User talk:Lugnuts/Archive 61

Lugnuts' contributions to Wikipedia are an INSULT to 4.54 billion years of evolution.
— Professor Brian Cox

You don't need proof when you have instinct.
— Joe Cabot

What is this, the International Year of the Wally-Brain or something?
— Del Boy

	Nicotine, valium, vicodin, marijuana, ecstasy and alcohol. "C-c-c-c-c-cocaine!" Close the door, put out the light. / You know they won't be home tonight. The European cannon is here. Oh Robert Mugabe! Oh Robert Mugabe! Oh Robert Mugabe! Oh Robert Mugabe! I <3 AWB!

"Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven".

John Milton, Paradise Lost (1667)

"Can't believe it's been nearly 11 years since them slags smashed into the twin towers".

Danny Dyer, Twitter (2012)

"People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people, Jeremy".

Super Hans, (2005)

"The chance to march across Europe with the greatest general of all time and kill Belgians. Marvellous!"

AJ Rimmer, (3m years from now)

Merry Merry[edit]

I know you'll likely simply remove this, which is obviously fine--but I wanted to stop by just to wish you a happy holiday season. All the best to you and yours, and may 2022 be better for us all. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 15:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nooooooooo!!!!!!!!![edit]

Sincerely, ~~Wikipedia's~~ the global cricketing community. Please come back at some point! 2405:6E00:B7A:3A00:84F7:D7DD:2FA6:90C5 (talk) 16:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lugnuts[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts,

Apparently, there are so many thousands of edits to your User page that it has to be deleted by a steward. I tried but couldn't delete the page. You might contact a steward directly if you are set on deleting it. Also, be aware that if you want to restore the page in the future, it will be equally challenging. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see it[edit]

I'm sorry to see this. I'd hoped you'd stay and be productive, as you clearly can be, and that you'd maybe even find that the proposed restrictions might be good for you in many ways. Best to you. —valereee (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disgrace[edit]

Just seen that ANI, what an absolute fucking disgrace, absolute shite chatted by people who never contribute to the cricket project. Your stubs are important starting points, with which many of us, myself included, have expanded to good quality B-Class articles. Knobheads everywhere. StickyWicket (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. While Lugnuts might ve at sone fault here, the accusations at te ANI were ruthless. Wikipedia is like Twitter nowadays. Filled with a-words. Most of them probably never heard of cricket. Truly a loss for the cricket community here. Human (talk) 17:09, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both. You do have to question some people's motives on here. Almost as much as questioning England's match "tactics" of late...

Please stop interfere in my work you again and again delete my information regarding camrean green Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community Sanction : prohibition from creating stubs[edit]

Per this discussion, you are indefinitely banned from creating new articles that contain less than 500 words when created. This includes converting redirects. You may appeal after six months. Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:32, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't retire, I value your continued contributions. Deb (talk) 15:34, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, I saw a bit of what happened. I'm really sorry. I hope you find a way back. Take your time and see what you can do or say. Some editors were really dead-set against you; those will not carry the day, I imagine, if you were to propose how you can work within parameters suggested by that ANI discussion--not the extremes. Take care, and thank you: there are plenty of editors who appreciate much or most of what you have done here. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. For transpancy, I've asked for clarification on 500 words vs 1500 characters. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of keeping responses in one place, this is the response I left,

The term word was used twice in the proposal and rereading the discussion and noting the number of users advocating for a total ban on article creation, there was clearly no consensus that less than a total ban would fly unless substantial articles were produced. Regardless of the original meaning, the concept that gripped was a substantial article and multiple users endorsed 500 words. I don’t feel comfortable arbitrarily changing it to characters as that wasn’t the consensus of the discussion. If you want to shorten it, I think you need a fresh consensus and should open a thread at AN. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t personally strongly object to a change and there is internal consistency in using DYK criteria but there are already enough occasions where admins act against a clear consensus that I feel that discussion needs to be had before any change to the sanction. Given issues with your stubs, concentrating on articles that can be 500 words is actually no bad thing, and, if it were me, I’d do a fair amount of that before making that request. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:00, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Listen - compare your case with that of the user named in Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive984 (section 83). He's still operating under a restriction because there's a competence issue, but he keeps plugging away. You can do much better work and I sincerely hope you will stick around and do that. Deb (talk) 19:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts[edit]

I just want to say that I am glad that I got to know you for at least some of my time on here. I wish you the best in life, and I hope you find happiness in whatever you do. Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:51, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ooooh, I'm never happy in life! Thanks Scorps. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same. OCD sucks. Scorpions13256 (talk) 01:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vitaï Lampada[edit]

This is the word that year by year,
While in her place the school is set,
Every one of her sons must hear,
And none that hears it dare forget.
This they all with a joyful mind
Bear through life like a torch in flame,
And falling fling to the host behind—
"Play up! play up! and play the game!"

Well played, sir! Andrew🐉(talk) 20:34, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With Burns out for a duck
Lugnuts said "drat! bad luck"

Attempted poem, Turner Prize entry Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section Heading[edit]

Definitely sorry to see what happened at ANI... I think that Wikipedia is changing and contributions from dinosaurs like us aren't what the project needs, but that's consensus I suppose. It is too bad there wasn't a little bit more good faith going around in that discussion though. In any case, I'm saddened, but completely support your decision... I'll be scaling back too to focus on projects that actually matter. If you want to keep working on the Olympics in a meaningful way, let me know, but in any case shoot me a Wikipedia email and stay in touch! Canadian Paul 22:54, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dinosaurs, eh? In a past life, I suspect I was the poor bugger that got hit by the metorite, while the others were feasting on a fresh triceratops carcass. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As a kid, I always thought I was a T-rex in a former life. I was definitely not a humble child. Canadian Paul 04:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So much good work[edit]

Hi Lugnuts. Was so sorry to hear of this. I have never been one to join in (or even notice) such discussions in the most part, and while I am not going to comment on the ANI, I would like to say just how much all of the excellent work that you have put into Wiki is appreciated by editors within various projects, and how hard it will be for us to keep it going without you. You probably won't read this now, but your support and advice has been invaluable. I really hope you reconsider after some time and come back in at least come capacity even if in a reduced level. Thanks friend. Bs1jac (talk) 21:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed 100% with what is mentioned above. Thank you for helping me around. Hope to see you back soon. Ankurc.17 (talk) 18:21, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both. New year, new focus. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Paul Heitz for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paul Heitz 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/Paul Heitz 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.

snood1205 01:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shocked[edit]

I am deeply saddened to see an editor of this high reputation has left the project so untimely. Really unexpected and disappointing. zoglophie 16:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mervyn Sayers for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mervyn Sayers 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/Mervyn Sayers 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.

snood1205 17:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

{{Dis}}[edit]

Hallo, I see you created this redirect back in January, and that you've used it: AWB doesn't know about it (nor does the documentation page at {{Disambiguation}}), and as a result AWB suggests edits like this. I've left at note at [[Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#AWB_not_recognising_abbreviated/redirected_template_{{Dis}}]], but if you know how to get AWB fixed to recognise it, please do whatever you can. Thanks. PamD 09:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: - sorry, I don't know the inner workings of AWB! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:43, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else has now raised it as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T298389, so we'll see how that goes. PamD 12:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new year[edit]

Wishing you a happy new year (two days early)! Hope to see you back on the project soon. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:32, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, shit[edit]

I saw what happened at ANI. Hope you're OK, and having a splendid festive season away from here. You know I've never been a fan of one/two sentence stubs sourced to databases, but I always considered you a net positive, and I'll be sorry if you choose not to contribute any more. Best wishes, and a happy new year when it comes around. Girth Summit _(blether) 19:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Girth - yes, Christmas was a blast, thanks! And thanks for the kind words. Hope you are well and all the best for 2022. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it - mine was fun, but all the driving was a bit of a drag - the old Dumfries and Galloway, Aberdeenshire, Yorkshire triangle if we want to see both sets of parents. Still, it's easier than when I lived in London... Girth Summit _(blether) 20:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your articles[edit]

Thank you for your extensive article creation! I noticed your articles are visited almost 3 million times a month. Nemo 19:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nemo! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of José Urbay for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article José Urbay 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/José Urbay 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.

Ajshul ^<talk> 20:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguator[edit]

Hi, hope you are doing well. Do you think Mohammad Hasnain (cricketer, born 1975) should be renamed to Mohammad Hasnain (Karachi cricketer). I believe place of birth is more useful than disambiguating with date of birth. Also, most people search biographies by their places not by their date of birth. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 14:57, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBirdsShedTears: unfortunately Lugnuts has been driven off this site by jobsworths. I would agree that disambiguating by place of birth would be better, even better would be the team played for, which just so happens to also be Karachi. StickyWicket (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TheBirdsShedTears: - I think this has been sorted. Agree with the Karachi dab. Let me know if you need anything else. Ta. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I too agree with the Karachi dab. I had no idea that this dispute was never officially resolved. Scorpions13256 (talk) 01:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree- he has played for multiple teams, not just Karachi teams. Therefore, putting one of those teams as the disambiguator seems incorrect to me. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello[edit]

Hope you are doing well. Should i submit a technical request or i need to seek assistance from a page mover? User talk:FOARP/Archives/2022/January#Request move TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, probably best to log it under technical requests at WP:RM. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advise. TheBirdsShedTears (talk) 09:15, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Back!![edit]

Happy New Year to you and I'm very Happy to have you back. (•‿•) Kirubar (talk) 10:11, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kirubar! Happy New Year to you, too. Just seen that 12 players for the Brisbane Heat have all got COVID. Wow. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Really nasty! Despite having very strict border restrictions and long quarantine in the world, these things happening. Already Match 27 was postponed. BCCI have UAE. What will CA do? Kirubar (talk) 10:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a lot they can do. I guess if teams can't play matches, then they can go down the route of average points per game, like the ECB did last summer in England. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you back! - Have a Happy new year JW 1961^Talk 10:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Have a good 2022 too (too many 2s...) Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to say something similar etc... Blue Square Thing (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BST! Am I just intime for the IPL auction. Don't want to miss that... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to avoid finding out when it is... Thanks for moving that Otago chap btw - I forgot that you could do that Blue Square Thing (talk) 13:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Boris Gorlee" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Boris Gorlee and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#Boris Gorlee until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert Nevens for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Nevens 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/Robert Nevens 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail![edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 11:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 11:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chuffed[edit]

I just wanted to stop by to say I am very pleased you haven't abandoned this madhouse to the rest of us degenerate denizens! Cheers, and Happy Friday. Dumuzid (talk) 14:35, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Dumuzid! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back and Happy New Year[edit]

Glad to see you back. Felt the same way before in the past. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 15:46, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Rubbish! Hehe, Rubbish. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Silvia Lesoil for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Silvia Lesoil 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/Silvia Lesoil 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.

FOARP (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back Lugnuts[edit]

Welcome back Lugnuts. I'm glad you're back and I hope you had a good Christmas / New Year break! Chrisclear (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Chris! Yes, I had a good one thanks - hope you did too. All the best for 2022. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You Are Back[edit]

I guess the race to put in the edits begins again... :D :D Ankurc.17 (talk) 08:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why?? You know what I am talking about... If it has to do with International page.. I waited for few hours before adding there.. Ankurc.17 (talk) 07:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK - I wont update the grounds list(s) now. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Do note that i have kept my end of our deal.. I wait for few hours before putting in any update on International page.

2025 ICC Champions Trophy[edit]

So, fun fact: in this edit, you reverted an editor who for YEARS has been guilty of massive NOTWEBHOST violations, writing up talk pages for their IP range with cricket tournament stuff. I'll leave one undeleted, for your reading pleasure: User talk:39.40.209.27. I've blocked them, I've blocked them before; I don't know if they're writing up imaginary stuff or not, but I am not surprised to see their fandom and zeal find a way into article space also. Take care, Drmies (talk) 16:50, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. As of right now, it's not quite imaginary, but my gut feels it's unlikely. The Champions Trophy seems like the least important international cricket tournament in the calendar, with no-one really missing it if it went for good. Add to that the defending champions are Pakistan, and they are defending it in their own back yard (again, as of right now), I'm sure India simply can't wait to send their team over the border to play. Fanboys and cricket articles. Whatever next? Take care too! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK--but what is this? Because that's what was in the 50 or so user talk pages that I deleted. Drmies (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, now that is interesting. It rings bells of someone who was using their userpage/talkpage to create fake sports tournaments. If I recall, they had maybe one or two edits in the main article space, but literally thousands of edits to their user/talk page. Got to be the same guy. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I saw one of those edits it rang a bell: I had blocked that range before. May well have been. If you see it, let me know plz. Hey, happy new year. Drmies (talk) 19:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will do - and a happy New Year to you too! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:57, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a while ago, but... SN54129 20:05, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's a ton of that--I've seen them for soccer too. But this one is very specific: cricket, from Pakistan, mostly in user space. Cricket--who even understand that? I remember listening to the BBC World Service, and they'd give the scores, and I still wouldn't know who won. It's as inscrutable as those Wordle things people are posting on Facebook--but with a break for tea, of course. Drmies (talk) 00:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, def. recall tennis tournaments in this style, and fairly recent too. Tennis. What is that? Hitting a ball with a stick? Mercy. Sometimes Drmies, there is no winner, even after five days of play. Well, that's not quite true, as the real winner was, of course, cricket. And please don't ridicule the tea break, it's an intrinsic part of the game, with the ICC recently updating their rules for the shortest format ("an optional drinks break of two minutes and thirty seconds may be taken at the mid-point of each innings subject to agreement between Members at the start of each series"). Rules iz rules. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:52, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Charles Matteson (rower) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Matteson (rower) 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/Charles Matteson (rower) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back (albeit a bit late)[edit]

Hey Lugnuts, good to see you've unretired, welcome back. A week late from me I but only just saw lol. CreativeNorth (talk) 12:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Northy! Hope you are well too. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Virat Kohli[edit]

Hey Lugnuts, hope you are fine and wishing you a very happy new year. Can you improve Virat Kohli or give me some suggestions so that I can remove that "multiple issues" template... RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 11:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks, hope you are good too and a happy new year as well. The problem with Kohli's article is that it's so big and seems to cover lots of minutiae. As a starting point, I'd look at this section and look to trim some of the unimportant bits. For example, there's a line about him getting a 50% match fine (ref #120) - that was from something that happened 10+ years ago. Is that needed today? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But that match fine was because of that "middle finger incident". I think that incident is a major event in Kohli's career.. What are your thoughts? RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 03:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmmm, doesn't ring any bells with me, but if you think it's worth mentioning, I wont remove it. Some good work so far - nice one! Maybe drop a note at WT:CRIC to get others to have a quick look, even if they only tackle one section. Thanks for your work. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have dropped a note at WT:CRIC. Thanks :) RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 11:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cooper Connolly[edit]

You can't restore a speedy delete tag that's been declined. You should know better.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:22, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: - "You should know better"? Awesome attitude. Get off your high horse. I don't recall a speedy tag I've added being removed in recent memory, so maybe you could WP:AGF next time. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hey lugnuts![edit]

i just want to say thanks for making a Wikipedia page (or editing it) for my mothers uncle Thomas (Thomas Hewitt)!!!

He passed away a couple years ago and it was nice to see his own wiki page :)

thanks man! 84.121.162.254 (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lugnuts[edit]

I want to inform you that someone else is using my I'd , those edits done in the New Zealand cricket team in Pakistan in 2021–22 was done by someone else using my I'd so can you look after this issue that no one using my name edits any page .Thank You and take care. 115.96.132.175 (talk) 10:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Legends League Cricket 2022[edit]

Hi Lugnuts , Are you interested in Legends League Cricket Tournanent 2022? Vikas265 (talk) 09:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please make a page on this tournament

Hi! I'm not the biggest fan of T20 franchise leagues at the best of times, and I'm not sure what the match status in this tournament would be. I'm sure it would pass WP:GNG. So sorry, I wont be involved with this one. Maybe ask at WT:CRIC to see if anyone is interested. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Legends League Cricket 2022 is a 10-day tournament where we will see three teams playing with each other in the T20 format. A number of retired global cricketing icons will be participating in the tournament.

It is a 10-day tournament that will be held at the Oman Cricket Academy Ground in Muscat, Oman.
Yuvraj Singh, Virender Sehwag, Harbhajan Singh, Irfan Pathan, etc. will be seen playing for the India Maharajas.
The likes of Shoaib Akhtar, Shahid Afridi, Sanath Jayasuriya, Chaminda Vaas, etc. will be playing for the Asia Lions in the competition.
A World Giants squad will also be participating which will see players like Daren Sammy, Daniel Vettori, Brett Lee, Jonty Rhodes, Kevin Pietersen, etc in action.
The Legends League Cricket kicks off on January 20 in Oman.
The final of the tournament will be held on January 29.

I tried and asked but didn't get any response at WP:GNG and WT:CRIC Vikas265 (talk) 11:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Salvador Alanís for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Salvador Alanís 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/Salvador Alanís 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ODI Matches played by India[edit]

Hey, I'm in dilemma whether India has played 997 or 1000 ODIs. Cricinfo states that 1st Paarl ODI yesterday was India's 997th ODI. But when i made a page in Marathi Wikipedia listing all ODIs played by India in serial numbers then I found out that yesterday's match was India's 1000th ODI. Ironically, the list that i have made has Cricinfo source. Either Cricinfo has missing something or I have made mistake in counting. Aditya tamhankar (talk), 20th January 2022, 10:59 AM (IST)

Hi. Cricinfo has 997 as well. Maybe you've included some that were abandoned without a toss taking place? There would be lots of coverage about them playing their 1,000th match, and the first team to reach that milestone, not least from the ICC. Think back to when England became the first team to play 1,000 Test matches! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I found the flaw. My mistake in listing the serial numbers. I jumped 3 numbers from 533 to direct 537.. 🤣🤣🤣 Aditya tamhankar (talk), 20th January 2022, 13:08 (IST)

Sri Lankan Cricket team in India 2022-23[edit]

Hey Lugnuts, can you make a page or add this down to ICC Cricket World Cup Super League or International cricket in 2022-23 , this is true the Srilankan team are scheduled to tour India for five One Day Internationals from December 2022- January 2023 so can you please create it it is not there 115.96.135.136 (talk) 05:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar submissions templates color[edit]

Hi, I thought you might be interested in this: User talk:Ftrebien#International Oscar Submissions > Template talk:Table cell templates § Color change in "Nominated". Jmj713 (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for this. I noticed them making loads of changes to the colour format - I'll take a look at some point. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcel Chennaux for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcel Chennaux 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/Marcel Chennaux 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Arnolds Krūkliņš for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arnolds Krūkliņš 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/Arnolds Krūkliņš 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.

