary. I am not sure if I am necessarily "PM-central" (I work with NPP more I think), but that's beyond the point. One point that I have taken from what you are saying is page mover requests should probably be held with the same scrutiny as template editor requests, and I think that's a fair point. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 09:49, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
That is where i"m going with it. I've opened a thread at WT:PAGEMOVER about raising the requirements, too. If nothing else, it would cut down on the "yeah, riiight" requests by rank noobs. Slowing the process down markedly might also help (at least several days, as used for some other PERM processes). As for specific problematic editors, if I were to specify names here it would cause drama. I'm inclined to let it lie unless/until they do something wrong with the tools (per what I said about IIO – if someone's already got the permissions, use ANI to remove them). I did see one of them move something to a name they prefer after (but quite a while after) an RM had moved it to the current name; I had that undiscussed/un-consensus move RMTR'ed back. That's the only blip I've seen so far, but I'm also not looking very hard. I just had a "How on earth did this person get the PM bit?" reaction to about 5 usernames on the list. I've started watchlisting the requests page, though I'm not one to check watchlists every day. I'm one of the main "MoS and AT people", and have a pretty good sense of who's been long-term problematic in the area. (My own record isn't spotless; I got a short-term move ban several years ago, but it was for using direct moves to make policy-compliance moves, which seemed to me non-controversial, but two editors claimed it was controversial and I got the ban punitively, after already agreeing I would use regular RM process. Kind of weird, but also old history. So, I couldn't argue for "RM perfection", but I can argue that a history of attack-laden tendentious resistance against policies, guidelines, and other site-wide consensus being applied to one's "pet" topic is a strong indication one should not get the PM bit.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ<  10:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

added Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem
removed Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
  • A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Terra Sylvestris article

Hello

The code of the old article(the one you deleted) as text just sent to me somehow would be much appreciated otherwise if you cant give me this I would like to write a new article about Terra Sylvestris and submit it for review — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theokarfak (talk • contribs) 19:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

@Theokarfak: Please enable your e-mail in Special:Preferences so I can send a copy to you. Alex ShihTalk 06:27, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Tom Petty

Alex, that page is remarkably poor condition. Are you sure it should be on the main page? The death needed to be confirmed before we could post, but I'm not sure there's been enough eyes on the quality of the article at ITN/C. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:53, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Ah, my mistake. I will self revert, thanks. Alex ShihTalk 05:54, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, and no worries. Vanamonde (talk) 06:09, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Idealhusband appeal

Dear Mister Shih,

As soon as I discovered my article on Michael Nowlin Caan had been deleted, I made an appeal, in relation to both the supposed commercial 'promotion' and the notability criteria. However, I can find no response to my appeal, and the page is still deleted.

To put it nicely, I now wonder if your background helps you to appreciate developments in either space science or disability access rights? Please let me know if I can help with any further information or clarifications.

The original link = https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Idealhusband/sandbox&direction=prev&oldid=803454619 IdealhusbandIdealhusband (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Idealhusband: Hi. I've read your appeal (presumably yours, although it was posted by an IP user). Unfortunately Dr. Caan represents the ingenuity, public service and originality of California's scientific community is not an argument for having an article on Wikipedia. Being dedicated to good cause is also not a reason, please see WP:SOAPBOX. Unless if there are any reliable sources that verifies the notability of the subject, you may want to consider alternative outlets. Alex ShihTalk 06:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Shih, I have revised my account to include more Notable aspects of Michael Caan's scientific and design work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idealhusband (talk • contribs) 10:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Shih, An updated version is now at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Caan for consideration. Thank you for your earlier comments, Idealhusband. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idealhusband (talk • contribs) 16:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Shih, Dr. Caan knew I was working on his page, but now it is online he has contacted me to say he wants it deleted, for Privacy reasons. I am sorry to trouble you again, but at Michael Caan's request would you please delete his page again? Thank you, IdealhusbandIdealhusband (talk) 09:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

@Idealhusband: OK, done. Regards to Mr. Caan. Alex ShihTalk 09:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks for your rapid response, Idealhusband86.185.55.42 (talk) 09:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes

I checked WP:PERM and found that nominating someone for pending changes reviewer is not explicitly allowed and not prohibited, so I decided to contact you here. I am nominating user Bilorv. The reason is after I visited the heavy backlog to review, I found his edit waiting for more than 4 hours. I then visited his page and with his edit history, I personally think he's capable and can help too in reducing the backlog that accumulate more often. If you found him eligible or ineligible that's OK and if I should ask him to request, it's all right. Thanks –Ammarpad (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: I don't see any concerns, so  Done. Thank you. Alex ShihTalk 04:58, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Inappropriate close of Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stephen_Paddock

I don't see how your closure of Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Stephen_Paddock is justified at all. Most of the users that !voted Redirect at the AfD were not regulars of AfD, but rather were just stopping by after visiting what must be a very highly viewed article. Parroting a redirect rationale without any real understanding of the underlying policy. The policy explicitly supports keeping the article, as pointed out by myself and others. In no way was it a WP:SNOW close either, with 27 (redirect) vs 20 (keep), so I'm not sure how you justified closing it early. Especially when you look at the most recent 10 !votes or so, it is clear that Keep is actually gaining, and that Keep voters have a better understanding of policy (they actually discuss the wording of the policy rather than just parotting "redirect Per BIO1E" with no deeper analysis (which others argue supports keeping AND point out why).

I was just stopping by to do a detailed analysis of the people who are actually !voting, to point out that the redirect/delete voters are not, for the most part, AfD regulars who understand the policy, but rather other editors that are just stopping by due to the high profile of the subject and don't really understand the policy they are arguing about (which is why they don't go into detail about WHY it applies). A lot of people object to this sort of article on principle (giving the perpetrator attention) and are happy to parrot a policy that doesn't really apply in order to justify getting rid of it, even temporarily.

See the talk page at Omar Mateen, this exact same discussion happened with a merge discussion at the previous 'largest shooting in american history'.

This has only been open a grand total of less than a day, and clearly doesn't have any kind of SNOW result. Your rationale that it can be interpreted both ways should be a 'no-consensus close (but is still far too early for one), how does this get interpreted to simply take one side and draftify (which no one suggested)?

I appreciate what you were going for here, to try to close it before it gets too unwieldy, and to come up with a solution that suits both sides, but unfortunately that is not going to satisfy anyone that !voted keep.

I could argue that the draft qualifies right now for recreation as notable, and move it back over the redirect. Can I? No, because your close de-facto endorses one side of a no-consensus argument. Please undo the redirect and repoen the discussion.