Cbl62 (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gösta Grandin for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gösta Grandin 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/Gösta Grandin 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.

Contesting redirects[edit]

Hi there. While not explicitly stated, my interpretation would be that in most cases contesting and reverting redirects comes under the umbrella of "converting redirects into articles". As such, I would hope to see expansion and addition of better sources, rather than what happened here and here, when contesting redirects of articles such as these. Best, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 13:47, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It would be, say creating Joe Bloggs (cricketer) as a redirect to a list/club, and then coming back to convert that to an article. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:51, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. However, some (me included) would not see the scope as being that narrow. Personally, I would not want to see significant numbers of reverts like the two examples above (particularly the latter). Best, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 14:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Contesting a speedy redirect is not "creating an article". It's up to the person redirecting it to demonstrate that the redirect is better than an article, and contesting/reverting someone is different to creating a new article. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are describing a similar but different scenario. It usually doesn't work out well for editors who push the boundaries of community sanctions; given what is in place here and the reasons behind them, it would be advisable to take "converting redirects into articles" as being broadly construed, which would include contesting redirects without addressing the lack of substantial content and sourcing. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:05, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The key phrase is "... creating new articles... " These were not, under any description, new. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is, of course, for you to decide how you approach these things. Best, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion reverting a redirect to restore a long standing article is permissible but the aspersions allegations against other editors bet stop now, or I’m going to start dishing out blocks for PAs. If you think someone is proxying then either open a thread about it with credible evidence or shut up. Throwing aspersions is not an alternative response. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:02, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a moment to update your signature[edit]

Please take a moment to update your signature in Special:Preferences. You can copy from the newer revision in this edit. It should just take a few seconds to update it to stop using deprecated font tags. Thanks in advance. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! We're trying to keep Template space free of obsolete tags. Edits like this are needed to keep it up to date. Can you please take a moment to adjust your signature? Here's something you can copy and paste:

'''[[User:Lugnuts|<span style="color:#002bb8;">Lugnuts</span>]]''' <sup>[[User talk:Lugnuts|Fire Walk with Me]]</sup>

Thanks for taking a moment to make this maintenance update. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is another polite request to take 60 seconds to update your signature. It will help save work for gnomes and bots. Thanks! – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:30, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Brilliant! :D SN54129 14:35, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This change is still needed. Please take a moment to help your fellow editors. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I really fail to understand why you are willing to take the time to revert my fix to your signature, but you are unwilling to take less than a minute to actually update your signature to remove deprecated font tags. Whatever POINT you are trying to make has been made by now, and this behavior is becoming disruptive. A team of hard-working gnomes have cleared every single instance of deprecated font, tt, center, and strike tags from Template space, and your outdated signature is the only one that regularly causes the tag count to go from zero to non-zero. You are making work for us, which is at the very least inconsiderate. Please update your signature, and be careful to avoid violating WP:3RR. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"You are making work for us" - Seems a pointless task to be fixing in the first place! Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is noted. Please update your signature. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your request is also noted. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary-Anne Musonda shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonesey95 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now that has to be the best example of irony for a long time. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for modifying your signature. It helps. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:40, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Friedrich Prehn for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Friedrich Prehn 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/Friedrich Prehn 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.

...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 00:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

D.C. Rice[edit]

Hello Lugnuts. Hope you are fine. Should D.C. Rice be nominated for deletion? RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 06:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. No. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnastics[edit]

I’ve noticed that several articles you’ve written have said that gymnasts have competed in 6 events, but they haven’t. There are 6 events in women’s gymnastics competed separately at the Olympics, but for someone to compete in all six, they have to qualify to each final. Most gymnasts do not make each final. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afheather (talk • contribs) 09:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So apparently you've created 100s of articles that have this same mistake. After 1956, the individual apparatuses were competed separately. This means that the vast majority of atheletes competing in the Olympics from 1960 onward would not compete in all of the event finals. You need to fix this. Doing an event in qualifications does not mean that they competed in the event finals. There are 6 events in women's gymnastics and 8 in men's gymnastics. It is incredibly rare for a gymnast to make all finals, let alone numerous gymnasts at the same games. I would recommend using the pages for these finals as a guide to determining who competed in these finals. Afheather (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Frederick Denman for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frederick Denman 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/Frederick Denman 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.

...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jerry Conine for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jerry Conine 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/Jerry Conine 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.

...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:42, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question.[edit]

Hi. Thanks for your good work. I don't think this edit, without explanatory edit summary btw, was appropriate however. It is common at wp where there is an article on name x for a location, and all searches for "x" go to that location rather than a disambiguation page, to add a see also where there is an individual whose surname is "x." Yet you reverted here, without explanatory edit summary. I would urge you to reconsider and revisit. Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bozek,_Yeni%C5%9Fehir&diff=1067447123&oldid=1067415990 --2603:7000:2143:8500:30CD:F863:CA5C:68FC (talk) 19:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gregory McDermott for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gregory McDermott 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/Gregory McDermott 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 01:57, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hazel Hutcheon for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hazel Hutcheon 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/Hazel Hutcheon 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 02:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Max Zumstein for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Max Zumstein 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/Max Zumstein 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.

Wgullyn (talk) 14:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcel Heim for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcel Heim 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/Marcel Heim 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Stefan Lindeberg for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stefan Lindeberg 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/Stefan Lindeberg 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of A. Buydens[edit]

The article A. Buydens has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 23:25, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Meyer[edit]

The article Aage Meyer has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 23:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aarne Kallberg[edit]

The article Aarne Kallberg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NOLYMPICS, lacks significant coverage

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aage Meyer for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aage Meyer 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/Aage Meyer 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 12:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hannu Vuorinen for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hannu Vuorinen 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/Hannu Vuorinen 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.

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 13:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aarne Kallberg for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aarne Kallberg 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/Aarne Kallberg 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 14:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Come on, let's get cracking on improving these stubs. Deb (talk) 14:26, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Deb. Yes, that's my plan! Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Abraham Mellinger[edit]

The article Abraham Mellinger has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage, and I was unable to identify such coverage. Fails WP:NOLYMPICS, so notability isn't presumed, and in the absence of presumption or any evidence that they are notable, prod seems appropriate.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 04:16, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of N. M. Smith[edit]

The article N. M. Smith has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks significant coverage; I was unable to find any not in the article. The fact that we don't know his full name also suggests that he lacks notability. Prodding, as the lack of any indication of notability, as well as the failure to meet any SNG, suggests this is uncontroversial.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 05:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Stewart Tritle[edit]

The article Stewart Tritle has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unfortunately, appears to lack significant coverage; I was hoping to find how the chief of construction for the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition ended up playing at the games there. There are a few passing mentions of him; he appears to be the brother-in-law of General EJ Spencer, but the lack of significant coverage and the failure to meet any SNG suggests that prod is appropriate here.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 05:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this one, I've managed to find coverage. BilledMammal (talk) 06:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hernán Williams[edit]

The article Hernán Williams has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails the revised WP:NCRIC notability guidelines for cricketers as has only played in the 2013 ICC World Cricket League Division Six tournament, which is now considered a non-notable tournament.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StickyWicket (talk) 09:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, just having a clear-up and expansion of Argentine cricketers, noticed this guy doesn't meet NCRIC anymore, hope you don't mind my PROD! StickyWicket (talk) 09:31, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AssociateAffiliate: - morning. Yes, no probs. Just looking at his CI bio, and he did play in a List A match in as part of the Division 2 tournament in 2007. Don't know if there's more about him somewhere! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts I've removed the PROD for him, didn't even check CI my bad! I have checked Lucas Paterlini who didn't play in any LA matches, so have PRODed him. Only 5 more Argentine cricketers to do, then that's another nationality done! StickyWicket (talk) 09:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All Argentine cricketers now done. When the PROD's expire (unopposed I hope) that will make 67 notable players. Joining Ireland (588), Kenya (116) and Malta (1) as being a completed nationality. I think ther are others, but need to go through them! StickyWicket (talk) 15:16, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, didn't know there was that many notable cricketers for Ireland! Nice work. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! I was mildly surprised myself, and give it a season or two we'll have the 600 up. Even more surprising is that I think there will be around 300 notable American cricketers. Had a look at Bahraini cricketers earlier, noticed all but two in the category now fail NCRIC. Just a heads up! Also I've noticed our mutual friend has been redirecting New Zealand cricketers, which was essentially a completed nationality. StickyWicket (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Halina Pitoń[edit]

The article Halina Pitoń has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non medalist Olympians are no longer presumed notable per WP:NOLYMPIC. Subject lacks significant coverage to meet notability standards.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 16:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Edwin Turner (athlete) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edwin Turner (athlete) 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/Edwin Turner (athlete) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 January 28[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 January 28. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Ravenswing 22:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of K. Woerner[edit]

The article K. Woerner has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 03:29, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Frank Raab[edit]

The article Frank Raab has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Search for results from the 1904, and obituaries from 1940, reveal nothing. Fails WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 03:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of George Stadel for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Stadel 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/George Stadel 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Friedrich Schwarz[edit]

The article Friedrich Schwarz has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, fails WP:GNG and WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 03:43, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Abdulwahab Werfeli[edit]

The article Abdulwahab Werfeli has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No WP:SIGCOV can be identified, fails WP:OLYMPICS so notability can not be presumed.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Beyene Legesse for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beyene Legesse 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/Beyene Legesse 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcel Rewenig for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcel Rewenig 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/Marcel Rewenig 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 05:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Abraham Mellinger for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abraham Mellinger 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/Abraham Mellinger 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 02:06, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Max Miller (wrestler)[edit]

The article Max Miller (wrestler) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks WP:SIGCOV and fails WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:34, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Milton Whitehurst[edit]

The article Milton Whitehurst has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks WP:SIGCOV and fails WP:NOLYMPICS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:36, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rudolph Wolken[edit]

The article Rudolph Wolken has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks WP:SIGCOV and fails WP:NOLYMPICS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:46, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ravi Timbawala[edit]

The article Ravi Timbawala has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NCRIC revised guidelines for player notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StickyWicket (talk) 19:39, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mind if I redirect any of these I come across? Perhaps compile a list I can copy over? StickyWicket (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope - that's fine. Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! I've only redirected Naeem Bardai (WCL non-LA appearances), left some more recent T20I cricketers alone as they had made nearly 20 appearances each (I'm happy with +10 for one of the better associate nations). Wondering about Irfan Afridi through. An interesting one. He never played a T20I or a List A match in the World Cup Challenge League, which was surprising given his recentism. Doesn't seem to have played since he was banned from bowling though. What do you think? A GNG pass, or redirect to 2018 ICC World Cricket League Division Four? StickyWicket (talk) 00:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also Uganda done! 58 notable cricketers (57 depending on the above). StickyWicket (talk) 00:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops[edit]

Oops, I reverted your edits on your userpage. I'm sorry. Severe storm 28 01:30, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of A. V. Ford[edit]

The article A. V. Ford has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG through lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 06:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of A. Şefik[edit]

The article A. Şefik has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG through lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:NOLYMPICS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 06:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Hellstrøm[edit]

The article Aage Hellstrøm has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, though WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Holm[edit]

The article Aage Holm has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, though SNG's or GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:05, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Justesen[edit]

The article Aage Justesen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability under WP:GNG or WP:NSPORTS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 02:15, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ulferd Bruseker for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ulferd Bruseker 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/Ulferd Bruseker 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.

Fram (talk) 10:31, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Leidersdorff[edit]

The article Aage Leidersdorff has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, either through GNG or NOLYMPICS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 12:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Poulsen[edit]

The article Aage Poulsen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indications of notability, either through GNG or NOYMPICS. Search for coverage of him primarily returns results for a historian named Jens Aage Poulsen, although there is one mention of a Danish referee by the same name, it is unclear whether it is the same person and it is a passing mention.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 12:15, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aage Rubæk-Nielsen[edit]

The article Aage Rubæk-Nielsen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability, either through GNG and NOLYMPICS. Passing mentions can be found, but nothing more.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BilledMammal (talk) 12:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Frank Raab for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frank Raab 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/Frank Raab 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 17:08, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Gianna Guaita for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gianna Guaita 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/Gianna Guaita 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:19, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic archive[edit]

Thank you very much for adding my grandfather to the archives. It means more to the family than you can know. 2601:600:9B7F:1C50:A5FC:C6C8:E470:179E (talk) 13:30, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Wong Chi-Keung[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Joseywales1961, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Wong Chi-Keung, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. To prevent the deletion, please add a reference to the article. You may remove the deletion tag yourself once the article has at least one reliable source.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Joseywales1961}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Josey Wales^Parley 18:09, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lugnuts - Page curation sent this here, I know you didn't create this article about a Hong Kong actor, someone is hijacking a redirect you made Josey Wales^Parley 18:11, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseywales1961: - no worries. I've restored the redirect. Looks like the hijack-ee is writing about themselves. You might find WP:ARTHI handy too! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, (another one for my arsenal of warning tags LOL) Josey Wales^Parley 18:28, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Marcello Barbieri (gymnast)[edit]

The article Marcello Barbieri (gymnast) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not claim enough notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 156.1.40.28 (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mohit Sharma (Delhi cricketer)[edit]

The article Mohit Sharma (Delhi cricketer) has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Michri michri (talk) 10:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Luis Mantilla for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Luis Mantilla 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/Luis Mantilla 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 14:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And this is not a revenge AfD and/or continued harrasement by you because...? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:37, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow.[edit]

I am shocked at the shear amount of edits you have made to wikipedia, it is extraordinary.

Can you teach me?

K.V --Keanu Venter (talk) 18:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Juan Paz (swimmer) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Juan Paz (swimmer) 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/Juan Paz (swimmer) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Aage Leidersdorff for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aage Leidersdorff 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/Aage Leidersdorff 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.

BilledMammal (talk) 09:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And this is not a revenge AfD and/or continued harrasement by you because...? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:45, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted bot[edit]

Hi, why did you revert my bot here? Please add {{ping|Qwerfjkl}} on reply ― Qwerfjkl talk 10:40, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COSMETICBOT. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:53, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How is this edit cosmetic? Capitalising 'football' changes the short description, which can be viewed from different places (search, {{Annotated link}} etc.) as detailed (probably) on Wikipedia:Short description. ― Qwerfjkl talk 16:31, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding article Mukhtiar Singh[edit]

Mr Lugnuts, i am son of Wrestler Mukhtiar Singh and i have much more information regarding Mukhtiar Singh with refrences. I request you not to whipe my editing in your edits.I hope you understand my concern. Thank you Balterian (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Virat Kohli career summary graphs[edit]

Hey Lugnuts. Hope you are fine. Are those graphs in Virat Kohli's career summary really necessary? RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 03:24, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I don't see the point of them, but they are used on other cricketers' bios, so who knows. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So then I won't be removing them as they are used on other cricketers' bios too. RIDHVAN SHARMA (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Irmintraut Schneider[edit]

Just dropping by to tell you that I did do a WP:BEFORE on this one, so you don't get left feeling like this is some kind of one-two attack by me and the editor whose redirect you reverted (I noticed it independently and did checks for sources before checking the article history and noticing the revert that had happened in the last hour.) -- asilvering (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Asilvering! They may well be non-notable, but the sheer number of bad reverts done in the past hour thows any doubt of WP:BEFORE being done. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me}

Communication[edit]

Hi Lugnuts,

Apologies for posting here as I realize that you don't want to engage with me, but I believe this is an important issue and I would prefer to avoid adding a new section to the current discussion regarding you at WP:ANI.

This is regarding your recent reverts and refusal to discuss at Kyohei Ushio, where you claimed that they were a national champion while forgetting to include the source that supported this; in cases like this, where an editor raises a reasonable concern with an edit you made, you need to discuss that concern, or failing that accept the editor reverting your change.

In general, I believe this explanatory supplement is worth reading.

Finally, I will note that in deference to your desire to avoid communication, I will avoid doing so as much as possible; exceptions will include discussing edits you make that relate to prior edits that I made, and required notifications - although if you request that I stop sending notifications such as those for AFD's, I will do so. BilledMammal (talk) 13:41, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further restriction[edit]

Good afternoon, per this discussion a community restriction has passed to the effect that you are Regardless of the editing method (i.e. manual, semi-automatic, or automatic; from any account), Lugnuts is indefinitely prohibited from making cosmetic changes to wikicode that have no effect on the rendered page'

There was further discussion around a ban from AFD but there was no consensus to enact this. Nevertheless there was strong sentiment that your behaviour was unacceptable and You should be on notice that further disruption at AFD can be dealt with by blocks without needing a community sanction to be imposed. Spartaz ^Humbug! 16:57, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, no editing on the vernal equinox, but only if the full moon is waning and the beer you are drinking is less than 7° plato. Canadian Paul 06:46, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll make a note in my diary! I'd correct the two errors in the OP's post, but that might not have any effect on the rendered page. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:13, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lugnuts. I'm glad the latest "investigation" is over and you're still with us. I like being a WikiGnome from time to time so, if you come across any batches of articles that need some work doing behind the scenes, let me know and I'll take care of them for you. I assume I'm still allowed to have no impact on the rendered page, ha! All the best and keep up the good work. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:14, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, Shakes. If someone with more time on their hands wishes to trawl though four to five hundred of my edits per day to see if I slip up, then be my guest! After all, that's what's really important. Cool, will drop you a note if some mass changes need to be done. And I hope the US-centric Wordle from yesterday didn't have you throwing you computer through the window.... :D Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:19, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I had the U, M and R and figured it was going American. I got HUMOR on the fifth go, I think. It's back to GB today. Have you tried Nerdle, the arithmetic alternative? No Great Shaker (talk) 10:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was fifth time lucky for me too. Not herd of Nerdle before now, so will check it out. Ha, just tried the link and the one day I'm not working from home, the site is blocked! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:36, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ranji Trophy 2022[edit]

Earlier CricInfo said about two phases which would have been started by tomorrow (10 February). But on the next article Ajinkya Rahane, Cheteshwar Pujara picked in Ranji Trophy squads; Hardik Pandya opts out they said that the first phase will be started on 16 February. Another source, Ranji Trophy 2022 will begin on February 17: BCCI saying about the training quarantine and all. Can you sort out among these and fix the main page? Then I will follow it in the Group pages. Thanks. :-) Kirubar (talk) 05:31, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kirubar: - Looks like the 17th is the start date from what I can see. Nothing in the upcoming fixtures on the BCCI's site (yet), but they're usually the last to update! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:14, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mohit Sharma (Delhi cricketer) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mohit Sharma (Delhi cricketer) 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/Mohit Sharma (Delhi cricketer) 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.