I will definitely be filing a deletion review otherwise, as this close seems highly unusual and does not follow normal deletion close protocol. A close this early, as I understand it, must be either a SNOW close, or else qualify for speedy deletion. Neither is the case here. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Insertcleverphrasehere: Thank you for expressing the concerns. I am aware of the precedents Omar Mateen and Seung-Hui Cho, but ideally each case should be assessed on their own merits (one major difference is the motives of these two subjects were almost immediately available and widely reported, compared to the little information available on the motives of the current subject, which is slightly related to #2 of WP:BLP1E in the context of this very moment). I don't believe speculating on the intentions/ability of other editors or prediction of trends are particularly helpful.
I think in my closing rationale I have clearly expressed that this subject certainly deserves an article based on the arguments presented, quite possibly in the next few days, once there are more sustained coverage on the significance of the subject (I am quoting WP:SUSTAINED as it was mentioned in your edit summary; the way I read it combined with other opinions in the discussion is that lagging indicator of notability indicates that Stephen Paddock will be notable once there are sustained coverage over significant period of time in the context of his notability). Before that happens, the underlying concern is that the better compromise is to wait.
For this case, I think I will defer to the process, so please go ahead and file an deletion review request, and include a link to my statement here. Sorry for your time. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 06:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
You know, that is a good rationale for Redirect/draftify for now !vote. I wish you had made one. The problem, is that your rationale for closing that you express above is not an accurate reflection of the consensus of the discussion (or lack thereof). It is clear that there is no consensus one way or the other in the linked discussion.
I shouldn't have brought up any rationale for keeping the article in my comment above, because:
The much larger problem, and the primary reason you should revert your close, is that the close was made out of process. The only reason for closing a discussion 6 days early (as far as I know) is because of WP:SNOW or because it meets one or more speedy deletion criteria. 20 v 27 with a trend toward keep does not represent a SNOW close, as the result is not 'obvious' at all. No speedy deletion criteria were cited in the close. If you want to "defer to the process", can I ask that you re-open the discussion and let the process run its course.
The discussion period is 7 days, not 9 hours, at least the last time I checked. Your rationale for closing early "before it blows out of proportion" does not appear rooted in policy except perhaps as an example of ignoring the rules. I don't think this is a good precedent to set for closures of deletion discussions. Please correct me if I am wrong.
If you could please respond yay or nay to this comment it would be appreciated, as I'd rather not open a deletion review unless absolutely necessary. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 07:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
@Insertcleverphrasehere: Fair enough, I will re-open the discussion. Alex ShihTalk 07:25, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. And sorry for going off on tangents earlier when I should have just stated my main point and left it at that. I could have been much clearer in my first comment. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 07:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Terra Sylvestris Article continued

Hello

I have now enabled email so I believe you can send me the code I asked for

thank you in advance

All The Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theokarfak (talk • contribs) 07:16, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Theokarfak: OK, sent. Alex ShihTalk 07:22, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello, I want to thank you for protecting the article Richmond Boakye. It has been for months that the article has been vandalised by one same person using numerous IPs and always in same way, removing from the infobox the data that the player first had a spell at Red Star as loaned player and then was brought definitelly by the club. By agreement at WP:FOOTY the two spells should be listed separatelly and never joined together as the IP is doing. It is an absolutelly silly change, with no major meaning, however the IP refuses to collaborate and understand despite efforts have been made by me and othere editors to explain that to him. It seems really a case of an extremelly stubborn vandal who doesnt give up for more than a yer already I believe.

Unfortunatelly, that same IP is doing the exact same vandalisation at another current Red Star footballer article which also initially had a loan spell at the club before being brought, the article is Mitchell Donald. FkpCascais (talk) 17:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@FkpCascais: Done, thank you. Let me know anytime if the disruptive editing continues. Alex ShihTalk 18:00, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, I will for sure. Best regards! FkpCascais (talk) 18:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Guidance on draft Octagon Systems page

Alex - I'd like to get your guidance on why you deleted the draft Octagon Systems page as advertising. Are there particular areas you saw as key issues? Octagon Systems is already referenced in multiple Wikipedia articles and I'm just trying to round out the info loop. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuggedSystems (talk • contribs) 18:17, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Anamika Mishra

Hello, I came across this draft while reviewing pending submission at AfC. An article with similar title was AfDed and deleted 2 years back. Currently, the title is protected from creation. May you please check the deleted content? If the contents are similar then this draft should be declined else the 3 references presented in this draft look reliable. Thanks. Hitro talk 19:14, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@HitroMilanese: Hello. The current version is quite different from the version that was deleted (and the recent deleted version from the mainspace). Although they use the same sources, most of the promotional content/extraneous details were removed. I think due to the history of this title it's probably better if someone that speaks Hindi can check the sources in detail before promoting to mainspace. Thanks and regards, Alex ShihTalk 22:44, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. I guess I will leave it for the user proficient in Hindi. Regards. Hitro talk 08:55, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Permissions

Hey Alex, sorry for bothering you. I was just wondering if I was eligible to reapply for Rollbacker because I have achieved 200 mainspace edits since my last request for Rollback permissions. Mdriscoll03 (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mdriscoll03: Seriously? It's been only two days since I placed a warning on your talk page about this. Without adding anything further, please wait at least one month before asking again. Thanks. Alex ShihTalk 22:50, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Alex Shih: I thought you denied me due to the fact that I only have about 170 mainspace edits when I applied for Rollbacker status.

New Page Reviewer Permission

Hi Alex, Just saw you declined my request for the New Page Reviewer permission --- I've been pretty infrequent on Wikipedia as of late, so just to confirm, the reason for denial was because I've made so few edits lately? And the barrier for entry to that permission and access to page curation is just being a frequent editor? Thank you for clarification. Upjav (talk) 22:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@Upjav: I wouldn't say "just being a frequent editor", please look at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Reviewers again. In your case, yes, please be active for at least 3 months with around 500 mainspace edits, as this is the consensus for users without extensive experience and who have been inactive for extended period of time. Alex ShihTalk 23:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Alex. Sorry to make you rehash - wasn't entirely clear to me when I initially read it. And of course I understand it's not some sort of pure quota - just wanted to affirm it because I thought I had read differently somewhere else. Cheers, Upjav (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
@Upjav: No problem, thanks! Feel free to let me know when you are closer to the activity level. Alex ShihTalk 04:10, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Culture Machine Media Private Limited Page deleted

Hi,

I sent the draft 'Culture Machine Media Private Limited' for review and see that it is deleted. I had previously tried to create a draft with the name 'Culture Machine Media Pvt. Ltd.'. Let me know how to proceed and publish my page.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.76.76.74 (talk) 12:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello - Deletion of Page

Hi Alex,

I hope all is well and that you're having a great week.

I noticed that you deleted a page from Wikipedia that I uploaded.

I just wanted to find out why and if this page could please be restored?

Our team email address is: info@spbprojects.co

If you could correspond with us via that email address that would be much appreciated.

I hope you have a great evening and speak soon.

Kind regards,

David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidsmith87 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Gaga Bhatt

Hi. Did you not see the talk page of Gaga Bhatt before you deleted it?—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 16:56, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, the text that was supposedly copyright infringement was a quoted paragraph. Said paragraph had been added 12 minutes before the CSD notice by a new user. And the quoted paragraph was from a book published in 1921, i.e., in the public domain. The CSD had been contested by me on the talk page with these reasons. Please restore the page. I'm away for a few days and might not respond to any pings. Thanks.—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 19:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
@Cpt.a.haddock: OK, restored. Public domain text still needs proper attribution, the bare minimum is {{PD-notice}} or else it can still be summarily deleted (not directed toward you, of course, speaking in general terms). I've made some alterations accordingly. Alex ShihTalk 20:08, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

RevDel request

I've been contacted off-wiki by an article subject who finds that he has someone who is using links to personal attacks on him in the history of the talk space of the article as part of a harassment campaign. The material was appropriately deleted from the talk page back in the day, but not revdel'd. Could you possibly revdel Talk:Michael Bérubé revision 618262400 (25 July 2014) through and including revision 621707128 (01:14, 18 August 2014)? Thanks. --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

@NatGertler: Done, thanks. Alex ShihTalk 04:04, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you--Nat Gertler (talk) 04:34, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Chris Philp

Hello Alex,

I have edited Conservative MP Chris Philp's page to include an Independent Newspaper news item regarding his time at Oxford University.

Although correctly sourced, this has been serially deleted owing to not portraying the Conservative MP in a positive light.

I have been called an 'obsessive troll' for including the Independent Newspaper item.

[1]

[2]

Many thanks

Tommytittle (talk) 08:17, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.independent.co.uk/news/student-fined-for-oj-tape-sale-1349780.html
  2. ^ https://www.irishtimes.com/news/price-to-be-paid-for-oj-transcript-1.53921
@Tommytittle: Wikipedia is not indiscriminate collection of information, so not all "correctly sourced" information should be included. Information should be relevant to the notability of the subject, and conform to the standard of biographies of living persons (BLP). The information that you are seeking to add is highly trivial, and a BLP violation, which is subjected to removal per WP:BLPREMOVE #2 as it's based on primary source. You will have to drop the stick. Alex ShihTalk 08:57, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Pages

Hello! I am Tni fans111 from Indonesia, and I would like to ask why have you been deleting pages made by Alldinna Rui about individual Transjakarta Route pages (ex: TransJakarta Corridor 5). Because to me, it could explain the Corridors individually, like it's characteristics without making a page too long. Would you mind restoring it?--Tni fans111 (talk) 21:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

@Tni fans111: Please see User talk:Alldinna Rui. Alex ShihTalk 15:11, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: Ok, sorry for the miss understanding. If I remake the same pages and add more unique information to the bus stops(including external links), will the same problem happen again?--Tni fans111 (talk) 21:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
@Tni fans111: Yes, as long as they are referenced properly, and the page creator answers questions when there are problems, the same thing will not happen again. Thank you for your patience. Alex ShihTalk 16:38, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! I am PallaviBose and I am new to wikipedia. I have created a page yesterday on Randeep Rai which is deleted by you. I was totally unaware about the "reference" thing.Can I get back the page please? I would surely add the references.--Pallavi Bose (talk)

DYK

Hello, Alex! I was wondering if we would have a DYK noticed on the talk page of the Ruddy cuckoo-dove too, as it was in the double hook here. Thank you, and have a great rest of the day! :D 13:03, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

@Adityavagarwal: Added, thanks! Alex ShihTalk 17:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks too, Alex! Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

ANI discussion: Joefromrandb

I've brought a discussion to ANI regarding Joefromrandb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who was released from your block 15 days ago. Toddst1 (talk) 19:16, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

I'd appreciate any further concerns you have with the block being made at the above thread to save the editor the email notifications -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 19:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Why

Can you just Edit unstead is deleting people work, wiki is free, don’t understand what makes you important enough to delete peoples work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Misfit33 (talk • contribs) 18:32, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, saw you left a message over at Chinese Wiki for me - good to hear from you! I am not active on Chinese wiki anymore, but do continue to work on various subjects here, mostly to do with Chinese politics. Will let you know if there are areas of collaboration! Colipon+(Talk) 01:50, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Colipon: Thanks! I'll definitely be interested. Alex ShihTalk 09:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Restore deleted page in order to improve content

Hello Alex, Hope you're doing great, Is it possible to restore the page "World Patriarchal Maronite Foundation for Integral Development - WPF" I would like to amend the content based on your feedback instead of starting from scratch once again,

Thank you for your understanding, Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPMFoundation (talk • contribs) 07:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Please reconsider deletion of SiFive?

Hi. I just argued that SiFive should not be deleted, only to find you had already deleted it. Would you mind taking a look at the case I made and considering whether to undelete that article? Thanks in advance — CWC 00:46, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Chris Chittleborough: Sure. I'll undelete it for now, but I think I'll submit it to AfD for more discussion. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 03:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Good move. Thanks! CWC 05:37, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Lilie Chouliaraki

Hello Alex, thanks for reviewing my draft submission on Prof. Lilie Chouliaraki. I understand your concern about the text I edited as a large part is similar to the one I wrote for the LSE's website. But Prof. Chouliaraki and I edited that text and LSE has 'non-exclusive' license use (as stated in their copyright policy). First, can you advise me and Prof. Chouliaraki on how to deal with this matter? Second, I would prefer to paraphrase the content based on your advise instead of starting from scratch once again, is it possible? once again thank for your support. Best regards Ms4263nyu (talk) 07:37, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ms4263nyu: Hi, thanks for dropping by. I have restored the draft and removed majority of the content as it needs major rewrite in order to be accepted (see WP:NOTCV for the commonly rejected non-encyclopedic information). Copyright tags on Wikipedia are not always about having the copyright, but whether or not the page has the proper copyright attribution (if the content is incorporated from somewhere, it has to be tagged with templates such as {{PD-notice}}). Please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Notability (academics) in your rewrite (if you need specific content, I can e-mail it to you but I cannot restore them), and make sure that there are sufficient secondary sources that establish the notability of the subject. This is one of the tools we often use here for paraphrasing. Let me know if you have any specific questions. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 08:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Eliette and Herbert von Karajan Institute Deletion

Hello Alex, my name is Matthias Röder and I am the CEO of the Eliette and Herbert von Karajan Institute. Our user account and wikipedia page on our company were recently deleted. I have the following questions and would appreciate if you took the time to answer them time permitting. Thank you!