Fade258 (talk) 01:53, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IPL sections for non-Indian Players[edit]

Hey!! Hope you are doing well. The 2022 IPL auction just started and I was wondering if we should create IPL sections for non-Indian players, such as Pat Cummins ~~or Trent Boult~~. Let me know what you think! Oh, and also, the 2022 IPL Auction page, which would make the most sense to create after the auction is over. Let me know! Raps19 (talk) 06:59, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I happened upon this by chance. No. Please don't. In almost every circumstance this is unnecessary from the POV of anyone from anywhere else in the world. Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:11, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with no, and they probably shouldn't be there for Indian players either. Just list it in a normal section with all the other non-international cricket tournaments that the person plays. But of course, the IPL fandom/breakaway WikiProject have to want to do everything differently..... Joseph2302 (talk) 08:37, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Raps - all well here, thanks. Per what BST and J2302 said - there's no need to have this. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:39, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Poul Nielsen (footballer, born 1915)[edit]

The article Poul Nielsen (footballer, born 1915) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article created in a rapid spree by creator based on database entries only (a behaviour for which creator has been previously sanctioned). Should be deleted until such time somebody can actually bother to do the actual legwork and find proper sources for it, i.e. keeping a red link to encourage article (and not database entry) creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge PROD due to the AfD at Marcel Rewenig. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:07, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, these are not revenge PROD, you are clearly assuming bad faith. These are very clear examples of you not doing the basic job of looking for sources before creating articles. It's the exact same kind of behaviour you have been sanctioned for before, and I'm doing you a favour by proposing these for deletion so people who actually want to bother looking for sources and write proper articles have an indication that this should be done and not a misleading database-entry created by the usual culprit. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

once a prod is removed, it can't be re-added + Mis-use of Rollback tools. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:13, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Leo Nielsen (footballer)[edit]

The article Leo Nielsen (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article created in a rapid spree by creator based on database entries only (a behaviour for which creator has been previously sanctioned). Should be deleted until such time somebody can actually bother to do the actual legwork and find proper sources for it, i.e. keeping a red link to encourage article (and not database entry) creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge PROD due to the AfD at Marcel Rewenig. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kaj Nielsen (footballer)[edit]

The article Kaj Nielsen (footballer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article created in a rapid spree by creator based on database entries only (a behaviour for which creator has been previously sanctioned). Should be deleted until such time somebody can actually bother to do the actual legwork and find proper sources for it, i.e. keeping a red link to encourage article (and not database entry) creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge PROD due to the AfD at Marcel Rewenig. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jørgen Nielsen (footballer, born 1923)[edit]

The article Jørgen Nielsen (footballer, born 1923) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article created in a rapid spree by creator based on database entries only (a behaviour for which creator has been previously sanctioned). Should be deleted until such time somebody can actually bother to do the actual legwork and find proper sources for it, i.e. keeping a red link to encourage article (and not database entry) creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge PROD due to the AfD at Marcel Rewenig. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of John Nielsen (footballer, born 1911)[edit]

The article John Nielsen (footballer, born 1911) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article created in a rapid spree by creator based on database entries only (a behaviour for which creator has been previously sanctioned). Should be deleted until such time somebody can actually bother to do the actual legwork and find proper sources for it, i.e. keeping a red link to encourage article (and not database entry) creation.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:06, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Revenge PROD due to the AfD at Marcel Rewenig. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:08, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Poul Nielsen (footballer, born 1915) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Poul Nielsen (footballer, born 1915) 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/Poul Nielsen (footballer, born 1915) 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.

RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 18:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And this is not a revenge AfD following the Marcel Rewenig because...? 18:15, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

I think...[edit]

...we might have gotten all of them. Nearly. Whack-a-mole for the next month and half then... Have fun. Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you once again for your work in this area. And all the infobox tidy-up stuff you do. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're winning you know. And that is a fine thing. Mind you, no doubt this is canvassing or something... ;-) And thank you for everything you do as well. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - my pleasure. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Danish player articles[edit]

You don't speak or read Danish do you?? I was looking at those articles of those Danish players at AfD. My gut is that you're right to create those stubs, I've noticed each player was at a club, when those clubs were top at that period and winning honours. I am hella sure there are more sources to be found because of that, don't let these wiki-bullies wear you down. I've expanded a little on what you've created, it's just finding the right sources to put on those articles that is killing them. Govvy (talk) 11:26, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Govvy: - Sadly, I don't speak or read a word of Danish. The best I did was spend a day there in 2012! I was simply going through a list of international footballers with no articles, per the notability that exists (or will that be "existed") at the time. Thank you for your kind words and help in any expansion work you've done. Much appreciated. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Godflesh - Christbait Rising[edit]

From Streetcleaner:

Don't hold me back/This is my own hell

or

Don't hold me back/This is my hotel

You be the judge... (from about 48 seconds in) Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:11, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've always read Streetcleaner as an extended metaphor concept album about the frustrations of mundane jobs, such as managing a hotel, removing the pulp in juice manufacture, and, of course, cleaning streets. Inspired observation, @Lugnuts:! Yawnling (talk) 16:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of W. E. Lawrence for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article W. E. Lawrence 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/W. E. Lawrence 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mohammed Kaif (cricketer, born 1996)[edit]

The article Mohammed Kaif (cricketer, born 1996) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to meet WP:NCRICKET.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.Michri michri (talk) 11:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Signature[edit]

Hey! Apparently your signature uses obsolete font tags causing linter errors. I'd suggest remedying this issue whenever you're able to. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, since you and I seem to edit in some of the same spaces, I'm getting a lot of notices of the bot fixing your old signature (which I'm fine with), however I noticed that you haven't fixed it yet which means I'll keep getting updates. I personally would really appreciate if you could fix your signature. For reference, the fix according to the bot fix is Lugnuts. Gonnym (talk) 15:21, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For a second I thought you were talking about me and I was really confused because my old signature didn't have that many problems. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look in to it. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You still have not fixed your signature. Why exactly is that? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:29, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed implies something is broken, but it looks fine to me. As I said, I'll look into it. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:45, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically speaking it is broken as it's causing lint errors because it uses obsolete font tags. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:56, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Spoors[edit]

He is Dual citizen. Playing for National team isn't a joke. How can foreigner play for some other country without being citizen. Aarogya1234 (talk) 10:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Through their parents or grandparents nationality, for example. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marcel de Kerviler for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marcel de Kerviler 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/Marcel de Kerviler 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2022[edit]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Notifications such as this and this. BilledMammal (talk) 03:08, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Nzanthung Mozhui[edit]

The article Nzanthung Mozhui has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to meet WP:NCRICKET.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Michri michri (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canvassing concern[edit]

It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.

See [1],[2],[3],[4] and [5] which are very likely to be viewed as canvassing by the community. If you're notifying editors who you think may be interested in improving an article, I'm curious why you would link the AfD instead of the article itself. You've been warned about this before and you would be well advised to stop. –dlthewave ☎ 19:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:APPNOTE - "Editors known for expertise in the field". Now get off my back. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Napoléon Murat‎[edit]

As you know, I have been going through some older Olympic equestrians. Lots of interesting people and families which we surprisingly seem to have very sparse coverage of on WP. However, because nobility are very fond of everyone giving everyone the same name, it can be (very) difficult to be sure you have the right person sometimes. On that note, this discussion may be of interest. Best, _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 15:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll take a look. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:31, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looky here[edit]

[[6]] - could this be helpful? Deb (talk) 16:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Yes it could. Thanks Deb! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Mark Lanegan[edit]

On 22 February 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Mark Lanegan, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 22:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lilian Staugaard for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lilian Staugaard 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/Lilian Staugaard 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup Group A[edit]

Template:2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup Group A has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 12:29, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup Group B[edit]

Template:2020 ICC Men's T20 World Cup Group B has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Nigej (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hassan Ghulam[edit]

The article Hassan Ghulam has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NCRIC. Players who have played in the WCL are not notable enough for Wikipedia. This player also hasn't played any official matches according to this.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Cheers, --WellThisIs TheReaper 23:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hugh Peery for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hugh Peery 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/Hugh Peery 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.

Cranloa12n (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Guus van Ditzhuyzen for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guus van Ditzhuyzen 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/Guus van Ditzhuyzen 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trophy Name Announced[edit]

Please add the trophy Name for PAKvsAUS... It is Benaud Qadir Trophy....!!! MaazRajput123 (talk) 08:27, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done - thanks for the info! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Shane Warne[edit]

On 4 March 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Shane Warne, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Amakuru (talk) 20:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yamileth Solorzano[edit]

Hey Lugnuts, would it hurt any if you moved Yamileth Solorzano to Yamileth Solórzano as her external link shows? Come on... Best, --Discographer (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Discographer: - done! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:29, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lugnuts! Best, --Discographer (talk) 10:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

Hi @Lugnuts:, Can you tell me the appropriate article title for T20I tri nation series? For example: 2022 India T20I Tri–Nation series. Is this is a appropriate article title. Fade258 (talk) 14:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It would depend on a) the host of the series and b) the year it takes place in. We've got pretty much all them covered to date, either on the main international tour page or the associate tour page. Do you have an example of one that could be missing, or mis-named? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:29, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, That T20I tri nation series will be happened in Nepal (Host country) in 28 March to 4 April 2022. Fade258 (talk) 15:12, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page already exists here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:25, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for remind me. Fade258 (talk) 15:30, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, Please without feeling frustrated with me. Please tell me Can I nominate the article for deletion under G7 criteria where that particular article was created by another user. Fade258 (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer - no. G7 only applies if you're the only editor to the page. Why would you want this to be deleted? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:45, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't want to delete the page. I ask you only for knowledge. Fade258 (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Phew! Yes, G7 only really applies if you created the page, and then you want it deleting, with no-one else making any major changes. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:51, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think it so. Recently, This {{2022 Indian Premier League points table}} template has been tagged under CSD G7 where as this template wasn't created by nominator. Please have a look. Fade258 (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It'll probably be declined by an admin for deletion. Best contact those involved as to why it was created and tagged for deletion. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:43, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lars Nilsson (volleyball) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lars Nilsson (volleyball) 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/Lars Nilsson (volleyball) 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.

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 17:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Otto Anderson for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Otto Anderson 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/Otto Anderson 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.

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 17:11, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Clyde Coffman for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clyde Coffman 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/Clyde Coffman 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.

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 17:22, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Christopher Campbell (painter) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Christopher Campbell (painter) 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/Christopher Campbell (painter) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page[edit]

Hi Lugnuts! I hope you're doing well! I was going through some logs, and I saw that your user page has been torn up a number of times by vandals and trolls. I also noticed that it had no protection at all. I went ahead and fixed that for you. ;-) If you don't want this protection applied and would like it removed, let me know and I'll be happy to do that for you. I just figured I'd help you out and let you know about it. ;-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:30, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah: - I'm very well thanks - hope you are too. Many thanks for doing this - I can't think of a valid reason why anyone would want to edit my userpage, so I'm more than happy for the protection. I knew paying the extra for the upgrade to the WP Platinum Package would pay off! Thank you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:36, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! HA! The WP Platinum is a good choice. Make sure you take advantage of the free ice cream included! ;-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:54, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Brook Staples[edit]

The article Brook Staples has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unable to find anything beyond passing mentions of results in WP:BEFORE. WP:NOLYMPIC no longer presumes notability based on Olympic participation, and there's not enough coverage to meet WP:BASIC.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rishabh Pant Edit[edit]

Hi @Lugnuts: thank you for your comments on the Rishabh Pant page for the edit I made, just starting out here so it was very useful. Just looking at the number of articles you have created and edited for cricket in general its amazing! Hopefully can collaborate with you on future articles. Anchor62 (talk) 12:27, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Anchor! Yes, if you can use a match report/press release rather than the direct stats link, that would be best. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:29, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Minoru Takarabe for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Minoru Takarabe 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/Minoru Takarabe 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AFD[edit]

As you know, the deletionists have stepped up their game. Have you ever tried using NewspaperArchive or Newspapers.com to save any of your articles? I have saved at least 3 articles from deletion this way. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:39, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Scorps - this is the next thing I was going to look at on WP. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:20, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could be worse, you could have deletionists who create shit like this, but complain about anything that hasn't been sourced for a decade or more. Ouch. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What!!!![edit]

You have said it was stat 4 yr ago. I think you don't know about cricket, if ICC named him no 1 all-rounder mean, it has to be some reason, the reason must be that he proved himself from his batting and bowling, it mean that he can bat and bowl. And from your perspective he changed his role from an all-rounder to only a bowler. It is not possible a person who ranked in all-rounder was, is or will be an all-rounder . This type of vandalism is not accepted Ripomobo11 (talk) 12:39, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your talkpage shows you don't seem to bother with reliable sources, my liege. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:48, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

?? First of all give reason Ripomobo11 (talk) 08:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you insist: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Ripomobo11 Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First please answer the question you not consider him an all-rounder and why Ripomobo11 (talk) 10:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are exploiting by not answering their questions which is not good? Ripomobo11 (talk) 11:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Their ( new editors like me) Ripomobo11 (talk) 11:25, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Lugnuts. Hope you're well. I see we have another common interest at the moment. I've had two of them at the Sharma article arguing about whether he's an outstanding player or not. And that's after I got indefinite protection on it only the other day!! All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All is well here, thanks Shakes! Hope you're good too. One thing's for sure: it's an interesting set of edits across multiple pages....! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:38, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Virgil Ioan for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Virgil Ioan 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/Virgil Ioan 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Werner Mund for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Werner Mund 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/Werner Mund 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lambert, who swears he's not a deletionist, continues with his deletions. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:55, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One to think about[edit]

Hello again, Lugnuts. When I visited your page earlier, I noticed you're still being plagued with AfD notices so I've followed some of them and commented. This one really annoyed me. I think a certain person who "first joined" the site in 2019, soon after me, is rather obsessive about raising AfDs, especially on articles created by you. This rang a bell and I remembered someone being sanctioned a year or so back for flooding the AfD lists every day. I couldn't for a while remember who it was but, after a lot of digging, I find it was User:Störm, whose name I vaguely recall, probably because of the umlaut.

So, I pulled this out of the talk page history and, having looked a little further, it appears that what Störm was doing is the same as this other person is doing now. I may be way off target but do you think they could be the same? Looking at their earliest activity in 2019, it strikes me as suspicious that they could raise two AfDs in their first 25 edits and display complete ease and familiarity with the process in doing so, even knowing which deletion-related discussions to invoke. They might have no connection with Störm, but I'm prepared to bet there's a connection with someone. I'll happily take it to SPI if you think there's a case. Anyway, enjoy the rest of the weekend. No Great Shaker (talk) 22:30, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your alert msg[edit]

Thanks for the alert, Lugnuts. We'll see what happens. No Great Shaker (talk) 16:23, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And thank you for taking time to do it. Thanks again. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take it to a replay at the other venue (except we never seem to do replays any more!). Will let you know. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:11, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help and time with this. If you are to take it further, please ensure you've got a ton of solid evidence to avoid the case falling down! Thanks again. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:43, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what's going on?! Two Test series going on at the same time, each played two matches, with all of them drawn! Any American TPS about - yep, we've had twenty days of cricket across four matches, with no winners. Well, apart from cricket being the winner, of course... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Franco Ogera for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Franco Ogera 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/Franco Ogera 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:49, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lambert's last 400 AfDs. "I am not a deletionist!" Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:27, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Giovanni Bonati (gymnast)[edit]

A tag has been placed on Giovanni Bonati (gymnast) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

WP:G4 - recreation (as a redirect) of a page which was deleted at AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giovanni Bonati (gymnast)) and for which there was explicit consensus against having a redirect.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gösta Grandin[edit]

Hi! There was explicit consensus against a redirect here. If someone else decides to create it, that's fine, but I do not think it should be you given your COI with respect to these stubs. Note, I only tagged and did not delete so another admin may disagree. This is my opinion though and I'd hesitate against creating these en masse since I see @RandomCanadian has similarly voiced concerns. Star Mississippi 14:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's the fastest you've replied to any query I've seen - amazing that! Obviously Random C will voice their concerns, as they support deletion... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:48, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

as I mentioned on my Talk, I'm pretty sure we are in different time zones which would lead to lags between our edits. No comment on the rest as I'm not familiar with RandomCanadian's edits beyond them occasionally crossing my watch list. Star Mississippi 15:53, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's more your inability to answer a direct question, regardless of what timezone you are in. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:56, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, there is no question in your preceding comment (unless the first sentence is some form of rhetorical question, but you didn't punctuate it as so). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's the broken reply tool @RandomCanadian. @Lugnuts' comment is likely a follow up to a conversation on my Talk. Lugnuts, you're welcome to your assessment of course. I believe I always answered as fully as I was able. Happy to agree to disagree. Star Mississippi 16:15, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How many redirects about non-notables do we usually have? In the same way that being a sportsperson does not give a free pass for an article, it doesn't give a free pass for a redirect. WP:R#DELETE also has "10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.": if you are arguing that there is some glimmer of a possibility that these might be notable, and given that the target article contains, indeed, little if any information on the subject, then it would make more sense to have a red link to encourage article creation. And if they are not-notable, and given Wikipedia is not a database (a "summary-only description") or a mirror of databases, well then I've already explained that. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Elmer Raguse[edit]

I am the grandson of Elmer Raguse and admittedly new to editing on Wikipedia. I have tried to add content to his page and Lugnuts keeps deleting it. Am I doing something wrong? Craigraguse (talk) 14:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Craigraguse: - hi and welcome to WP. I assume you are refering to this edit. Everything you add MUST be verified with reliable sources. Do you have an online source to back up what you added to the page? Also, if you are related/connected to the subject, please also see WP:COI. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:03, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Esha Rohit / Oza[edit]

Hi there, hope you are doing well. I noticed that Cricinfo are now using Esha Oza instead of Esha Rohit again as the short form name of this UAE Women's player. Not sure if it's worth redirecting (again) as I am sure in the last tournament they had it as Rohit (they have changed everywhere to Oza, for now). Bs1jac (talk) 16:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bs1jac: - all good here, thanks. Hope you are well too. Thanks for spotting this. Looking at the sources in the article, as well as comparing Google results, I believe that Esha Oza is correct and have done the move. Thanks again! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:15, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Olympics[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. I've begun a deletion sorting page for articles about the Olympics which are nominated at AfD. Hope you find it useful. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers - thanks for doing this! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of André Bautier for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article André Bautier 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/André Bautier 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Fazle Rabbi[edit]

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

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

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 00:46, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sportspeople by city or town in the Netherlands has been nominated for renaming[edit]

Category:Sportspeople by city or town in the Netherlands has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --Ferien (talk) 20:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Women's world cup[edit]

Before reverting , check Page no 24 in https://resources.pulse.icc-cricket.com/ICC/document/2022/03/08/57dab826-cf74-4251-bc3f-e1d9b237fcb3/WCWC-2022-Playing-Conditions.pdf

Also, check time of Final in https://www.cricketworldcup.com/matches 42774 (talk) 05:35, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The playing conditions state the top of group go to Semi-final 1, 2nd place to Semi-final 2, IE Aus and SA. India haven't reached the semi-finals yet... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:40, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

India haven't reached semi-finals yet, but can qualify after last group match. Neither ICC or ESPNCricinfo have confirmed that AUS will play Semi-final 1, so it is early to update semi-finals now. 42774 (talk) 05:43, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

India is a red-herring at the moment. The Playing Conditions, which you've kindly linked to, show SF1 as top vs 4th (IE Aus vs TBC) and SF2 as 2nd vs 3rd (IE SA vs TBC). Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:46, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lowest Australia can finish is second and a win (or even a washout) against Bangladesh will lock in top spot, but they will have to wait until Sunday March 27 to find out where and when they will play their semi-final.

The World Cup playing conditions dictate that India – should they qualify – feature in the second day-night semi-final at Christchurch's Hagley Oval, regardless of where they finish inside the top four.

(from https://www.cricket.com.au/news/womens-world-cup-cwc22-run-home-semi-final-race-australia-south-africa-england-india-west-indies/2022-03-23)

42774 (talk) 05:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's great - but it doesn't matter right now for the placements of Aus and SA. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:58, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Giuseppe Fago for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giuseppe Fago 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/Giuseppe Fago 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:55, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giuseppe Fago. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

I've gone ahead and removed the first sentence of this. If you feel that there's misconduct, please take it to ANI instead of commenting about it in deletion discussions. –dlthewave ☎ 02:33, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dlthewave, since you see yourself as an unofficial talk page police officer, your failure to address this must be seen as a dereliction of duty. You were aware of Lambert's conduct at the ANI, which in no way concerned Lugnuts, and yet you did nothing when Lambert made that insulting comment. No doubt if Lugnuts had referred to Lambert or one of your other pals as a net negative, you'd have been there tut-tutting and removing it. Lugnuts politely asked Lambert to remove the offending message and was met with silence, an effective refusal. In the end, Lambert had to be told by Black Kite to remove the comment.

Also, your intervention at the Fago AfD has made a nonsense of subsequent posts, completely losing their context. That is another reason for making a polite request if you want someone to change or delete a previous post. Removing a post without asking first is the antithesis of politeness – it is downright rude. Obviously, as Black Kite had to do with Lambert, a sysop can step in if the polite request is refused.

Lugnuts, sorry for intervening here but after what happened at my talk page yesterday, I think I should help anyone else who has had this same problem of wanton interference. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, could you please remove the revenge AfD accusation at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giuseppe Fago? –dlthewave ☎ 05:28, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See, easy to be polite isn't it? Pity that someone has to stand up to you first. No Great Shaker (talk) 05:31, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is! I've removed the offending word for BilledMammal. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:10, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant DtW. Easy to get confused... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:11, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! –dlthewave ☎ 11:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I warned you before about casting aspertions and attacking the motives of other editors. You failed to immediately redact when requested and left the personal attack here. If I have to block you again for this it will be for a significantly longer period and if ots aggravated there will be no time limit. Understood? Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:38, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Spartaz: - Yes. Apologies, I've not been online for most of the day. While I did retract the comment at AfD, I completly forgot about it here. It's now removed. Is that OK for an unblock on the proviso that if there are any further issues from now on it goes to an indef, no questions asked? Also, what is "ots aggravated"? I don't know what you mean by ots. Typo? Acronym? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:30, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One day for like the fourth block for personal attacks is pretty darn lenient. It's such a short block I don't see any reason for you to appeal, just do better in the future. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:49, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Or in context, four times across 15 years and 1.5million edits. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Beeblebrox that you should be grateful its only 31 hours. Frankly if you are spraying so many aspertions around you can't keep track if them then you should be using that time reflect and improve. Ots is a typo. It was supposed to be its. I.e. if your next offence is aggrevated then it will be straight to indef. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:59, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, fine. Also - "I warned you before about casting aspertions and attacking the motives of other editors" - Do you have a diff for that? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:05, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On this very page in the section Contesting Redirects. You responded, "understood". Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

THanks. Hopefully you'll apply the same standards to those making personal attacks against me, when they've been warned not to do so. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously?? Is that the sum reflection of your conclusions after this block. I had hoped for more meaningful selfreflectiom. Just picking up your allegations of socking mentioned above, It is casting aspersions to accuse someone of being a sock while refusing to pursue the allegation. Asking questions is fine but then there is a point where you either shut up about it or do something. Its not permitted to keep repeating the allegation as a truth without any action. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:19, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"while refusing to pursue the allegation" - no, if I get the necessary evidence, then I'll persue it - that's a very different thing. "I had hoped for more meaningful selfreflectiom" - well, as I've said I hope you apply the same standards to those making personal attacks against me. I guess we should both lower our hopes of each other. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:24, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 March 2022[edit]

From the Signpost team: How The Signpost is documenting the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

News and notes: Of safety and anonymity

Eyewitness Wikimedian, Kharkiv, Ukraine: Countering Russian aggression with a camera

Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary

Eyewitness Wikimedian, Western Ukraine: Working with Wikipedia helps

Disinformation report: The oligarchs' socks

In the media: Ukraine, Russia, and even some other stuff

Recent research: Top scholarly citers, lack of open access references, predicting editor departures

Wikimedian perspective: My heroes from Russia, Ukraine & beyond

Discussion report: Athletes are less notable now

Technology report: 2022 Wikimedia Hackathon

Arbitration report: Skeptics given heavenly judgement, whirlwind of Discord drama begins to spin for tropical cyclone editors

Traffic report: War, what is it good for?

Deletion report: Ukraine, werewolves, Ukraine, YouTube pundits, and Ukraine

Gallery: "All we are saying is, give peace a chance..."

From the archives: Burn, baby burn

Essay: Yes, the sky is blue

Tips and tricks: Become a keyboard ninja

On the bright side: The bright side of news

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:50, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rossana Lombardo[edit]

The article Rossana Lombardo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unable to find significant coverage in WP:BEFORE. Participation no longer satisfies WP:NOLYMPIC.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:31, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mathias Logelin for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mathias Logelin 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/Mathias Logelin 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:16, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IPL Commentary Panel[edit]

I added commentary panel because it was also mentioned in the page 2022 Pakistan Super League. But IPL commentary panel was removed.

I'm not Lugnuts (but I assume they don't mind me replying here). I started a discussion about this at Talk:2022 Indian Premier League#Commentary panel. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding camrean green[edit]

Stop deleting my information regarding camrean green you again and again delete my information Jaspreetsingh6 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read your talkpage: User_talk:Jaspreetsingh6#March_2022. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lindsay Langston for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lindsay Langston 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/Lindsay Langston 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.

A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 12:20, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User not block notice[edit]

You have been blocked for a period of 1 second for making terrible puns on ANI. Stifle (talk) 09:00, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Stifle - Harsh, but fair. Only right you hoover up the bad guys. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:04, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Outlaws of Sonora[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. Hope you are okay and thanks for your message. I think I've got this plot confused with another film (can't remember title) which has a doctor being kidnapped and then turning the tables on the outlaws. This one's on YouTube so I'll watch it later and see what happens. I've seen it once before but it was years ago and I think something else happened with the doctor. It's a case of everything merging into one, d'oh! Like hotels – I only remember them if they're like Fawlty Towers, ha! Anyway, glad to see you're back again. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shakes! All good here, thanks - hope you're well too. Despite being prolific in creating many missing articles on Westerns, it's a genre I don't really care for. Once you've seen one Western, you've seen them all, right?! Haha, yes I like your hotels analogy. I once stayed in one in Copenhagen, were the bathroom was smaller than a toilet on an airplane. I turned on a tap in the sink, to find it also turned the shower on... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:08, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, ha! You sound like my missus. She says Westerns are the Marmite of the cinema and all horses with a gunfight at the end! That hotel in Copenhagen isn't the only one like that. I remember one somewhere in Germany many years ago where the shower was part of a fitted wardrobe and I could only just squeeze into it. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've found hotels in London to have some of the worst service and rooms in any location I've ever stayed. However, Eastern Europe seem to go above and beyond with their customer service. I was about to go back to Poland when this pesky pandemic started. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:43, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not using edit summaries[edit]

There's surely a template for this somewhere, and I'd really be inclined to be lazy and use it, but in the interest of expediency: you got the message, right? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:03, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Get back to me when edit summaries are mandatory. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sorry to butt in here, but I was also under the impression that edit summaries weren't necessary? Obama gaming (talk) 21:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Obama gaming: They're not strictly necessary, but it's considered a pleasant thing to do (see Help:Edit summary), especially when you're reverting an edit (as that implies you are disagreeing with that edit: we all know that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and there can't be much collaboration - in the hopes of reaching a new compromise or understanding the existing one - if no reason is given). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again - "Get back to me when edit summaries are mandatory". Maybe you can start an RfC on making that so. Good luck! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:27, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again, "it's not mandatory" is not an excuse for anything. And you haven't bothered providing a reason for those edits even outside of edit summaries, so you're not exactly very convincing. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 12:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again - "Get back to me when edit summaries are mandatory". Give it a rest, son. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:05, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) This looks to me like a case of WP:HARRASS and that is never (quote) a pleasant thing to do, nor is anything ever (quote) an excuse for it. There is certainly a WP:POINT being made for no good reason. While edit summaries can sometimes be helpful, 99% of the time they are a waste of space because they say nothing when there is nothing to be said. I nearly always write one myself out of ingrained habit because, back in my IP days, a sysop asked me to write one each time and I believed, mistakenly, that it was mandatory. It isn't and, unless it will actually help the reader, why bother? Most of my input is copyediting and I guess the edit summaries I write most often are ce and clean up. But what do they actually achieve? If I wrote nothing and someone looked at the diff, they would immediately see a copyedit of corrections, revisions, etc. If I added a massive amount of new info which had not previously been mentioned, an edit summary such as created new section about whatever might be useful but, again, the diff would show that a whole new section had been created. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:43, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, they're trying their best to WP:BAIT me and they don't want to WP:DROPTHESTICK either. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:59, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts reverted an edit I made, and hasn't provided any reason why (not even now). Coming to a talk page to request clarifications is not WP:HARASS under any definition of that. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:53, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nam players[edit]

Hi. A couple of players made their T20 and List A debuts in this series: [7]. Would you mind updating the existing articles of some of the players? Thanks. Human (talk) 09:47, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Oooh, thanks for the reminder - I'd forgotten all about that. Yes, will do. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:48, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those (with articles) have been updated. Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:41, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quinton de kock[edit]

I did vandalism at Quinton de Kock, stop me if you can cause I love vandalism .Zzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is foolZzuzzz is fool Cricket Lover 007 (talk) 16:04, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Sports links[edit]

Template:Sports links has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page.

Proposed deletion of José Antonio Prud'homme[edit]

The article José Antonio Prud'homme has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NOLY and does not pass WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TartarTorte 18:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Haris Šveminas for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Haris Šveminas 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/Haris Šveminas 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:00, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Create Article list a debut first class debut[edit]

Hello Lugnuts I am living in Bangladesh I want crete article about Bangladeshi cricketer who debut list a or first class cricket on 2021–22 Dhaka Premier Division Cricket League I have some list of players whose debut recently list a cricket 5 plus match. now I am create 2 player article there are debut list a cricket 1 SM Meherob 2 Ashiqur Zaman can I create more please check this article and give me a permission can create more??

Tanvirnahid565 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:07, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tanvirnahid565: - Neither of these two players meet the notability requirements for cricketers, and they are likely to be deleted, unless there's other coverage on each of them above and beyond playing in the tournament. Please do not create further articles, unless they meet the notabilty requirements. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:11, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Al Mamun please check this article he is also debut only list a cricket. but this article are not delated Tanvirnahid565 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Al Mamun (cricketer, born 1990) please check also this article there are same as my creating article this player only debut list a cricket. Tanvirnahid565 (talk) 14:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Check Article[edit]

Hello Lugnuts, Please check this article Abdullah Al Mamun (cricketer, born 1990) this player only debut list A Cricket and he is notable on Wikipedia and me cerate a new article like him Husna Habib there are play same list A cricket on Bangladesh there are play same match on list a cricket Please check it. Thank you Tanvirnahid565 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You created an article without even consulting further. That other one was creating before the WP:NCRIC happened. Human (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mátyás Balogh for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mátyás Balogh 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/Mátyás Balogh 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.

Ficaia (talk) 06:20, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Mathias Logelin" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Mathias Logelin and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 14#Mathias Logelin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. FOARP (talk) 11:11, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Boris Yakimov for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Boris Yakimov 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/Boris Yakimov 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.

Ficaia (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"LOL (Laughing Out Loud)®" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect LOL (Laughing Out Loud)® and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#LOL (Laughing Out Loud)® until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 05:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea why I created this redirect. LOL. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:04, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zimbabwe tours[edit]

Details are in for Namibia and Afghanistan tours of Zimbabwe. Bs1jac (talk) 14:50, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:51, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan Junior League?[edit]

Hey Lugnuts, does this under-19 league seem worthy of an article? [8] Thanks. CreativeNorth (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The tournament may generate enough coverage to pass WP:GNG, but I personally wouldn't bother with U19 leagues myself. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:04, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfD[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. Looks like you haven't been told about this one. Hope you're enjoying Easter. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 22:33, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers! I've asked that specific user not to bother me, and I'd pick it up from my watchlist. Thanks for the note. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Luis Casíllas for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Luis Casíllas 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/Luis Casíllas 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Erasmo Gómez for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Erasmo Gómez 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/Erasmo Gómez 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gunnar Hoglund (disambiguation)[edit]

The article Gunnar Hoglund (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not required (WP:ONEOTHER). The two articles have hatnotes to each other.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I Have a question on Wikipedia notability Cricketrs[edit]

Hello Lugnuts, I have questions about cricketer notable on Wikipedia. I am interested to cerate article about Bangladeshi cricketer. Jakir Hossain this cricketer player only one first class cricket match. He debut only one first class cricket. but he is notable on Wikipedia. Can I cerate article about cricketer like that? Arifulislam564 (talk) 17:59, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Shivaji Yadav[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts,

Thank you for creating Shivaji Yadav.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article needs more references to satisfy notability for sport. What is needed are references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS; that is your guide. You may also read WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources. A more comprehensive guide is WP:SOURCES ... Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion. Kindly do the needful. Thank you.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Whiteguru (talk) 10:33, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New articles & Google search[edit]

Dear Lugnuts:

I recently posted four articles on Wiki for consideration, all literary works by James M. Cain: Three of a Kind (novella collection), Pastorale (short story), The Baby in the Icebox and Career in C Major.

These are my first new article contributions. Why don't they appear on my Google search, as other Wiki Articles do? Confused and ignorant.--CerroFerro (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Probably has to do with how long it takes Google to catch-up with new articles on WP. Maybe someone at WP:VPT can explain a bit better/in more detail. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CerroFerro new articles don't appear on Google search for 90 days, or until a new page patroller has marked them as reviewed. Until that point, new articles have a "no index" thing on them, so search engines like Google won't pick them up. Joseph2302 (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mystery solved! Thanks Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 April 2022[edit]

News and notes: Double trouble

In the media: The battlegrounds outside and inside Wikipedia

Special report: Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war

Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary (Part 2)

Technology report: 8-year-old attribution issues in Media Viewer

Featured content: Wikipedia's best content from March

In focus: Editing difficulties on Russian Wikipedia

Gallery: A voyage around the world with WLM winners

Interview: On a war and a map

Serendipity: Wikipedia loves photographs, but hates photographers

Traffic report: Justice Jackson, the Smiths, and an invasion

Recent research: Student edits as "civic engagement"; how Wikipedia readers interact with images

News from the WMF: How Smart is the SMART Copyright Act?

Essay: The problem with elegant variation

Humour: Really huge message boxes

From the archives: Wales resigned WMF board chair in 2006 reorganization

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2020 ICC WOMEN'S T20 WORLD CUP[edit]

Please tell me why you reverted my edit on that article please! Answer Saha86830 (talk) 13:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of any sources. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC)Ok thank you but if you watched that tournament then you know that what i have wrote is correct. But i have not found any source so please help me too find some sources[reply]

Sir create my article[edit]

Name- Firoz Chaudhary Dob- 01-07-2000 And I am a teacher in government school Place - delhi, India 106.211.16.4 (talk) 19:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		For finding sourcing for Pop Drunk Snot Bread. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John D. Hall (sound engineer) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John D. Hall (sound engineer) 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/John D. Hall (sound engineer) 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.

Gab4gab (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ivan Pavlovsky for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ivan Pavlovsky 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/Ivan Pavlovsky 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.

Kges1901 (talk) 23:47, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of António de Menezes for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article António de Menezes 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/António de Menezes 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.