  1. The institute is going to organize a Wikipedia Edit-a-thon over the next few weeks. We were hoping to use the user page for the institute as a place for me and my team to coordinate work of the various participants. I understand now that user accounts need to be tied to individual persons. In your opinion, what is the best way to organize a global Edit-a-thon on wikipedia? Can organizations create temporary accounts for that? Many thanks!
  2. The page for Eliette and Herbert von Karajan Institute was meant as a first version of the article in German that has been excisting for a long time. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliette_und_Herbert_von_Karajan_Institut Our company exists for over twenty years now and manages the estate of one of the most famous musicians of all times. We are well established and many news outlets have written about us, as you can see from the following google search: https://www.google.at/search?dcr=0&biw=1463&bih=693&tbm=nws&q=%22Karajan+Institut%22 Considering the circumstances, would you be willing to revert the deletion? Many thanks!

Best wishes, Matthias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthias Röder (talk • contribs) 12:32, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Matthias Röder: Hello, thank you for dropping by. Have you had the chance to take a look at this page, Wikipedia:How to run an edit-a-thon? I am not too sure about creating temporary accounts, as this has to do with Account Creator which I am unfamiliar with, so I'll ping someone else who probably have a better answer (Dane, would you help?). In regards to Eliette and Herbert von Karajan Institute, I have no problem as long as there are reliable secondary sources from news outlets that are significant coverage, not passing mentions. Google news search only gave me 13 results, and most of them appears to be, passing mentions or press release. Maybe I'll bother another editor Gerda Arendt‎ to double check if she has time. Alex ShihTalk 14:31, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
(dropping in for a few minutes, sitting at an airport before departure:) that's a notable institution, should be restored, or at least userfied. I have little time in October. Grimes2 might help. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
If Röder or other folks involved with the Institute created it, it should not be restored directly to article space; at best, it should be a draft submitted to WP:AFC after further work. --Nat Gertler (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt and NatGertler: Thanks Gerda, as always. And Nat, that's my thoughts too, thank you. I've restored the article to Draft:Eliette and Herbert von Karajan Institute, tagged for both AfC and COI (on the talk page), and declared COI for Matthias Röder also (it was already explicitly mentioned on the user page, but I added a userbox just in case). Cheers, Alex ShihTalk 15:03, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear all, thanks a lot for your feedback and for restoring the article to AFC. All the best, Matthias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthias Röder (talk • contribs) 18:02, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Matthias Röder: Hello, my name is Dane and I am an Administrator at the Account Creation Interface. I wanted to give you some helpful hints for carrying out an Edit-A-Thon on Wikipedia. You will want to send an email to accounts-enwiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org letting us know that you will be having an Edit-A-Thon. If you provide us with the start and end date of the event along with the name of your organization and the "Target Pages" in the email, that will help us to assist you quicker. (I know that you have posted some of this information above however the team won't already have these details besides me) We can then coordinate on creating the required accounts for your participants. Thanks for your interest in having a Wikipedia Edit-A-Thon and we look forward to hearing from you! -- Dane talk 01:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Restoring testing page

Hi Alex Shih, I was wondering if it would be OK for me (or if you want to do it) to restore Article Development and move it to User:Equintella\Article Development. Long story short, the editor is part of the Wiki Education program and when she created this, she thought she was working in her userspace, so it was entirely an accident that it was made live. It looks like it was meant to be something like this: User:Equintella/sandbox/Article Evaluation, and when she contacted me about the speedy tags, she thought that the content was deleted from her sandbox.

I could restore this with my admin account, but I didn't want to step on any toes. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Shalor (Wiki Ed): Of course! Restored to User:Equintella/Article Development, thanks for letting me know. Alex ShihTalk 14:01, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you so much! I was just emailing the student - you're really on top of things! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:02, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Luigi Grosu (Actor & Singer)

Thanks for deleting the article. I don't know how to request it be salted, and I'm not sure at what point should Jaymi Martin (talk · contribs) be blocked for repeatedly recreating the article under different names. This looks like the ninth attempt with a new title if I'm counting correctly. He may not be trying to recreate the article under the same title anymore, so salting may not be necessary. --Ronz (talk) 16:07, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ronz: Wow, thank you for letting me know. This is long term abuse and blatant undisclosed paid editing/conflict of interest (with the user being the producer of the subject). I have blocked the account and salted all of the titles. Keep me posted if possible, thanks! Alex ShihTalk 16:17, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your edit to my userpage - I've only just noticed it despite it being from two days ago! Turns out I had the new visual editor turned on in my preferences - I've removed that now as it was a tad annoying. Take care, Patient Zerotalk 10:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@Patient Zero: No problem! Cheers, Alex ShihTalk 15:37, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Medini Green Parks

Hi Alex. Thank you for looking through the Medini Green Parks article but I noticed it was deleted and protected today. The park article is one of our community efforts to put our city of Iskandar Puteri in Wikipedia as it is creating a lot of firsts for the nation. The park is an award-winning community-run project which also hosts the city's public art and I have access to print and digital content on the park. I would like to take over and continue work on the article if possible. It should not have been published by the previous writer without consulting me or the community. Do let me know if it is possible for me to work on the page draft, thank you. Mad Cactuar (talk) 05:29, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mad Cactuar: Hi, sure. I cannot restore the previous version as there were too much close paraphrasing, but I can e-mail you the copy if you enable e-mail from Special:Preferences. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 05:46, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination

Hello, I wondered if you would possibly email me the London Central Portfolio article which was recently deleted. I appreciate now why it was deleted; it did not occur to me at the time it was written that it would read as being an advertisement - in fact I was quite careful to make it as neutral as possible - but I can see places now where I've used inappropriate language. My intention is to rewrite it and then ask other editors to review before resubmitting. Thank you very much. Francesca w (talk) 16:58, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Francesca w: Sure, I've e-mailed the copy to you. Just make sure you don't have any undisclosed conflict of interest, and avoid too much extraneous information, focusing only on sources with significant coverage, and summarize what they say about the subject. Alex ShihTalk 17:09, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: Thanks very much for the email and for your feedback. Francesca w (talk) 17:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Everette Taylor

Hi Alex, you admin create-protected Everette Taylor as it was repeatedly recreated. The 'new' user User:Jeanlozorio has recreated it as Talk:Everette Taylor. Thanks, jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:12, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jcc: Hey, thanks for the heads up! Page deleted and user blocked. Alex ShihTalk 23:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Rollback

Thank you, Alex Shih. Highly appreciated. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 07:38, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hi there,

We're trying to see what happened to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxim_Jago page - the deletion log reads '(G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)'. As far as we can guess, someone must have edited the page to add advertising, as that wasn't the content of the original page.