Scorpions13256 (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Terry Pearce for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Terry Pearce 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/Terry Pearce 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 09:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

April 2022[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for making personal attacks towards other editors. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:39, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I already warned you about throwing aspersions in AFDs but this was more of the same Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, I was the one who made the nomination. Please direct your anger at me, not him. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have to wonder what is expected to be different next week, considering this at least the fifth time this user has been blocked for the same type of behavior. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I blocked him a day last time and this is the next escalation. If a week off doesn't curb his behaviour then we can look at a further escalation. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These disputes about athletes and notability have had everyone on edge for weeks now. I'm not condoning casting aspersions but it's the same group of people coming back to AfD after AfD, discussing the same issues, tensions are high all around. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would absolutely agree, and can imagine that it must be very frustrating when the same sorts of candidates are brought to AfD by editors with some experience in the field when there is either an obvious alternative to deletion or where there are clearly sources that can be found. None of the cricketer articles which have been nominated recently, for example, have been deleted. In the case that precipitated this ban, sources were provided by Lugnuts which suggested that there were clear sources available - and an ATD was presented that is entirely appropriate.

And there have been a lot of AfD notices recently. I note that the general sports RfC proposal which was accepted was clear that "There should also be some type of grandfathering so that if passed, there is not a sudden rush for AFD" - although in the enthusiasm to change the SNGs this element of it seems to have been forgotten as far as I can tell. I don't pay enough attention to the Olympics stuff to know if that was the case with the separate discussions that led to the removal of the SNG for Olympians or whether it included any suggestion of ATDs. But maybe there should be a presumption that an ATD should at least be explored - there are thousands of articles which are now clearly vulnerable to deletion as a result. And there have been a lot of AfDs which, in some cases at least, seem a little hasty at times. Blue Square Thing (talk) 06:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I love waking up each morning to see endless AfD notifications, now that it's open season to delete all sportspeople, along with users like Gay Fan 7 constantly socking and making horrific personal attacks. But lets focus on the real important stuff, eh? Maybe Spartaz would also like to block others who accuse Lambert of not doing any WP:BEFORE work, as I'm not alone in this line of thinking. And maybe explain why a part-time admin, who is itching to go for the block button, isn't making WP:PUNITIVE blocks. It clearly stinks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:46, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A one week block for this? I personally do not see how that is worthy of a block. BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The issue is not anything Lugnuts might have written as a reaction to what he considered an inadequate BEFORE. The real issue, which sysops need to seriously address, is that certain AfD regulars automatically go for the delete option instead of showing proper respect for WP:PRESERVE which is a key component of the site's editing policy. If an article genuinely lacks significance (e.g., a non-league footballer), then of course it should be deleted. But, if the guy is a league player and therefore potentially notable, although his article currently falls short of the SIGCOV bar, then it should be a redirect per PRESERVE so that the history is retained in case someone does find the necessary coverage later. AfD is going to be a problem until these people are made to perform BEFORE adequately and learn the difference between an article that should be deleted and one that should be redirected. Lugnuts does his very best to find sources when one of his stubs is challenged and I fully empathise with the inevitable frustration that arises when he sees the same people repeatedly failing to do their best. I think this block should be terminated immediately. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 16:25, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spartaz this is a dreadful block. Honestly. This amounts to literally nothing in the big scheme of things, yet a week-long block?? People have directly attacked one another (indeed, admins have told users to "fuck off" for example) with no penalty. This block is utter bollocks. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BeanieFan11. Reading that and other similar comments on the blocking admin's talkpage can only bring one conclusion - everyone will agree to disagree. Anyway, I've had a day off, as it were, to look over this, calm down and reflect. Clearly I have an issue understanding WP:ASPERSIONS. The link to Wiktionary has the definition of "To make damaging or spiteful remarks". And that's where I'm struggling. I understand what would be a personal attack, for example calling X user a <insert swear word here>, which is unacceptable, and something I wouldn't do. There seems (to me at least) to be a grey area between the boundaries of a WP:NPA and WP:ASPERSIONS. So @Spartaz: and @Beeblebrox: - please help me to help myself in this situation. If I was to request an unblock, what would you want me to say and what would you want me to agree to so we can move forward on this? Happy to strike/remove said comment, along with anything else you would deem appropriate. Believe it or not, I don't come to WP each day with the any intent on winding people up and causing disruption. I know some people may be choking on their token beverage of choice reading that, but it's true. I'm obviously too blunt (sometimes) for my own good. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's basically battlefield behaviour. You don't seem to be able to stop yourself from making comments about other editors as part of your effort to win a discussion. If you weren't on so many warnings and blocks for precisely this then of course the comment wouldn't have led to a block or let to any comment but you are on thin ice because it's not ending. Perhaps I can turn the question round on you? How can we stop you commenting on editors instead of the content. No one has ever been blocked for discussing a source or adding sourced content but doing that doesn't require you to make pronouncements about other editors as part of your contribution. The community is clearly losing patience with disruption around you and defending the articles you created at AFD without having a go in some way at those you perceive as on the wrong side seems to be very difficult for you . You have a ban from creating substubs because it leaves so much clean up to other editors and notability standards have moved well away from where you have been creating content. So how can we fix that? Blocks are a very crude tool so what else can we try?Do you have any ideas as I really feel you need some kind of filter to keep you out situations where you are tempted to say something about your "opponents"? What do you suggest? Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:26, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Spartaz - OK, first off I've been working through expansion of "substubs" (here) to try and address the clean-up, and not leaving it to others. As far as AfD goes, I'm not trying to "win a discussion", I guess I'm just not the best a putting my point across. I guess I can look at an AfD, take a step back from who nominated it (as that's not important), and simply cite sound rationale(s) to keep (or indeed delete/merge/redirect, etc). Avoid saying anything that anyone could read as a non-constructive comment, and make sure the frustration around the whole change in notabilty does not get the better of me. And take that extra moment to read, re-read and double check any talk-space comment before hitting the submit button. How does that sound? Would that be acceptable for an unblock, and if not, please tell me what else I need to add. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would be fine now but after a while it will go to the back of your mind and then we will be back here, except next time it might be a month or and indef and you used up your chances. I'm not saying this to create an obstacle but thinking about how to put a structure in that will save you from yourself. As a regular AFD closer I can confidently say that sources and source analysis wins a debate. I never give any weight to comments that are essentially so and so smells. My point is you don't actively win a debate by making a comment but you can even win by proxy through offering sources and policy based arguments. You have a lot of supporters, do you have any you can trust to proof your comments and copy them over without the aspersions or personal attacks? I know that is a bit demeaning and frustrating for an editor of your eminence but I'm trying to think of a solution that's going to stick rather then just kick the can down the road until the next escalating block. Something similar worked for TRM and eventually wasn't needed. I'm not going to make this a condition of an unblock but I'd like you to seriously consider this or something like it as block/unblock or block/wait it out is inevitably going to see you gone from this project because the temptation to personalise your contributions is eventually going to get the better of you until or unless you find another way to make the contribution that filters that out. I'm unblocking you now but I'd be happy to continue the conversation tomorrow and I really hope you take the opportunity to create a permanent solution that removes the issue. That would be a win for everyone. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It's late(ish) in the UK right now - let me have a read/sleep on your post, and I'll construct a full response in the morning. Thanks again. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's even later here in Belgium and I'm knackered so tomorrow is fine. I'm just pleased you want to engage in the discussion. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! I honestly thought you were in North America based on your edit times. As I said elsewhere - will give this a complete review in the morning. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Spartaz: - it goes without saying (but I'll say it anyway) that the first thing I'll do when the block ends is to stike that AfD comment and apology in that discussion too. Hopefully you're still online and this doesn't get protracted due to timezones, etc. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I unblocked you but those annoying floating messages for talk page comments interfered with my rationale and then the autocorrect took over when I was trying to say per discussion here. Please take my comments seriously. You need to find a structural solution. Block unblock is wearing thin when the same issues crop up. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will do and understood. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:08, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the nomination, I wanted to nominate an article for deletion written by someone other than Lugnuts, but I forgot to check who the original creator was. I do not intend on making any more nominations in the WP:NOLY area. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:03, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jean-Yves Mallat for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jean-Yves Mallat 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/Jean-Yves Mallat 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 03:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Clifford Prinsloo for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clifford Prinsloo 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/Clifford Prinsloo 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2022 County Championship[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. Welcome back. I was looking through your contribs to see if I could help with anything in case you were out for a full week. Someone had been updating this article by posting snapshot scores from mid-afternoon on the second day of play! Yes, really. I've reverted it all back to your last edit so you might want to take a look tomorrow and see if all is okay. This is an excellent article, by the way – very well constructed and highly informative. Great work. Keep it up.

As I said above in the April 2022 piece, you are not the problem. The issue is people who visit AfD on a regular basis who think only in terms of delete. They need to understand that PRESERVE is part of editing policy while SIGCOV is only a guideline. That's what sysops should be focused on. Anyway, as you said yourself, it's latish here now. Glad you're back and hope you're okay. All the best. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 21:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you (and to all those who also replied in the above thread). The County Championship is my final thing to do tonight. Will give a more fitting reply to all in the morning too. :) Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 21:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Clifford Gibbs for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Clifford Gibbs 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/Clifford Gibbs 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Priest for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Priest 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/William Priest 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:48, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting[edit]

I find it interesting how many accounts take issue with your articles Lugnuts. It almost seems like when one user receives a topic ban for mass nominating AfDs, another user takes up the mantle. Also interesting how they all seem to disproportionately target your articles specifically. Also all seem to frequently fail WP:BEFORE on sportspeople articles. Strange how they focus on those specific areas as well as retaining old English exonyms. I suppose there's a group of people out there who have a focus on both nominating sportspeople for deletion and retaining old English exonyms. I personally find that combination of topics oddly specific.

Good luck. You didn't deserve that block earlier. Have no idea how you've dealt with this for so long. Desertambition (talk) 20:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll tell you what happened. The deletionists finally took over the project. Right around the time WP:NOLY was changed, I was going to tell him that the deletionists would also come for WP:NFOOTY. It turns out I was right. The community has decided that 1 sentence stubs are no longer acceptable. I personally don't mind them, as I have created many myself.

I dedicate a good chunk of time on here preserving the articles for secondary schools when they get nominated for deletion. Secondary schools are no longer inherently notable as of 2017. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both. Apparently, you can't say the word "deletionist" anymore, despite there being a user box specifically for that. It's health and safety gone mad... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can say it all you want, but you can't blame others for not really taking you seriously if you do. I had a look at the category, most of those accounts are long gone, although I do see a few familiar names from recent memory on there. I find that a bit silly as well. The whole idea that there is some "great war" between the evil deletionists and the bold virtuous inclusionists got rather played out quite some time ago. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:36, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, what's your point here? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the deletionists were the good guys? ;-) Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Yes they are. And I wont hear a bad word said against them. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Namibian cricket team in Zimbabwe in 2022[edit]

Hello User:Lugnuts

I created a page Namibian cricket team in Zimbabwe in 2022 on 05 April 2022 with some details with CzarSportsAuto as the solitary source. User:Bs1jac asked to Hold on to the updates as he wanted the information to publish by more sources. On 15th April, you moved the page to Namibian cricket team in Zimbabwe in 2021-22 without leaving a redirect and then immediately recreated the same page (Namibian cricket team in Zimbabwe in 2022) by your i/d. What was the need to move my page when you had to recreate it again. I know you have been making the maximum number of edits on cricket, but please let others alson contribute

Thanks, Vikram Maingi (talk) 10:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

THink it was in the wrong year. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:13, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New articles[edit]

I wasn't a fan of some of the short Olympian and cricketer stubs but always loved the groundwork you did on films. And there's still a staggering amount missing, particularly from non anglo countries. Most of the lists I did haven't been updated in the last few years. I think it's a great shame that they banned you from creating new articles when you could be continuing the work you did on films. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dr B - long time no speak. Hope you are well. I did what I can, and continue to do what I can, despite the restrictions. Much easier to move the goalposts + destroy, rather than help to build. Take care. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear from you too. Very well thanks. It's completely against the principles of building an encyclopedia though, you should have the freedom to create whatever you want if the articles meet guidelines. As Charles Matthews once said a while back, "we need editors who create lots of articles" when taking about User:Boleyn. Is there anyway they can revise the restrctions to allow you to create film articles which have two sources or something? Most people who edit film articles are very grateful for the work you did on here and the consistency of it which allow them to be easily expanded. Annoying.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can appeal after six months of the initial restrictions being imposed, subject to my motivation to do so. We must stop all these one-line stubs, or else! Such as this and this, and thousands more that get added every day by other editors. Speaking of expansion, the other fallacy is that I leave all the expansion work to others. Keeping just a recent record of that shows it's not true. And if anyone took a few seconds to look at the articles linked to the International cricket in 2021–22 page, for example, they can easily bask in my magnificence. Enjoy the rest of the Bank Holiday! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Emmanouil Gneftos for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emmanouil Gneftos 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/Emmanouil Gneftos 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Muzamil Sherzad[edit]

Got an interesting potential DYK nom right there ;) StickyWicket (talk) 18:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Dare I dream?! Saw that he was at the U19 World Cup, and saw that there was quite a bit about him. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, definitely. V interesting. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - nice to see some positive comments (at long last) about cricket articles. I will look into the DYK process tomorrow, as it's been some time since I last nominated one. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hassan Dyamwale for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hassan Dyamwale 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/Hassan Dyamwale 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.

Artem.G (talk) 10:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Riedell for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Riedell 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/William Riedell 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bob Starkey (rower) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bob Starkey (rower) 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/Bob Starkey (rower) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the nom above was made at 14:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC) and this one was at 13:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC) isn't this a violation of your editing restriction - " User:Johnpacklambert is indefinitely banned from nominating any articles at WP:AFD to a maximum of ONE article in any given calendar day, determined by UTC"? Please can an admin clarify? Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:48, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So long as JohnPackLambert limits his nominations to one per calendar day, my view would be that he is acting within his restriction. The reference to "UTC" appears to be used to determine how we determine what is a calendar day (i.e., how we determine when May 4 begins and ends), not to require that he wait 24:01 between nominations. Cbl62 (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfD[edit]

I'm sorry, but it seems there is a singular user nominating your articles for deletion? I don't want to postulate that they have an agenda but it seems just so so bizzare. Clogs up your talk page too... X-750 _{I've made a mistake, haven't I?} 03:35, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't like to comment incase someone takes it the wrong way... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:01, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understandably not. Just an odd observation. How about some pavlova in the meantime? X-750 _{I've made a mistake, haven't I?} 08:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Serve it up! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:43, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Without further ado. X-750 _{I've made a mistake, haven't I?} 09:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"All the words[edit]

are gonna bleed from me And I will sing no more." --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:18, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

..."and I'll find me a soapbox where I can shout it"... Was lucky enough to see them live back in 2004. Happy days. Thank you for the page protection BTW - much appreciated. And thanks to all who've helped in the past with reverts and rev'dels! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:36, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

English Cricket team in india 2005-2006[edit]

Recent revisions you made to the Wikipedia article English cricket team in India in 2005–06 were either written in your opinion or were plagiarized from some sports magazine or newspaper. Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the additions made by the IP editor - they are a WP:LTA case of adding false scorecard information... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I realized It was past two o clock and I hadn't eaten lunch, I was probably being unreasonable and irritable. Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - unreasonable and irritable are two words I live by on a day-to-day basis! I'll take a better look at that page later. You're right - there's def. a lot of WP:OR in the match reports, so most of that can be ditched. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leagues[edit]

Hi. I wanted to create to create articles for the UAE T20 League or whatever the name they are referring to as the Knight Riders, Glazers and others have bought teams there. I think it have enough coverage to have article though I'm not sure as I don't want my talk page to be cluttered with AfD noms like yours. It sucks you cant create stubs anymore that would have made it easier finding sources. I also wanted to create the article for 2022 season of LPL which was one of the reasons why Sri Lanka scrapped the ODIs with Pakistan. There's also an unnamed franchise tournament announced by CSA to replace MSL which I'm keeping aside for now. It'll be great if you help with sources and and reviewing the articles. Thanks Human (talk) 12:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Yes, both of these should pass WP:GNG with enough coverage of them. Happy to help with adding sources - just drop me a note here with a link to each page as/when it's created. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:54, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The UAE league seems to have quite a good coverage but I don't know what the title of the article should be. ECB doesn't mention the name either: [9]. Human (talk) 02:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe go with something like UAE T20 League for now, and it can be moved when the name is announced, or create a draft in your sandbox until there's more known. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm creating the UAE T20 League. Would you mind looking into that and possibly improve. I'll add more stuffs if available. I'll also create Rahul Bhatia if Bs1jac doesn't. Human (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@A Simple Human: - nice work. Thanks for starting this. I've made some slight improvements. If you could start Rahul's article, that would be great. Let me know if there's anything else you want me to help with and/or check. Thanks again! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing I want to know is that, does the Challenge League matches fall under the updated NCRIC guidlines? It was in the first two tournaments and thus articles were created. I doubt they do anymore. Human (talk) 06:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The tournaments themselves are fine - they easily pass WP:GNG. Most of the players who already have articles should pass WP:GNG too, and have played internationally. It's likely that Bermuda, for example, will have a lot of List A debuts this month, but those pages should not be created, unless there's enough coverage for an individual. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ueah I was talking about the player articles. It looks the same situation with the T20Is, except they are higher in importance than List A. People wont bother searching associate List A cricketers if the T20I cricketers arent that important at all. Human (talk) 07:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One or two of them could have some coverage of them. I think Cricket Europe, for example, may have a feature on someone playing for Jersey. It'll be a case-by-case basis, but no big deal if there isn't any info on them. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Woodcock (cyclist) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Woodcock (cyclist) 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/John Woodcock (cyclist) 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:52, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Spyridon Ferentinos for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Spyridon Ferentinos 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/Spyridon Ferentinos 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hank Frierson for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hank Frierson 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/Hank Frierson 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan: 85

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan on articles I started: 40 Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Andrew Symonds[edit]

On 16 May 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Andrew Symonds, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Andrew Staunton for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andrew Staunton 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/Andrew Staunton 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 05:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2020 ICC WOMEN'S T20 WORLD CUP SQUADS[edit]

Hi what is my mistake please tell me i was thinking that i don't add a refrenece that is my mistake. And if you know i am making a mistake then why did'nt you fixeing my mistake . Rather you're telling me to solve my mistake Saha86830 (talk) 05:47, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you say something about a mistake? Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Debbie Sonnenberg[edit]

The article Debbie Sonnenberg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

It fails WP:GNG, can't find any media sources covering her.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sea Cow (talk) 19:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest?[edit]

G'day Lugnuts, I hope you're doing fine. I'm real good mates with Andrew Jefffoat and Michael Pickett (swimmer), and I was just wondering does that create a COI for me when editing their articles? Cheers! X-750 _{Rust In Peace... Polaris} 20:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morning! All good here, thanks. Hope you're well too. I'm not that familar with the COI rules myself, but WP:COIEDIT has all the info. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:19, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shabana Kausar for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shabana Kausar 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/Shabana Kausar 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Slaheddine Fessi for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Slaheddine Fessi 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/Slaheddine Fessi 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.

MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Edward Maw for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Edward Maw 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/Edward Maw 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan: 87

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan on articles I started: 41

Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When you flood a category with sub-stub articles that you spent less than 5 minutes on creating so much that you get banned from creating more stubs, than it is not surprising that lots of articles you created are nominated for deletion. I am not singling out articles created by you for deletion. There is a policy now that non-medaling Olympians are not notable. I have nominated articles created by other editors on non-medaling Olympians for deletion as well. You have also been asked to be respectful and refer to me as Mr. Lambert. I find your continued refusal to refer to me in a respectcful way a sign of general rudeness and disrespect. There is no attempt to single out articles created by you for deletion. There is an attempt to remove from Wikipedia articles on non-medaling Olympians that lack significant coverage in reliable sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"There is no attempt to single out articles created by you for deletion" - Sure thing, Lambert! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stop with your rude references to me. You have been asked on multiple times to refer to me as Mr. Lambert. Your refusal to do so is a clear sign of rudeness, disrespect and trying to create less cooperation on the encyclopedia. Please stop refering to me in this rude and disrespectful manner.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Otto Schröder for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Otto Schröder 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/Otto Schröder 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.

John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan: 88

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan on articles I started: 42

Same time tomorrow, Lambert! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not even nominate an article created by you for deletion yesterday. You need to stop the bad faith assumptions and accusations against fellow editors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I never said you did, Lambert. Still, we'll see you here about this time tomorrow. And the day after that. And the day after that. And the day after that. And the day after that. And the day after that. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Stop refering to me in such a disrespectful manner. You have now been asked on multiple occasions to refer to me as Mr. Lambert. Your continual refusal to do so shows persistent rudeness on your part.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Wait - is that your real name? I thought it was a TV character or some-such other pseudonym. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan: 89

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan on articles I started: 43

"There is no attempt to single out articles created by you for deletion" - Lambert

Same time tomorrow, Lambert! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnastics[edit]

Here, here's your source for the Olympics. https://web.archive.org/web/20120731114223/http://www.gymnasticsresults.com/olympics.html#1996 Qualifications is not an event. Team finals, all around finals, and event finals are. Instead of harassing me, why don't you educate yourself on these things. Quit following me around when I'm fixing your mistakes. Afheather (talk) 13:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please, do not cast aspersions. Hardly following you around, when you are reverting me, and not supplying any sources for your revert! I look forward to your apology here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And if I had made this personal attack on you, no doubt an admin would be trigger-happy with the block button. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your "source" doesn't even back you up. It shows their results from qualifications, not finals. None of these athletes made it out of qualifications to compete in the events you're claiming they did. Example: Elizabeth Line. You claim she competed in the team, all around, and beam events. Do you see her or Great Britain listed here: http://www.gymnasticsresults.com/olympics/2004/wagfinals.html ? You don't, because she didn't compete. Your lack of knowledge on how gymnastics is contested prevents you from properly extrapolating data.Afheather (talk) 13:45, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still no apology... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to apologize for. It's a straight up fact. All these microstubs you've created are being brought up for deletion and you don't like it. I'm correcting blatant mistakes in these articles so that if they are brought up for deletion and are rated as keep, they're at least factually correct. Afheather (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"There is nothing to apologize for." Apart from your personal attack. And casting aspersions. You're not correcting "blatant mistakes" - as you're supplying ZERO sources on each and every article to verify your edits. Infact, when you're simply removing chunks of text from articles, with no explination/rationale, it looks like vandalism. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 13:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing I'm correcting isn't already backed up by the source already supplied. You just don't know how to read the results. Afheather (talk) 13:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And as to personal attacks, accusing me of vandalism isn't? Afheather (talk) 14:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read what I've written again and the order of the words - "when you're simply removing chunks of text from articles, with no explination/rationale, it looks like vandalism" I've highlighted the key word to help you. You've supplied no sources, so unless you're going to bother to add them, then there's nothing more to add here. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source already provided backs up my edit. You just don't know how the sport is contested. Afheather (talk) 14:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So educate me and fix it. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gymnastics at the Olympics is done in stages. The first stage is qualifications. Everyone competes in this phase. It determines who goes on to team, individual all around, and event finals. It is very rare for someone to make all finals. Simone Biles was the only one who did it in the 2020 Olympics and before that I think the last one was Shannon Miller in 1992. There is some variation on this in about every Olympics, so it can get hinky. Athletes must perform on all apparatus to try to qualify to the all around, hence why I used Elizabeth Line as an example because she couldn't even qualify for the all around since she only performed on the beam in qualifications. Currently, the top 8 teams advance to the team final, although this has changed from past Olympics where the team final was contested as part of qualifications. The last year that was done was 1996. Starting in 2004, the 2 per country rule was invoked, meaning that only 2 people per country can qualify to the all around final. Before that, the top 3 could. The top 24 athletes after removing anyone who was in the top 24 but behind 2 of the other athletes from their country, advance to the all around. This rule was already in place for the apparatus finals, which takes the top 8 gymnasts in each event, 2 per country notwithstanding. An athlete may compete on all apparatuses during qualifications but still not progress past that phase or maybe just make it to the team final. So saying someone competed in 6 events when they didn't make it past qualifications is inaccurate.

I have been fixing it, and I tried explaining it to you when I first noticed the issue. Afheather (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that - I obviously missed the detailed explination from you earlier. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does this mean I can continue correcting them in peace? I don't think my above explanation will fit in the comment box. Afheather (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's fine. Just needed to be clear to the layperson (IE me) why content was being removed without any obvious reason. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of K. R. Karimanickam for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article K. R. Karimanickam 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/K. R. Karimanickam 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.

𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 14:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your signature and lint errors[edit]

Hey, mind changing your signature from '''[[User:Lugnuts|Lugnuts]]''' [[User talk:Lugnuts|Fire Walk with Me]] to '''[[User:Lugnuts|Lugnuts]]''' [[User talk:Lugnuts|Fire Walk with Me]]? Per WP:SIGFONT:

"... tags were deprecated in HTML4 and are entirely obsolete in HTML5. This means that the popular browsers may drop support for them at some point. Wikipedia is already preparing for this by delinting code project-wide through Linter. When support is finally dropped, the tags will be ignored in all signatures; any properties such as color and font family will revert to their default values. For this reason, it is recommended that you use ... tags and CSS properties instead. For usage examples, see Wikipedia:Signature tutorial § Real-life examples."

When you change your signature to the one with span tags, we reduce Lint errors. The aim is to eliminate all lint errors rather than add them. We're currently at 11.59m+, don't add more :) Sheep (talk) 14:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, you didn't say please. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second, it's not mandatory - get back to me when it is. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And third - if it's an issue on nearly 12 MILLION PAGES it's not really that important either. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry for bringing this up again but do consider replacing it as suggested. There's an approved bot replacing lint errors so there's no point for it to "chase" you around. Thanks. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 03:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Minorax - done! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Andy Fletcher (musician)[edit]

On 27 May 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Andy Fletcher (musician), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Another musician's death to add to my ITN work. Lets have a Black Celebration. :( Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

note[edit]

Why are you reverting the change I just made? I don't want to revert again as I would run the risk of violating 3RR, which can get me blocked anyways. These changes were to fix Linter errors. I mentioned that in one section although you didn't respond.

ALSO PLEASE don't revert my changes without good explanation why, because I'm assuming my edit was unconstructive or something when it technically ISNT

Do you use HTML5 because I'm thinking you're undoing my edit because it changed the appearance of your signature Sheep (talk) 07:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What a shame. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 May 2022[edit]

From the team: A changing of the guard

News and notes: 2022 Wikimedia Board elections

Community view: Have your say in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board elections

Opinion: The Wikimedia Endowment – a lack of transparency

In the media: Putin, Jimbo, Musk and more

Special report: Three stories of Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war

In focus: Measuring gender diversity in Wikipedia articles

Discussion report: Portals, April Fools, admin activity requirements and more

WikiProject report: WikiProject COVID-19 revisited

Technology report: A new video player for Wikimedia wikis

Featured content: Featured content of April

Interview: Wikipedia's pride

Serendipity: Those thieving image farms

Recent research: 35 million Twitter links analysed

Tips and tricks: The reference desks of Wikipedia

Traffic report: Strange highs and strange lows

News from Diff: Winners of the Human rights and Environment special nomination by Wiki Loves Earth announced

News from the WMF: The EU Digital Services Act: What’s the Deal with the Deal?

Video: How the entire country of Qatar was blocked from editing

Gallery: Diving under the sea for World Oceans Day

From the archives: The Onion and Wikipedia

Essay: How not to write a Wikipedia article

Humour: A new crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Muzamil Sherzad[edit]

On 2 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Muzamil Sherzad, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after travelling more than 8,300 km (5,200 mi) from Afghanistan to Ireland, Muzamil Sherzad was named a member of Ireland's squad for the 2022 ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Muzamil Sherzad. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Muzamil Sherzad), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your super fast edits[edit]

Hi Lugnuts, your edits are super fast and does not give a chance to others. I wanted to applause you for your edits on cricket articles and your editing speed. Your speed always amaze me. What's the secret of your editing speed! MNWiki845 (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. There's no secret, just experience and knowledge of the subject area. That's all! Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply man. Happy editing. MNWiki845 (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Charles Massonnat for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Massonnat 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/Charles Massonnat 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.

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan: 91

Number of AfDs started by Lambert since 1st Jan on articles I started: 44

"There is no attempt to single out articles created by you for deletion" - Lambert— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugnuts (talk • contribs) ≠

Are you casting aspersions again? Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Those are the AfD stats (you can double-check them yourself, if you must), and a direct quote that the other user posted on this very page (CTRL+F it). Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And making comments about them in your edit summaries is perfectly fine too? Not to mention he has asked you not to refer to him as Lambert but you keep doing it. ? That all seems pretty personalised to me. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at ANI you will want to look at. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ODI cricketers[edit]

Hi. I just created the Rahul Bhatia article. You can check if there's something missing. I can create Shariz Ahmad too if you want. Anyways your talk page looks like a mess. Human (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just created Shariz Ahmad right in time for the match. Looks like he isn't playing, but that stop you from adding stuffs. Human (talk) 09:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Human. Oooh, nearly time for the Test match to continue! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I created Rahul Jariwala a while ago. You can add things as usual. Somehow I missed that and asked Bs1jac to create an article but he didn't respond. Anyways good luck getting over your controversies. Human (talk) 06:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on both counts! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just created Mohammad Aadil Alam. You can take a look. Human (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw you create Alex Horton a while ago, though it's not a stub it might be different. You can create Tim Pringle the same way but I guess there aren't much abiut him like the other article. I am waiting for others to create an article. I found out requesting to others is a waste of time (not you) and I get negative reactions so I'll go on create it myself if nothing happens. Human (talk) 19:29, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! He's on my to-do list, so if I can find a bit more on him, then I'll make the page. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:39, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've created it anyways. You can add stuffs as usual (NZ u19, Chris Pringle son). Human (talk) 02:49, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:58, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Ive created Divan la Cock. Ill probably create Basir Ahamad sometime tomorrow if noone does. Finding the correct playing XI is a pain in the qualifiers right now but CI seems to correct them quickly. Thanks Human (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again, Human. No rush on the creations. I'll spot them as they're done and expand as much as possible. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:06, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I took a bit of risk and created Basir Ahamad and Kishore Mahato today. I added something needing a source in Kishore Mahato as the article was previously created and deleted before he played ODI. Must be some Nepalese source on that. Thanks Human (talk) 16:46, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I will take a look. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:47, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Your input will be appreciated here. Thanks Human (talk) 01:25, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you may have made an error.[edit]

This looks like a typo you might wish to correct i.e. "Lambert" to "Charles Massonnat". My apologies in advance if that is not the case. Jacona (talk) 12:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jacona - thanks for that. Now fixed/updated. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think that typo may have added a lot of unnecessary drama to the necessary drama. Thanks again! Jacona (talk) 12:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! It's frustrating as I'm perfect, and I don't make misteakes. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Film categories[edit]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Archive 79#Should "films by country" categories remain all-inclusive?. There's a bot in development already to tackle the supermassive categories, though apart from a test run on a very small batch it hasn't been deployed yet, but I've started to go ahead with some of the small ones that can be cleaned up quickly. Bearcat (talk) 14:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - thanks for the link. @Sc2353: - I know you do a lot of work on film cats, so you might not have seen this. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Umran Malik edit revert[edit]

Bro you removed my edit from Umran Malik without any significant reason. I added references and nothing was puffery there every reference is from reliable website. I did everything according to Wikipedia Guidelines. You should have to explain me reason or revert your edit! -Gorav Sharma Thegoravsharma (talk) 14:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You added "He is famous for his fast bowling and is considered to be India's fastest bowler at present." That's not encyclopedic for starters. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:58, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ohk! I have two questions : Q1) After how many edits i won't be a beginner? Q2) Wikipedia article related to your point “That's not encyclopedic for starters”? Thegoravsharma (talk) 15:08, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please ask at the WP:TEAHOUSE - it's the place for new editors to raise questions. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:13, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation Pages[edit]

If you create a disambiguation page (either as a page create or by tweaking an existing page), there should be a lede sentence of the form: András Mészáros may be . I have inserted the lede sentence. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrospective legislation[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts. Hope you are well despite the latest ever-expanding AFD.

I don't know why I haven't thought of this before but, in both British and American law, retrospective legislation is frowned upon and rarely implemented. Other countries might or might not have similar principles.

The thing about your stubs is that they were all created before the deletionist clique achieved their "community consensus" (i.e., all nine of them against seven opponents in a community of millions) about SIGCOV or whatever claptrap they are spouting.

I would argue that it is unjust, unethical, unconstitutional, indecent, immoral, perhaps even illegal for them to retrospectively condemn articles created in good faith by you at a time when such articles (i.e., short stubs with a single source) were deemed acceptable. I would argue that their SIGCOV rule must apply ONLY to stubs created since their RFC succeeded. Anything else is a travesty of justice and means WP is acting outside the bounds of common propriety without regard for people's rights in order to satisfy the desires of a few agitators like... well, you know who they are.

Do you fancy taking this to a new RFC to see if we can jolt WP's conscience? I think we would have to propose a refimprove tag on all short stubs but that is only a banner to try and persuade someone who sees the article, and who does have sources, to cite them. The stubs would be safe from AFD. Obviously, unless SIGCOV is overturned someday, all new stubs will have to be substantial with multiple sources.

I'll leave this with you. All the best. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 21:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Morning Shakes! Yes, all good here, thanks. Hope you are too.

Thank you for taking some time to think of this and float it about. However, I don't think it would gain much, if any, support. If anything, it might have the opposite outcome, opening even more floodgates! Best to leave it for now. I'm pretty sure there was a discussion from a few years back about the N:SPORT page that came out with some conclusions, including NOT to mass AfD articles. I'll have a look for that if I get a moment. It's also interesting that people throw SIGCOV about at AfDs, when it's only a guideline...

Meanwhile, hopefully the rain stays away from "Down South" and the fourth day of the Test gets underway to a possible thrilling conclusion!

Thanks again. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay, Lugnuts. We'll leave it for now and see what comes up. You're absolutely right SIGCOV is only a guideline whereas PRESERVE is actually editing policy. I've been following the Test match too. This lad Matt Potts looks a good prospect. Hope the weather stays fine. All the best. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 08:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be starting on time. I'm calling it early - a tied Test! :D Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:52, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could be. It surely won't be a draw. I'd say it depends on Joe Root, really, but NZ have some really good bowlers. We shall see. NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 10:02, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your request at ANI[edit]

This is the kind of uncivil comment I referred to at ANI. Please AGF a little more readily or, at the very least, refrain from making such accusatory remarks. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem unreasonable to ask if the BEFORE work had been done with these, considering the speed and number of prods in the timeframe noted. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please recognise the difference between asking if such work has been done (in a civil manner), and accusing the other party of not doing it, or insinuating they haven't. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 10:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a bit rich coming from you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:01, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is, and he really shouldn't treat someone else's talk page as a battleground, should he? I think he should find another site because I've rarely seen a userpage with so much whingeing on it. I see Moan #1 is about small groups of editors – oh, one of them must be his community consensus, then? NGS ^{Shakin' All Over} 14:43, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another example from today. There is simply no need for making personal comments such as this in your edit summaries. _wjemather^{please leave a message...} 19:40, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Raúl Antoli for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Raúl Antoli 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/Raúl Antoli 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.

Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbcom case request[edit]

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Lugnuts and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Fram (talk) 09:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Harry Oppenheim for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Harry Oppenheim 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/Harry Oppenheim 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.