We'd like to restore the page and obviously resolve any issue you raised.

Can you help?

Thanks in advance!

Talkback

Hello, Alex Shih. You have new messages at Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi's talk page.
Message added 17:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Since pings aren't working. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Giabal

Thanks for the prompt deletion of Giabel, Alex. Best Nishidani (talk) 19:08, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

@Nishidani: No problem! Alex ShihTalk 23:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion

Do you usually A7 delete articles that are nine years old? Geschichte (talk) 22:33, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

@Geschichte: No, but every article should ideally be assessed individually. Which article are you referring to? If it's The Favorites, I didn't see any significance indicated that would meet WP:BAND. If it's FC Adal Asmara, I've restored to PROD it instead to address potential concerns. If it's another article that you are referring to, please let me know so I can correct myself, thanks and regards. Alex ShihTalk 23:06, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Dear God thank you!

This was long needed. --Jayron32 23:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Possible sock

Hi Alex,

Could you please take a look at User:GregJohnson1245 for me? I suspect he is a sock of GeoJoe1000. He registered less than an hour ago, and has thus far made three edits: two on mine, and one on the user talk page of Spintendo. Both edits were addressed to us, encouraging us to delete comments from our user talk pages where we discussed GeoJoe's behaviour. I find it extremely suspicious that a new editor should add to such discussions weeks after they were resolved, especially when he used the same language as the original editor; in particular, he says that leaving the comments on a talk page "makes you look like a bully", which was always GeoJoe's favourite accusation to be levelled against anyone who disagreed with him. Prisonermonkeys (talk) 00:55, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Prisonermonkeys: Pretty obvious behavioral evidence I think. I have blocked the user, but I probably won't be tagging this account per WP:DENY. Regards, Alex ShihTalk 01:02, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Alex. While I've got you, would you mind taking a look at WP:ANI/3RR for me? I just put up a section, but it doesn't look right to my eye. Am I missing something? Prisonermonkeys (talk) 01:10, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@Prisonermonkeys: EdJohnston fixed the header for you. Alex ShihTalk 01:31, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
I think this and this are other obvious socks or at least it's block evasion.Tvx1 20:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@Tvx1: Yes, taken care of. SPI may be needed soon. Alex ShihTalk 23:11, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

A decision should have been made 2 months ago.

Closing the discussion just muzzles unhappyness against a system designed to protect the Admin corp from being held accountable for their actions (in Rubin's case lying about me!) ArbComm has delayed this case at several turns but TRM was quickly blocked for two weeks, the filer was indef'd, and a hound was allowed to participate just to spite me. It's not a pretty sight from my position. Several very inappropriate Admin blocks prevent me from ever becoming a protected Admin so yes, I'm entitled to at least voice concerns. Legacypac (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Legacypac: Yes, I understand, and I agree. But don't you think something that's hastily posted (unsigned, typos, incoherant layout, and at a timing when they have finally just started voting) would have been counter-productive to the original purpose? I don't have a better solution myself, but if I put myself in your shoes, I would start in a different place, such as contacting editors that spoke out against TRM's block to discuss the possibility of filing a petition, for example, even though it's discouraged by the guidelines. Alex ShihTalk 01:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
It just goes on and on and this case shows the system is broken. I know it will get wrapped up and we all knew the result back in August - that is not the point. Various editors have raised the problem of delays at ArbComm repeatedly at various stages which is the only reason the case has moved forward at all it seems. It's a huge time sync and the longer it drags the more annoying it becomes to the injured parties. I don't fault individual Arbs, I fault the process that requires so many steps instead of dealing with this by motion or some other speedy way. Legacypac (talk) 01:36, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@Legacypac: About the unnecessarily prolonged process, my opinion is that arbitrators should be subject to mandatory recall if they are 1) inactive 2) editing but not participating in cases. This is probably something I will bring up in November. Alex ShihTalk 01:43, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
You know I have strongly supported you in many of the frequent discussions mentioning you at ANI and similar, so please consider my advice as coming from a supporter. Pursuing an opponent, any opponent, is never pretty and is particularly despised at Wikipedia. People have been sanctioned for refusing to leave the talk pages of blocked sockpuppets. The procedure at Wikipedia is that if a problem requires a solution, it will happen eventually and it should not be relentlessly pursued by a small band of malcontents. I vaguely recall that an admin made a bad decision against you, but if you were to keep quiet, no one other than yourself would remember that. However, at least a hundred uninvolved editors will have seen your many noisy posts regarding the incident and they will remember the bad taste. Run for Arbcom if you think you could do it better. Johnuniq (talk) 02:41, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
I do appreciate the advice and support. No non-Admin will ever get on ArbComm, and no editor that has been unfairly blocked will ever become an Admin. The hurtles to become an Admin are stupid high and once that status is reached, the hurdles to revoke it are stupid long and drawn out. I don't even care about Rubin really as that will eventually play out. I'm focused on the big picture issue that we need a better procedure. Legacypac (talk) 03:19, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
One suggestion for a shorter process here. Views welcome. Also agree that RfA hurdles are too high. On Alex Shih's related point, there's been a couple of non-admins who got close to winning Arbcom ballots, and I distantly recall a non-Admin was actually appointed, back before elections were a real thing. Misremembered. It was User:Bahamut0013, appointed to CUOS not Arbcom.
I think non-admins have a better chance now the vote gets widely advertised - it's been less of an insider-only exercise these last two years. But yes, it would still be steeply uphill. -- Euryalus (talk) 03:49, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
I did see and thank you for your comments on the case. Some good ideas there. Legacypac (talk) 04:38, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Interestingly, I'm now considering running at Arbcom this year. I've already asked the existing committee if I'm able to discuss their various competencies during the run-up, given that I'm probably the editor with the most Arbcom injunction experience currently working here. I'm actually not allowed to criticise the competence of anyone here, and apparently that includes Arbs, although I am allowed to submit my criticisms to Arbcom for them to determine if they will allow it to be published. I think Kim Jong-un might be sitting in there somewhere. It's particularly pertinent this time round as we have Arbs who abused their oversight privileges, we have Arbs who abused their Arb/admin COI privileges, we have Arbs who somehow pretend that creating a fortnight of drama is better than actually talking, so there's lots to get through. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: I may consider too, this will be interesting. Alex ShihTalk 23:13, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Requesting Revision Delete

Hey Alex, thanks for granting me the Rollback permission.