Indy beetle (talk) 20:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ACA-VDCA STADIUM[edit]

I think you had made a mistake on Dr. Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy international cricket stadium by adding the last match of india to Last ODI section the dates and teams should be in last t20i section. I have not corrected it please correct it. Saha86830 (talk) 13:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! Too many T20i/ODI matches yesterday! Well spotted - I've fixed it. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:50, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sri Lanka vs Australia[edit]

Dear Lugnuts...This Series Is Missing in 2020–2023 ICC WC Super League Add...It Is Happening Now In June...Please!!! MaazRajput123 (talk) 17:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The ODI matches are not part of the Super League. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:31, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Thanks MaazRajput123 (talk) 04:25, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case opened[edit]

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Evidence. Please add your evidence by July 9, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 11:14, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ferdinand Gassina for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ferdinand Gassina 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/Ferdinand Gassina 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 15:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look[edit]

As you're well known about cricket and has created multiple cricketer pages i want you to take a look on Draft: Kishore Mahato. I have already added required information and reliable sources and i feel like it meets the notability guidelines now. Regards, DIVINE 📪 16:46, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please give the Teahouse a try for more input. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:54, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Millie Hudson[edit]

On 20 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Millie Hudson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Olympic diver Millie Hudson, who attempted to swim across the Strait of Gibraltar in 1928, was a member of the Hammersmith Ladies Swimming Club along with Belle White, the first British diver to win an Olympic medal? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Belle White. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Millie Hudson), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:04, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:00, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ihor Parkhomenko for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ihor Parkhomenko 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/Ihor Parkhomenko 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 04:07, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Remo Sansonetti[edit]

The first external link is wrong. I do not know how to correct or remove it. An another person Maurice.Xx236 (talk) 11:09, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! It's pulled through from Wikidata - I just removed it from there. Thanks for spotting it. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fermín Madera for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fermín Madera 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/Fermín Madera 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.

Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Arlene Kelly (cricketer)[edit]

On 25 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arlene Kelly (cricketer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Arlene Kelly made her international debut for the Ireland women's cricket team after nine of their regular players were unavailable for selection? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arlene Kelly (cricketer). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Arlene Kelly (cricketer)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your sock account[edit]

Come on Lugnuts--make it less obvious! User talk:Cricket=bestsport intheworld. ;) Drmies (talk) 12:28, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rumbled! I thought it was less obvious than my initial choice of User:Nugluts. On a serious note, they have created this draft which is VERY similar to the page sent to AfD. Could be nothing, of course. And hope you are well too, BTW. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:35, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So-so, thanks. That deleted (redirected) version suffered from copyvios; I don't yet see anything problematic here. Take care, Drmies (talk) 13:24, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alberto Mestre (swimmer, born 1990)[edit]

He didn't compete at the 2021 Summer olympics. At the 2021 Summer Olympics Alberto Mestre (swimmer, born 1999) competed.

Fixed - thanks for spotting this. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:49, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notability on MLC[edit]

Hey! I just had a couple of questions to ask. I was scrolling through WP:OFFICIALCRICKET until I saw a list of notable Men's Domestic competitions in which if people had played in that tournament, they would be notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article. I was specifically interested in this section. In the list of T20 tournaments, I noted that the United Arab Emirates (currently an associate member of the ICC) has two T20 tournaments which are deemed notable enough for own articles. So, my question here is, would Major League Cricket (meant to be the highest level of cricket played in the U.S.) have matches played as T20 status. There is a lot of hype around this, especially with the funding acquired by MLC and the partnerships which MLC has brokered (you can see that here). And if MLC were to have T20 status, would the tournament be deemed notable enough for the players that play in this tournament to be notable enough for their own article?

Thanks! --WellThisIs TheReaper ^Grim 14:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The short answer is: no. Longer answer: While the MLC (and its individual seasons) will no doubt pass WP:GNG, simply playing in this league would not equate to the cricketer becoming notable in their own right. Even though the matches will be twenty over fixtures, they will not have T20 status, instead being classed as "T20 other" for stats against players on sites such as Cricinfo, Cricket Archive, etc. Only full member sides (IE those with Test status) have domestic competitions with T20 status (Big Bash League, IPL, T20 Blast, etc, etc). Everything else does not (Global Canada, Hong Hong Blitz, etc). The UAE ones, such as the Abu Dhabi T20 Trophy, have franchise teams playing in them, and are certainly the exception and not the rule. Basically, if you or I were to play in the MLC (and nothing else), then the individual cricketer would need to have a ton of coverage on them so they pass WP:GNG. Hope that helps! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for the (quick) answer. I just have one question. You were saying that the UAE ones have franchise teams playing in the trophy, but, doesn't MLC also have franchise teams playing (for example, the team which the Knight Riders Group owns)? Thanks!! --WellThisIs TheReaper ^Grim 14:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think in that UAE example, the teams already had T20 status and were brought in from other nations for a one-off tournament. It was more of an anomaly than the other examples! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:27, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok. Thanks. --WellThisIs TheReaper ^Grim 15:15, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Vicky and the Treasure of the Gods film poster.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Vicky and the Treasure of the Gods film poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 June 2022[edit]

News and notes: WMF inks new rules on government-ordered takedowns, blasts Russian feds' censor demands, spends big bucks

In the media: Editor given three-year sentence, big RfA makes news, Guy Standing takes it sitting down

Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"?

Discussion report: MoS rules on CCP name mulled, XRV axe plea nulled, BLPPROD drafting bid pulled

Opinion: Picture of the Day – how Adam plans to ru(i)n it

Featured content: Articles on Scots' clash, Yank's tux, Austrian's action flick deemed brilliant prose

Essay: RfA trend line haruspicy: fact or fancy?

Recent research: Wikipedia versus academia (again), tables' "immortality" probed

Serendipity: Was she really a Swiss lesbian automobile racer?

News from the WMF: Wikimedia Enterprise signs first deals

Traffic report: Top view counts for shows, movies, and celeb lawsuit that keeps on giving

Gallery: Celebration of summer, winter

Humour: Shortcuts, screwballers, Simon & Garfunkel

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michal Gogola for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michal Gogola 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/Michal Gogola 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.

Emery Cool21 (talk) 11:00, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lugnuts, you might want to do some extra checking on this one if you have a Newspaper Archive subscription. I have a feeling that this person may be notable since we haven't found any sources from 2000. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:22, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shabana Kausar for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shabana Kausar 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/Shabana Kausar (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 04:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ryan Shutte[edit]

The article Ryan Shutte has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:BIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. 0xDeadbeef 05:24, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why 2022 New Zealand Tri-Nation Series this name?[edit]

Can you please elaborate why the 2022–23 New Zealand Tri-Nation Series has been renamed to 2022 New Zealand Tri-Nation Series by you? As the tournament is scheduled to be held in October 2022 which is within the period of 2022-23 cricket season. They why you renamed the article? Just because you want to add another article to your account?

Thanks. Proudly India09 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:53, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's the correct naming convention. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So your believe matters only? Just because you are a senior editor, an admin, your believe (rather your ego) is enough and logic doesn't matter at all! See the Template:International cricket tours of Australia. There you can find all their Tri-Nation Series are shared between two years, just because all those tournaments were played in such month. But, here, I do not agree with your believe. I am following the logic. Logic says according to cricket calendar A series in October 2022 to be named as 2022-23. Hence, I am reverting your edits. Thank you. Proudly Indian09 (talk) 07:18, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, right, I see. Apologies - early(ish) here in the UK and I was fixing a TON of errors on related pages. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its ok. To Human is too err. By the way, New Zealand Cricket has confirmed their 2022-23 season. Some of the articles of those series to be played in this season, are already redirected by you. I hope you to update those articles & fixtures soon! Thank You. Proudly Indian09 (talk) 07:30, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Mr. Lugnuts. How self-obsessed & egoistic person you are! The mentioned article was first created by me, but your ego could not digest it. So, you moved my page to the following name "2022-23 New Zealand Tri-Series", then created the same article using the same name from your id, just to satisfy your ego. Do you have the sole right to create cricket articles on Wikipedia? We, the other editors are just to edit & improve your article? I have been observing your such kind of haughty behaviour since a long & for your such kind of conduct, I have often been involved in a conflict of interest with you & every time using your seniority power you try to overcome others! Dear, you should remember, creating a new article, (when we see our created articles are read by numerous readers) gives us a sense of satisfaction. But your egoistic mind is unable to realize it. But it seems that by making every article in your name, you want to make this sense of satisfaction your sole right. Really disappointed with your behaviour. So, I have decided to quit WikiProject Cricket & Enjoy your Strange World. Even if I edit Wikipedia, I'll make sure that in that Wikiproject there is no presence of such an egoistic person like you. Thank you. Sony R (talk) 11:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^^Already covered here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 11:20, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, just been looking at the fixtures - should be a good summer (or winter, if you're in the UK...) Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ryan Shutte for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ryan Shutte 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/Ryan Shutte 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.

0xDeadbeef 08:57, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Query[edit]

Why are you so irritated with me? As per our agreement I don't edit the international page till 4 hours after an announcement yet the moment you see my name you would start editing the grounds page. Have I done anything to offend you? 05:00, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Ankurc.17 (talk)

Well there were a lot of corrections to make, which took some time, but they're all fixed now. Are you OK with updating all the grounds info from the Euro Qualifiers and other matches from now on? Thanks! Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, did till yesterday's games. Ankurc.17 (talk) 07:15, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Superb - thank you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:15, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vaibhav Singh[edit]

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

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sheu Tsay-chwan[edit]

The article Sheu Tsay-chwan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for sports and athletics (see WP:NOLYMPICS)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mleczekofficial (talk) 15:53, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Emilia Nilsson[edit]

The article Emilia Nilsson has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

fails WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:55, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Siddharth Verma page name change[edit]

Hi, trying to reach you. The page by the name of Siddharth Sahib Singh that you create is wrong. Original name of Siddharth Verma is Siddharth Sahib Singh. Contacting you from his office. Please contact me ASAP, on pushyamitra123jha@gmail.com Pushyamitrajha (talk) 05:42, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've found some more info on this guy, and have updated the page + title. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ICC U19[edit]

https://www.kompas.com/sports/read/2022/07/06/12000008/sejarah-timnas-kriket-u19-putri-indonesia-lolos-ke-piala-dunia-?page=2

Is it true that the groups have been made already? Flydon Melrick Picardo (talk) 08:23, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, the East-Asia Pacific Group only had two eligible teams taking part (Indonesia and PNG). They played a best of three set of matches, with Indonesia winning two of them. The Asia Group had multiple teams (UAE, Thailand, Bhutan, Nepal, Malaysia and Qatar), so they played a round-robin qualifier. The next ones will be the Europe Group, with the Netherlands and Scotland also playing a best of three. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Apfelbäume" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Apfelbäume and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 8#Apfelbäume until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TraderCharlotte (talk) 21:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indian cricket team in England in 2022[edit]

OK, I think we finally sorted this out. But please don't remove material like that - if you want to improve the source, it's better to do so in a aingle edit rather than removing it first. St Anselm (talk) 16:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If it's not sourced, I remove it, as everything should be sourced when it's added. The stats lists from Cricinfo aren't really the best sources to use, as they could be out of date in the very next match, so that's why a press source is prefered. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:04, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies[edit]

I would like to formally apologize for the error I made with adding info to Charlie Akers to you. I’ve been quite anxious over being a “good enough” editor recently and worried about blocks, and it was my mistake (and inability to) find a different way to word the article from Olympedia. If you have any tips, suggestions, or any of the sort for me anytime, I would greatly appreciate that.

Thanks so much, and apologies again Cornmazes (talk) 20:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alex Horton[edit]

On 13 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alex Horton, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alex Horton made his Twenty20 cricket debut for Glamorgan despite no actual play being possible due to rain? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alex Horton. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Alex Horton), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus?[edit]

You're going to have to be a little more specific about where exactly the consensus can be found in that discussion. Three people contributed in that thread, and only one was neither you nor me. There's no consensus there at all, from what I can see. – Pee Jay 14:45, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then please contribute to the talkpage discussion, per WP:BRD. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:46, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're claiming there is a consensus for the centring of the squad templates where none exists. You're the only one who seems to disagree with the default setting, i.e. having the tables on the left. – Pee Jay 14:57, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's the other way around - you are the only one who feels the need to change it. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 15:04, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No one else seems to care one way or the other. If I were to change all of them to left-aligned tables, I doubt anyone would change it back except for you. However, as I pointed out three years ago, it takes more code to centre the tables than it does to left-align them, hence the need for you to establish an actual consensus to deviate from the default setting. I await that consensus, otherwise there should be no problem with me left-aligning all the ones that are currently centred. – Pee Jay 15:09, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) OK, so I think you're both talking about tables like the one at English cricket team in Australia in 2017–18, yes? As Harrias says in the archive discussion, there are a bunch of ways of doing this. Personally in a case like that, I'd tend to query the whole idea of a squad for the home team anyway - unless one was actually announced, which it does tend to be for ODI series and so on at least these days. In an historic case, I much prefer the idea of a tour party, listed as bullets using a suitable col width - 20em perhaps, depending. Where there are set squads, as is the case more frequently nowadays, I guess tables like those ones probably work slightly better for me if they're centred - the code overhead isn't significant (it's just margin=auto, yes?) and I tend to think it looks a little better in the centre. Either format looks dreadful on a mobile browser in portrait mode, but the same is true of most table (a bullet format works much better if we're considering this as important). On a super-wide desktop monitor with full bowser width, I'd opt for centred I'm afraid PeeJay - sorry; but that's just my eye, I could well be wrong, but I think I'd tend towards keeping tables in whatever format they were first established unless there's an obvious reason not to do so - the "no actual squad" for a home side issue is the most obvious reason to remove them, perhaps. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's the one. I have no idea why PJ is so adamant on changing the existing format on that page because they don't like it. Saying it shouldn't be done because it "takes more code" to do it is ridiculous. Yes, the discussion was three years ago, and in all that time no-one has ever thought about changing any other tables on 100s, if not 1000s, of similar pages. But it is a hot day... Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 16:28, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Square Thing: I don't know if it's really the case that home teams don't have squads. In fact, I'm pretty sure we have sources to the contrary.

@Lugnuts: I'm not saying we shouldn't do it specifically because it takes more code, I'm saying the fact that it takes more code is indicative of the fact that tables should be left-aligned by default and that there should be a good reason to deviate from that. – Pee Jay 21:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, yes there seems to have been a home squad. Perhaps in recent years that's the norm, certainly for major teams. I'm thinking partly more about less recent cases - certainly back in the day of the summer of four captains, for example, home squads didn't really exist did they? Blue Square Thing (talk) 21:37, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we’re getting distracted from the real topic here. – Pee Jay 18:25, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022[edit]

Proposed deletion of Zahoor Sofi[edit]

The article Zahoor Sofi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no enough information for an article,I think it's not notable,they are no references to reliable sources provided

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Emkay2004 (talk) 08:20, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Valance Connell[edit]

The article Valance Connell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This cricketer doesn't meet WP:NOTE

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Afghan cricket team in India in 2021–22[edit]

The article Afghan cricket team in India in 2021–22 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The tour never took place. It seems to have been cancelled. So better delete this article .

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dympies (talk) 16:16, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Hi Can u create user page for me pls Welcome Hi I'm from India staying in kuwait I'm wikipedian I'm born 1990 Pls decorated also 94.128.81.246 (talk) 12:40, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I'm not gonna leave Wikiproject Cricket.[edit]

Why I would leave Wikiproject Cricket? I think it is not your parent's property! When there are haughty & adamant people like you, who edits the project at his whims & fancy, there must be someone to keep some checks. So, I will be there to keep you in check so that you do not start thinking of Wikipedia as your ancestral property. Sony R (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You literally said "So, I have decided to quit WikiProject Cricket & Enjoy your Strange World" in your post, above. Keep me in check - yeah, sure! Good luck with that. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Erwin Buder" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Erwin Buder and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 17#Erwin Buder until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 05:24, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Kishore Mahato[edit]

Kishore Mahato debuted today against scotland, I'm thinking if you can fix up the draft and make it live? [10] let me know if i should add some sources to support notability? DIVINE 12:49, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is so disrespectful of you while i worked for Kishore Mahato page for month and asked for help to you to accept the draft, instead of that you created yourself what a joke on the earth. DIVINE 23:31, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, it was A Simple Human that replaced the redirect with an article. I'm looking into the matter. Primefac (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

25 Centuries[edit]

Hi Lugnuts, is 25 centuries still the criteria for a standalone list article. I wanted to check first before putting the effort in and it being nominated for an AFD in 20 minutes. Thanks. CreativeNorth (talk) 14:30, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - yes, it's 25, per the cut-off on this template. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:32, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question re:notifications[edit]

As there were a lot of moving pieces in the case, I missed the chance to ask this on the Workshop page, but can you tell me how you decide what editors to notify about deletion discussions? I am wondering particularly in regards to the evidence put forward by BilledMammal which you (indirectly) called false in the Workshop. The notifications themselves seem neutral enough and otherwise satisfy the Limited, Message, and Transparency requirements of WP:CANVASS, but I am wondering about the audience piece. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Barkeep49: - of course. I assume it's in relation to this table in the case. Short answer is that from years of editing on WP, these are some of editors who I know might have knowledge in a certain subject area, or access to sources. For example, I know that Løken can access Norwegian/Swedish sources, as they are from that part of the world. Rugbyfan22 has knoweldge in (surprise, surprise) rugby. Same for Deb for Wales, Sammyrice, Schwede66, NealeWellington, etc for New Zealand, and so on. These are simply editors I know across WP who work in those areas. BA's own evidence shows that about half of them were deleted anyway! Hope that answers that question - anything else, please get back to me. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. I am still thinking about your email. Barkeep49 (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thank you. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 12:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive edits[edit]

@Lugnuts: Hi, I m Theoder2055. User MNWiki845 is persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content in pages like Cobra (soundtrack) despite several warnings. Is it possible to block him from editing? Theoder2055 (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Short answer is: Yes. Longer answer is to raise it at WP:ANI with plenty of evidence. I don't see any discussion on the article's talkpage, so I would at least start that before going to ANI. But they do have plenty of warnings on their talkpage for continuing to add unsourced/made-up content, so further disruption from them doesn't help their case. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:11, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cobra (2022 film) is a multilingual film which will be dubbed in various languages. So adding Dubbed songs in separate soundtrack article is completely fair. This Theoder2055 is xenophobic towards Telugu and other languages. MNWiki845 (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Callng someone xenophobic is not a good thing to do. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MNWiki845: please listen. YouTube is not a reliable source. For songs you need to add sources like Spotify, Jiosaavn, Raaga or Apple Music. Please don’t add YouTube sources. Otherwise it’s not necessary for me to remove the dubbed songs if you add sources like Jiosaavn, Spotify or even Times of India. At least you can also add from Twitter as it is a reliable source. Theoder2055 (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No[edit]

I have noticed that you have edit 2022 Asia Cup if again edit u will blocked from editing. 94.128.81.246 (talk) 09:50, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Alfred Egerton Cooper[edit]

On 19 July 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alfred Egerton Cooper, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alfred Egerton Cooper, a war artist who lost the use of an eye in World War I, painted airships (example pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Alfred Egerton Cooper. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Alfred Egerton Cooper), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

		Hook update
		Your hook reached 9,484 views (790.3 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of July 2022 – nice work!