I've got a very trivial favor to ask, but is possible to get a revdelete on my rollback request as I forgot to enter an edit summary? That single slip-up tainted my perfect record of having an edit summary for all my edits.I've been sitting in the rev-del IRC channel for about 30 minutes now with no response.

@GrapefruitSculpin: No problem. I am afraid I cannot do that; please take another look at criteria for redaction. For the record, why do you need to have 100%? 99% is just as good, don't worry too much about it. Alex ShihTalk 05:55, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: No worries, I was hoping my request would fall under WP:CFRD 6. Non-contentious housekeeping. I just liked keeping it at 100%, as I've notified other editors about their edit summary use.

Robert Stewart for Alex Shih....

Alex Shih, to answer your question, I never do business with males, for there is always the "chest thumping, mega-testosterone, I'm badder than you, Neanderthal head trip." I hire all women in my business dealings. They bring logic, reason, and sensibilities to a problem and work with me to rectify it. I'd hoped that Wikipedia would give access to them rather than these here. These males haven't been kind since the minute I arrived as my first outreach clearly outlines. But, it is what it is now. Oh well. Professor Reason (talk) 07:12, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

A question about an AfD closure

Can you explain why you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hacksurance (2nd nomination) after it had been open for only two days and some hours? By no stretch of the imagination was it a SNOW closure, since out of four contributors to the discussion two had argued for deletion and two for redirecting. Also, I would have thought that any administrator taking the unusual step of closing a deletion discussion long before the normal seven days' duration would normally give at least a brief indication why he or she had chosen to do so, rather than simply writing "The result was redirect to Cyber-Insurance", as you did. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@JamesBWatson: Sorry, I should have included a rationale, I apologize. Let me explain my mistake. I was in the middle of going through the contribution of Anny1112, having deleted several of their contributions from CSD and stopped short of blocking them as promotional only account (for William Benson Group, LLC). I was going to delete Hacksurance as well as I thought it could have been speedied also, but arriving at the AfD in that very mindset (closing out scanning contributions from this account), seeing the redirect talk (could not close as delete, but forgot about simply leaving the discussion open), led to the wrong decision. I have reverted myself. Alex ShihTalk 22:45, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

TheFatRat

Could you review the content of Draft:TheFatRat to ensure that the subject meets the notability guidelines for article creation? I see that the article has been recreated and deleted several times in the past, but I have good reason to believe that the subject is notable enough to have their own article. Büttner's album Jackpot EP has charted on the Billboard Dance/Electronic Albums chart, which satisfies the #2 guideline at WP:MUSIC. He may also meet other guidelines on that list (which may be disputed). But the guideline states that a musician "may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria," and Büttner certainly has met at least one of them, if not more. Clbsfn (talk) 23:24, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

@Clbsfn: I am not completely sure about this. I have removed the creation protection, as the current draft looks more reasonable (I still have doubts; the Billboard source is quite promotional and basically an interview, and the other sources are mostly not reliable). The problem is that even if one of the criteria is technically met, it is not a blank approval to every other extraneous information that could be deemed non-notable. I think you might want to ask the closing admin Slakr again if you haven't done so, or maybe drop a note for Ritchie333, another admin known for their music work. Alex ShihTalk 23:44, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: The Billboard reference I provided is not the interview with Büttner - I do agree that that one is promotional and too biased to be used as an objective reference. The reference I provided from Billboard is his chart history, which proves that he charted on the Dance/Electronic Albums chart. I'll definitely ask Slakr about it, since I haven't done so yet. Clbsfn (talk) 06:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
@Clbsfn: Sounds good! Alex ShihTalk 06:10, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

My talk page

Thanks, Alex Shih. "Someone" will not pass an RfA anytime soon. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Cullen328: Anytime, Jim! You are too kind, as always. Alex ShihTalk 06:07, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

WP:ANI#RfC Closure Review Request closure..

Thanks for closing that crazy thread:) But, don't you think that there shall be a statement of the fact that all the participants endorsed my closure?Regards:)Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 07:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Godric on Leave: Sometimes it might not be necessary to be explicit when the situation itself is already very explicit. That's just my opinion. Alex ShihTalk 07:07, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
On re-thoughts (and grounds of editor-retention), yep! :)And, I seem to have been the latest casualty of ping-failure.No ping(s) from today onwards, seems to be reaching me!Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 07:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

More of this

Hey, Alex, have you noticed Talk:Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China? I don't want to wade in more than I already have, but it looks like an SPA fighting with a couple of IPs, and I get the impression that AO (courtesy ping) may have made the wrong call in response to this bogus RFPP (at worst, the "vandalism" that was linked was disruptive POV-pushing/edit-warring, but the IPs are no worse than the autoconfirmed accounts on both fronts, as far as I can see). Notifying you because, as I said, I don't want to get too involved, and ... well, nationalist POV-pushing (or perhaps bogus sinophobic nonsense coming from Westerners who don't give a damn about Tibet) in the greater Sinitic area: I couldn't help but think of you. :P Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 11:01, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Hijiri88: Hey! I'll watch this page closely. For now, this edit that you removed was the correct call, as every source in that edit were unreliable Taiwanese sources engaging in soapbox. Ad Orientem actually protected the page as "disruptive editing" instead of vandalism, which covers POV pushing, so the call was correct. I tried to rewrite the second edit that you removed into something more acceptable for NPOV (in my opinion, we'll see). Thanks for the heads up! Alex ShihTalk 11:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the pings. FTR this article has a long history of POV editing which is not surprising given the highly controversial nature of the topic. Prior to my placing it under indefinite semi protection it had been protected repeatedly, with apparently similar issues arising again after each expiration. If the problem persists with SPA editors who are autoconfirmed we might have to consider extended confirmed, though I would prefer not to go there. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:11, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:8th Khangser Rinpoche

Hey Alex Shih,

I have nominated Draft:8th Khangser Rinpoche for speedy deletion under criterion G13. You declined with edit summary that it didn't fit. Can you explain more? Thanks. –Ammarpad (talk) 19:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Strange, it appears that the AfC template was confused by Magic links bot and placed a bogus warning (as being not qualified for G13), which I should have double checked. Deleted now, thanks. Alex ShihTalk 19:30, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for prompt revisiting of the issue too. –Ammarpad (talk) 20:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Because mopping up morons all day sure does work up a powerful thirst. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 10:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
@NorthBySouthBaranof: It does. Going out for a drink now, as a matter of fact ;-) Alex ShihTalk 10:04, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft space

Just as a note, drafts (such as this one) are not eligible for WP:A7. If a draft is being tenditiously resubmitted it should be sent to MFD. Pinging Jimfbleak as the deleting admin. Now, looking at the content and the history I don't disagree with the hefty usage of IAR, but I thought I'd mention it for future reference. Primefac (talk) 13:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Primefac: Noted. Alex ShihTalk 14:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
@Primefac: Yes, I should have picked that up Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
I think it was a quite appropriate use of IAR and a better alternative to blocking the editor involved. Thanks to both Alex and Jim. John from Idegon (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Please help to protect a article

Hello, I am here to ask if you can protect the page South Korea-Turkey relations becaues another user is including content without a supporting source and the included content is also not belonging in this article. I have already started a discussion but the user is still not accepting the fact. He use several not reliable sources of fringe turkish origin. Please have a look at this. Greetings --GoguryeoHistorian (talk) 17:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Was it the U of M IP again? Lived in Ann arbor for 5 years in the 70s and 80s, and really learned to dislike that institution. Guess the feeling is now mutual. John from Idegon (talk) 18:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: Yes, U of M IP back with the same childish antics again. I didn't know they are located literally right next to Detroit! Alex ShihTalk 18:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Yup. I lived one block from the football stadium and learned quickly not to leave home on Saturday's in the fall. Getting 110,000 people in and out of a city that at that time had a population of 125,000 was a nightmare. There were many times I had to walk the 7 miles to work as getting anywhere in a car was not happening. John from Idegon (talk) 18:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you for your helpful advice!

Beauty School Dropout (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

@Beauty School Dropout: Thanks :) Alex ShihTalk 04:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Camp Quinebarge

Hi Alex, I do not understand why admins keep deleting our entry. We are completely mimicking other summer camp entries, and yet we get dinged. I am literally taking the exact same language from another camp and changing it to our language, but we get dinged. It does not seem consistent to us. Further, we have repeatedly asked for clarification and guidance and gotten none. Please explain the seeming inconsistency and assist us. Thank you, Eric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emcarlsondc (talk • contribs) 05:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Alex, I will just say we tried to post a longer article initially that would have shown a more notable entry, but got dinged. So we went short. And got dinged. I appreciate other entries are also conflicts that may not have been identified yet but there are also hundreds of camps listed on Wikipedia, with rich histories, notable alumni and follow an important tenant of American history, the traditional summer camp experience, like Camp Quinebarge. We tried to portray that. I appreciate that grabbing from our website was not the answer initially (it was our first page) but now we seem to be in an impossible loop. What can we do to post a relevant and notable entry without risk of deletion. Thank you, Eric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emcarlsondc (talk • contribs) 05:51, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

That abuse

Have you thought of setting up an alternative talk page as I have at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Alt Talk, so that you can semi-protect your talk page when the vandalism or abuse gets disruptive and still let anyone contact you? I have an edit notice at User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Editnotice that sends IPs/unconfirmed users to it when my talk page is protected, and it seems to work. Vandals and abusers don't seem to bother with it, presumably because they wouldn't get the audience and attention they seek, and it's very quick to just delete and recreate it if they do. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:29, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

@Boing! said Zebedee: Yes, I was thinking about it. I don't know if it's against the policy to keep their attention toward myself and this page while patrolling the user creation log (satisfying), but I will create an alternative talk page. Thank you! Alex ShihTalk 15:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't think there's any policy problem as long as you have some place where IPs and unregistered editors can contact you (and as it happens, my talk page protection expired and they're back, so I've protected it again for longer.)

As personal aside, I see you were born in Taiwan. I'm fortunate to have been there for a brief visit. I only had a week, and I split the time between Taipei (which is a fantastic food place) and Alishan with its famous railway. It was a long time ago now, but I remember it well. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

@Boing! said Zebedee: Oh I meant that I was hoping (humorously) there's no policy against enjoying vandalism on one's own page, as on occasion they can be somewhat creative. I am really glad that you enjoyed Taiwan (I am from Taipei), politics aside it is a beautiful place, and people are proud of their friendliness. Hopefully Wikimania will return to Taipei someday so I can go and volunteer. Alex ShihTalk 15:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Hehe, yes, sorry - I see your joke now :-) And yes, I found Taipei a very friendly place. I did wonder how I'd manage with no command of Chinese at all, but all I had to do was stand somewhere and look lost and someone would come up to me and offer to help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

DYK

Having resisted the temptation to comment on the volcano pull by Fram on the DYK discussion page, can I suggest you replace the gap it leaves on the main page with another picture hook from the prep area? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Yes, I was thinking about it. Although I am a bit unsure about replacing the pulled entry with Gerda's entry (which is relatively short, and makes the situation seem extremely unfair) at this timing. As the Main Page is relatively balanced today, let me seek some opinions first at WP:ERRORS and hopefully replace the gap in the next couple hours. Cheer, Alex ShihTalk 09:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I'd prefer Fietz for a full day. Another short one for a replacement that doesn't hurt would be Ach, lieben Christen, seid getrost. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
@Gerda Arendt: Can't you take one for the team, Gerda? ;-) Just kidding. But I'm sure I'll be under fire if I promote Ach, lieben Christen, seid getrost straight to T:DYK. If we cannot find good alternatives, I might as well take one from the archive. Alex ShihTalk 09:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
I can only tell you what I know ;) - That one, pictured or not, should come soon. Yes archive, perhaps one of the other volcanoes, for similar looks. I reviewed one, Pichu Pichu. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:21, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Omise

You salted this in September, it's now recreated by the same user at Omise (company). SmartSE (talk) 13:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

@Smartse: I took the liberty and deleted it instead of tagging again as it's blatant spam with probably sleeper socks. Hopefully it's okay. Thanks for the heads up! Alex ShihTalk 13:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
That seems sensible to me - hard to believe that a new user would work out a way around the salting. SmartSE (talk) 13:11, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion - Kara Goldin

Hello there Alex,

Hope all is well. I've been off Wikipedia for a while as I recently had a death in the family. I came back to realize that one of the pages I created was deleted for Kara Goldin. I do understand some of the text was promotional, I'd really appreciate it if you could give me another chance in editing this and restore the page if possible. Here's the link to the original page I created: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kara_goldin

Please let me know if this is possible, it'd mean a lot to me if this could be done.

Arnold.kevin729 22:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnold.kevin729 (talk • contribs)

@Arnold.kevin729: Hi, I've restored the page to Draft:Kara Goldin so you can work on it. Alex Shih (talk) 22:41, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion error

Hi Alex. User:IEsuredI deleted the wiki page on Gaius Servilius Structus Ahala (consul 478 BC). I believe this was a mistake. He was a consul (one of two leaders) of the Roman Republic, which by itself warrants him having his own page. I'm sure there was more detail on his page which made him relevant, but he deleted the page so speedily that I can't access it anymore to explain why his page should remain. He suggested I speak to you about this issue. Could you please reinstate it? Thanks! --Urg writer (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

@Urg writer: Hi, actually the page was deleted under the wrong reason, I should have checked. It should have been deleted under WP:A10 (I have re-deleted it just now), as the page duplicates the existing topic at Gaius Servilius Ahala, thanks. Alex Shih (talk) 15:36, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying that Alex. In fact they are two different people. The one that was deleted died in 478 BC. The one that is mentioned in the remaining article held office in 439 BC. No doubt they are related, perhaps father and son or grandfather and grandson. Could you please reinstate the deleted article? Thanks very much. --Urg writer (talk) 21:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
@Urg writer: Hmm, my bad, sorry. Restored. Alex Shih (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Alex. It's a pleasure dealing with someone sensible and friendly like you.--Urg writer (talk) 00:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Tina Botts

I am wondering why Tina Botts, a well-known feminist philosopher, has been deleted. Could you please advise? John Wilkins (talk) 01:47, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

@John Wilkins: Sorry, that was my error. I have restored the page, thanks. Alex Shih (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Alex Shih. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard.
Message added 06:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Winged Blades of GodricOn leave 06:11, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Paysafecard

Hi, you have deleted Draft:Paysafecard in August. After deletion as an article, I had it restored last year by late admin JohnCD as a draft, after pointing out the relevance of the company. He had specified "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" as a condition to restore the article. I had already invested a lot of time fulfilling that request and to formulate texts in accordance with WP:NPOV. The draft still contained a lot of older text and sources, which were probably not in accordance with the guidelines, and it certainly was incomplete in many ways. I concede that a draft should not mingle around endlessly until being completed, but this is also a matter of time available for Wikipedia. However, I don't think that the state of the draft as-was made it a case for deletion as per G11. I ask you to restore the draft. In this case I assure to complete it by the end of the year (may it be deleted forever otherwise). --KnightMove (talk) 11:16, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

@KnightMove: Hi, thank you for the assurance, I have restored the draft. I have removed the awards section for now, as it is occupying nearly half of the article, and none of these awards seemingly meets the notability guideline. Regards, Alex Shih (talk) 04:13, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you! Well, I assumed the awards to corroborate the notability of the company, but I won't touch them again before a thorough overwork of the article and a revision which appear notable. --KnightMove (talk) 04:23, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

FYI

[2] SA 13 Bro (talk) 12:17, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Alex Shih:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – —usernamekiran(talk) 21:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Speedy deletion: Facebook Surround 360

Hi Alex, you think the page Surround 360 unambiguously advertise Facebook product. But it is a famous product from a famous company, jus like iPhone from Apple, S7 from Samsung. Why you think it does not deserve a page on WiKi?

DYK Queue 3

Alex Shih, you updated the hook for "Ach lieben Christen seid getrost" to remove the two commas from it after the article was moved, but you didn't also adjust the DYKmake for that hook to remove the commas from the first field. (The commas need to stay for the subpage field, if the credits are to be given properly.) Can you please make that adjustment? Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: Checked Done, thanks. Alex Shih (talk) 05:42, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Alex Shih, thanks, but I'm afraid it isn't done. You removed only one comma; both needed to go, so the remaining comma needs deleting. The single-comma version is a redirect that goes to another article altogether, though I'm going to fix that redirect now. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Urgh, sorry. Alex Shih (talk) 05:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Remote Utilities

Hi Alex,

Sorry, just noticed that there had indeed been a warning for a few days on the page and I didn't receive a notification due to notification settings. So my initial assumption that the deletion had been without warning was incorrect.

Anyway, perhaps it was about the latest updates regarding licensing that were added that made the page fall under the criteria for deletion. Is it possible to restore the page so that we can fix the issue?

Thanks.

@ConradSallian: Please sign your posts with ~~~~. I can restore the page, but you need to disclose your conflict of interest first. See WP:DISCLOSE for instructions. Alex Shih (talk) 08:13, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: I understand. I'm not a paid editor but I have a relationship with this company/product. I aim to keep the information on the page as factual as possible though. 176.213.142.140 (talk) 10:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
@ConradSallian: Okay, I have restored the page for now, and tagged the page with {{COI}} and {{refimprove}}. I suggest finding a volunteer from Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard to make sure the article does not get tagged for deletion again. By the way, what did you mean by "we"? Are there more than one person using this account? Anyway, regards. Alex Shih (talk) 10:42, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: Thank you. I'll definitely follow your advice, and will also review the contents of the page itself. As for "we" I mean the team behind the product that I'm a part of but I am the only one who uses the account (this is my personal Wikipedia account). 2A02:2698:6025:C44B:70A3:E585:9F56:DEA (talk) 10:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Happy Halloween!

Hello Alex Shih:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
    – Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)



Send Halloween cheer by adding {{subst:Happy Halloween}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98)

I kinda feel like this page should be indef-semied, but I'm also not sure about the policy regarding dealing with really obvious socks who can't be conclusively connected to others -- you'd be surprised how many accounts' first edits are reverts on that page. It's been attacked by massive sock farms of both anti-Korean Japanese-nationalist POV-pushers and anti-Japanese Korean-nationalist POV-pushers pretty much constantly for years. It was Juzumaru (talk · contribs)'s pet project, and I was honestly surprised something hadn't already been done about the page when I first encountered that user four years ago. Whaddya think? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 21:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@Hijiri88: You are up early. Ideally yes, but there isn't much disruptive activity recently so any protection now would be pre-emptive. I'll keep watch. Alex Shih (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Request a page deletion

Hello. Mistakenly, instead of creating a subpage, I created this article Nico Chietino in the mainspace. I request you to delete this article. RRD (talk) 07:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

@Royroydeb: Or can I just move it to your subpage without leaving a redirect instead? You can tag the page with {{Db-g7}} if you want it deleted altogether. Alex Shih (talk) 07:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for you help. RRD (talk) 07:31, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alex_Shih/Archive/2017-3&oldid=1142840626"