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 05:04, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't disrupt Wikipedia to avoid your editing restriction[edit]

You have an editing restriction not to make cosmetic-only edits, which was imposed because you nearly always made some insignificant edit to an article you created in the past any time someone else dared to edit it. While you seem to stick to the letter of that restriction, you have moved on to make minor edits of very dubious value to achieve the same result. This includes removing many redlinks for notable subjects, and moving people from the "possibly living" category to the year of death missing category contrary to the instructions at these categories (should only be done for 1907 and earlier, not for 1913, 1915, ... as you are doing). Please stop making such edits, asthey are likely to get you an additional restriction or worse if you continue with them. Fram (talk) 09:37, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They're not notable, so I de-link them. Feel free to create them if they are notable. And any Olympian born before 1916 will be deceased, per Félix Sienra. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:43, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WTAF (just an essay anyway) has nothing to do with this, that is about having redlinks in disambigs, navboxes, etcetera, not in articles. Redlinks in articles for notable subjects are encouraged. And unless there is certainy that these others are dead, then Sienra only shows the oldest known living Olympians. Heck, we don't even have the full name for many of these early Olympians, but somehow we know they are all dead? And you don't do this for Olympians only[11][12]. Anyway, your "they're not notable" is referring to people like Felipe Rocha [13] and Paulo Vilhena [14], Arturo La Pegna, Tørk Haxthausen... Fram (talk) 10:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and create them then. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 10:34, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Moroke Mokhotho[edit]

The article Moroke Mokhotho has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NOLYMPICS

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:01, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed decision posted[edit]

Hi Lugnuts, in the open Conduct in deletion-related editing arbitration case, a remedy or finding of fact has been proposed which relates to you. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:19, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022[edit]

Hello @Lugnuts: Theoder2055 here once again. This user 2409:4072:683:6E2:0:0:49B:80A1 is introducing incorrect information. Could you revert his edit and warn him for introducing incorrect information. Now I am taking a short break from Wikipedia for a hour and I will be back soon. But then if he keeps on making disruptive edits what I suggest to block him from making disruptive editing. Under the home media heading he mentioned that satellite rights are sold to Kalaignar TV but actually it is sold to Star Vijay which is mentioned from the source itself. Theoder2055 (talk) 07:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I don't really work in that subject area, so I can't help here. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 08:08, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Short descriptions[edit]

Thank you for adding Short descriptions to articles. However, many of these descriptions have started with a lower case letter. Please read the guidelines at WP:SDFORMAT — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 17:14, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh right, sorry Ghosty. I could have sworn a lower-case letter was the standard. You live and learn. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 17:15, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Miguel Costa (sailor) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Miguel Costa (sailor) 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/Miguel Costa (sailor) 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.

~ Matthewrb ^{Talk to me · Changes I've made} 02:23, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck[edit]

Good evening. I was a founder member of the ACS and I am also a member of the Cricket Society, as well as being a published author in a small way. Wikipedia has had a bad press in the circles I frequent but I have always tried to keep an open mind and I have to say I am impressed by your efforts over many years. I recently became aware of a campaign to remove cricket articles just because they are undeveloped and I believe the people involved in this idiocy are not the sort who create articles themselves but are here to destroy other people's work.

I was informed that the articles about Charles Cumberland and William Bullen are potential targets and I decided to become involved and do what I can to protect them. Cumberland is a direct ancestor of my brother-in-law. We have all manner of information about him but it is what you would call primary source and would breach your OR rules, so I have had to make do with the limited coverage available in some of the published sources. The same applies to Bullen although my interest there is in him being the Freddie Flintoff of his day and yet we know damn all about him!

While I have been wandering around the site, I have come across this gross injustice of a kangaroo court whereby you might be banned for talking sense and resisting the encroachment of ignorance. Forgive me if I have got it all wrong, but I thought the object of an online encyclopaedia is to capture and publish information about a vast myriad of topics. It seems, however, that the site has been taken over by people who are not interested in that ideal and prefer to spend their time seeking demolition instead of construction.

Whatever the outcome of all this nonsense, I wish you well. 2.99.212.62 (talk) 21:14, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the words. Hopefully those two articles (and many others) will get saved and expanded. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Art Green (ice hockey) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Art Green (ice hockey) 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/Art Green (ice hockey) 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 00:11, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ankit Manori for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ankit Manori 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/Ankit Manori 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 19:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Guillaume Hoorickx for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Guillaume Hoorickx 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/Guillaume Hoorickx 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 19:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Duilio Torres[edit]

The article Duilio Torres has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unremarkable architect

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —S Marshall T/C 16:44, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PRODs[edit]

Hello, Lugnuts,

Just a reminder that any time you tag a page for any type of deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/CFD/etc.), you need to post a notification on the talk page of the page creator. With PRODs, often times there is something an editor can do to address the reason for the proposed deletion, editors are also allowed to remove the PROD tag. Notification is an important part of the deletion process (see the message above this one). I'm sure you appreciate knowing when a page you created is going through one of Wikipedia's deletion processes rather than being unaware of this fact.

These notifications are done the easiest way by utilizing Twinkle to tag pages for deletion. Once you set up your Twinkle Preferences to "Notify page creator", then Twinkle will post these notices on your behalf. Twinkle is used by most editors doing page patrol and by many administrators and it has a lot of other useful features like keeping deletion logs for you, tagging articles for all kinds of reasons or reporting vandals to a noticeboard. I encourage you to learn more about it as it means that you don't have to memorize a lot of templates that you might need to use. Please notify page creators with every tagging in the future. Many thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:37, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz. Thanks for this. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:49, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... reading WP:PROD I find "You should notify the article's creator or other significant contributors" and not "must" or "need" -- I don't see the notificaiton as a requirement. I would say "please and thank you" and stuff... it is helpful. I don't see it as required. A pleasant day to all!--Paul McDonald (talk) 13:48, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tommy Czeschin[edit]

The article Tommy Czeschin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable athlete & reality television contestant.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bgsu98 (talk) 22:39, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tommy Czeschin for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tommy Czeschin 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/Tommy Czeschin 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.

Bgsu98 (talk) 23:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Dinkar Deshpande for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dinkar Deshpande 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/Dinkar Deshpande (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 12:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sachin Dholpure for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sachin Dholpure 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/Sachin Dholpure (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 13:01, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sanjeeva Rao for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sanjeeva Rao 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/Sanjeeva Rao (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 15:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mukesh Sahni for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mukesh Sahni 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/Mukesh Sahni (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 15:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Subodh Saxena for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Subodh Saxena 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/Subodh Saxena (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 15:29, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Amitabh Vijayvargiya for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Amitabh Vijayvargiya 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/Amitabh Vijayvargiya (2nd nomination) 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 15:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Minor barnstar
	Thanks for making proper grammar edits (was instead of is) on the gymnast pages I have recently edited! I am trying to add competition history tables for many gymnasts as the sport does not have much information on wikipedia, and have totally missed some of these simple edits! Any edit made to a gymnast page is something I appreciate a lot :) TheWAGymFan (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - happy to help. And thank you for the barnstar. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:56, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gratitude[edit]

I am looking at the case right now, and the outcome I want doesn't appear to be happening. Thank you for all the pleasant interactions we had with each other. Feel free to email me if you need any support. Scorpions13256 (talk) 22:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Scorps! Looks like it's all going snakes - just two more nails needed to be hammered into the ol' lug-coffin. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 05:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can always appeal after 12 months. The best advice I ever received was that to become a better editor I need to fix the problems in my off-wiki life. Unfortunately, I have not yet done that, but I have made enough progress to know that the advice was excellent. My problem is severe treatment-resistant OCD and social anxiety that has crept its way into my editing.

When the inevitable happens, I would recommend spending time with the people you care about most. Just remember that you can still brag to your friends about being Wikipedia's number 1 content creator. Scorpions13256 (talk) 15:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2022[edit]

From the editors: Rise of the machines, or something

News and notes: Information considered harmful

In the media: Censorship, medieval hoaxes, "pathetic supervillains", FB-WMF AI TL bid, dirty duchess deeds done dirt cheap

Op-Ed: The "recession" affair

Eyewitness Wikimedian, Vinnytsia, Ukraine: War diary (part 3)

Election guide: The chosen six: 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections

Community view: Youth culture and notability

Opinion: Criminals among us

Arbitration report: Winds of change blow for cyclone editors, deletion dustup draws toward denouement

Deletion report: This is Gonzo Country

Discussion report: Notability for train stations, notices for mobile editors, noticeboards for the rest of us

Traffic report: US TV, JP ex-PM, outer space, and politics of IN, US, UK top charts for July

Featured content: A little list with surprisingly few lists

Tips and tricks: Cleaning up awful citations with Citation bot

In focus: Wikidata insights from a handy little tool

On the bright side: Ukrainian Wikimedians during the war — three (more) stories

Essay: How to research an image

Recent research: A century of rulemaking on Wikipedia analyzed

Serendipity: Don't cite Wikipedia

Gallery: A backstage pass

From the archives: 2012 Russian Wikipedia shutdown as it happened

Humour: Why did the chicken cross the road?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Detlef Dahn for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Detlef Dahn 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/Detlef Dahn 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.

BrigadierG (talk) 08:45, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Adam Moncherry for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adam Moncherry 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/Adam Moncherry 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 01:28, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Enrique Barza for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Enrique Barza 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/Enrique Barza 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.

NotReallyMoniak (talk) 16:15, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jackie Clark[edit]

The article Jackie Clark has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of significant coverage in reliable sources as required by WP:SIGCOV. Of the three sources, one is a dead link, one is a closed statistical database and one is an open statistical database. Sistorian (talk) 19:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sistorian (talk) 19:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robin Greene for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robin Greene 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/Robin Greene 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.

Sistorian (talk) 19:42, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sam Meston for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sam Meston 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/Sam Meston 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.

Sistorian (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John West (cricketer, born 1861) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John West (cricketer, born 1861) 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/John West (cricketer, born 1861) 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.

Sistorian (talk) 19:47, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jackie Clark for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jackie Clark 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/Jackie Clark 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.

Sistorian (talk) 19:56, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cheraldine Oudolf for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cheraldine Oudolf 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/Cheraldine Oudolf 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.

Sistorian (talk) 19:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daniel Francisco for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Francisco 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/Daniel Francisco 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:00, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Abdullah Al-Doori for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abdullah Al-Doori 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/Abdullah Al-Doori 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Lara Aklouk for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lara Aklouk 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/Lara Aklouk 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of George Jabbour for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Jabbour 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/George Jabbour 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.

Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:11, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Outgoing[edit]

Apparently, I have a "moral obligation to help clean up the mess". Despite working on cleaning up said mess for the last 6 months, that hasn't helped, and it's even harder to do with an indef block. In a case about conduct in deletion discussion, votes are made with rationales on anything but condcut in deletion discussions. It used to be fun to create stuff, then the rules kept changing. Deletion monkeys spend their time at guideline/policy talkpages, playing with their own fecal matter, rather than actually creating, adding and expanding content. Despite the token "(I) genuinely hope that I see them back on Wikipedia after a successful appeal" I'm not going to wait until August 2023 to write a begging letter to a group of users who couldn't care less.

About a year after joining the project, I started creating articles. Some early creations from 2007 got tagged as copyvios. A year later, they were still being tagged. I got added to some white-list at the time, and avoided adding OBVIOUS copyvios and further scrutiny, but made no attempt to either stop or remove the ones I added. Guess what - that continued since then. Not just across the 93,000+ articles I created, but across the 1.5 million edits I made too. Tens of thousands (a low-end estimate) now have these issues. Have a look at any film article from before 1930, for example. And that's before I mention the countless deliberate errors on pages that have very few pages views. Was that person born on 21 June, or was it 12 June?

So that moral obligation? Ha. Good luck with that. "The mess" is now your mess and the burden falls with YOU to fix it. Enjoy. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 18:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

@Lugnuts Always been such a pleasure to collaborate with you on the cricket content; sharing ideas, sense checking, and most of all moderating together. I do hope you will return at some point. All the best until then. Bs1jac (talk) 16:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked[edit]

Sorry that you were blocked 1 minute ago as of writing time for adding to your proposed decision section, and thanks for creating so many articles on this encyclopedia. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 18:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022[edit]

I have indefinitely blocked you as no longer here to build an encyclopedia. Good luck in your future ventures. Cullen328 (talk) 18:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wish you good health[edit]

Hi I have seen some of your helpful edits in vandalism reverts on articles on my watch list. This talk page was on my watch and I saw the block. I have no clue what is happening, since the related discussion threads are too long, but I came here to I wish you good health. Take care. Venkat TL (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you! (2)[edit]

	The Surreal Barnstar
	So sorry to see you go! Thank you for all your hard work. St Anselm (talk) 19:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you saw the part where they're bragging about introducing deliberate errors and intentional copyvio, and you're going to give this person a barnstar for it? Valereee (talk) 20:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lest we not forget the now oversighted/revdelled attacks. But you know, creating sub par, barely sourced content with copyvios for a decade is totally admirable. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:22, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Allegedly. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 21:19, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you think Lugnuts is lying about introducing deliberate errors and intentional copyvio? I don't think that makes it better lol... Valereee (talk) 21:23, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I think. And I certainly do think that makes it better. I'm not sure how I'll react when WP/ArbCom inevitably comes for me; I doubt I'll take this route, but per NRP below, I can empathize with the hurt and anger behind it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can empathize with the hurt and the anger, too, but good grief. What they've done on the way out the door is tell us we literally can't assume they ever were acting in good faith. Ever. To me, this is flabbergasting. Not how I'd want to leave my legacy of 1.5M edits. Valereee (talk) 21:34, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I checked some of his archived talk page posts from 2007. There does seem to in fact be copyvios. However, I highly doubt he poisoned his articles with thousands of deliberate errors. They would have been discovered by now. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He's burning bridges on the way out. It's how any self-respecting punk leaves the room – with a sneer, a rude hand gesture, and "by the way, I dipped your toothbrush in the toilet". Lugnuts: dude, you're being an asshole, but I can be asshole sometimes, too. You can email me if you need someone to talk to. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to compare it to "I faked all my orgasms", but your way works, too. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 21:27, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The people who Lugnuts burned worst are his supporters. I wouldn’t at all put the Copyvios/deliberate errors thing totally beyond him either. Assuming we would have found the deliberate errors assumes that anyone ever checked whether his transcription of stuff by hand verbatim out of a database was accurate, to which the answer is: “of course no-one did”. I mean hell, Ruigeroeland’s copyvios we’re only discovered years after he quit, and we’re only now getting into the stuff Carlossuarez46 basically made up on Iranian villages. FOARP (talk) 21:49, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A super-un-classy comment from the creator of WP:Gravedancing. Really? Ingratis (talk) 22:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve struck the last part of my comment, on the principle that if I think something is the right side of the line and someone else thinks it’s the wrong side of the line, then I may be wrong and better to err on the side of caution. FOARP (talk) 09:16, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've never had such a reaction to giving someone a barnstar! St Anselm (talk) 16:35, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you! (3)[edit]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	I admire your efforts, despite the constant resistance. You're someone special, and it is very, very unfortunate to see the circumstances that you are in now. Best wishes for the future. X-750 _{List of articles that I have screwed over} 21:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gravedancing[edit]

I am the blocking administrator. If I see any more gravedancing behavior, I will hand out more blocks. I think most experienced editors will agree that the block was necessary. But this is a real human being with feelings who devoted a lot of effort for many years to what he saw as an effort to improve the encyclopedia. Please do not try to make him feel worse than he already does. Have some compassion. Cullen328 (talk) 03:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you! (4)[edit]

	The Resilient Barnstar
	Sorry you had to go out this way... CLYDE FRANKLIN 03:06, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Hello. you are awesome editor. thanks for your 16 years appearances (including more than 1,509,000 edits and creating 93,547 articles) specially in sports articles and help wikipedia to improve. I hope your problem be solved and we can see you here again. Best Regards. Miha2020 (talk) 03:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Sorry to see what happened. I know it is hard for you right now being blocked indefinitely after spending so many years here. I wont give out any barnstars, but just know that while I cannot say for other topics but the cricket articles here will definitely miss you. Anyways life must go on and I wish you best of luck. Human (talk) 12:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Take care[edit]

Sorry about this ... take care. Caro7200 (talk) 13:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Miss you. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct in deletion-related editing closed[edit]

An arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct in deletion-related editing has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

7&6=thirteen (talk · contribs) is topic banned from deletion discussions, broadly construed.
Johnpacklambert (talk · contribs) is banned from taking the following actions: (1) participating in deletion discussions, broadly construed; (2) proposing an article for deletion ("PRODing"), but not contesting a proposed deletion ("de-PRODing"); and (3) turning an article into a redirect.
Lugnuts (talk · contribs) is warned against making personal attacks, engaging in battleground behavior in deletion discussions, and other disruptive deletion behavior.
Lugnuts is banned from taking the following actions: (1) participating in deletion discussions, broadly construed; (2) contesting a proposed deletion ("de-PRODing"); and (3) creating articles that comprise less than 500 words, including converting redirects into articles.
Lugnuts is indefinitely banned from Wikipedia.
TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) is topic banned from deletion discussions, broadly construed.
The Arbitration Committee requests comment from the community on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion.

For the Arbitration Committee, -- Guerillero ^{Parlez Moi} 22:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct in deletion-related editing closed

Bad day[edit]

So sorry to see the latest developments - it will be much duller and greyer here without you. Thanks so much for being the sharp pointy stick that Wikipedia needs, even if it doesn't realise it. All best wishes for the future, Ingratis (talk) 18:45, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

		The Articles for Creation Barnstar
		Sorry to hear about your block. I was blocked for a year (because I didn't do the "right" thing, which seemed to be letting the trolls win). On the bright side, I don't miss all the hounding I experienced at Wikipedia when I was more active. Yleventa2 (talk) 19:18, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Goodbye[edit]

I’ve worked with you on many articles and you were always a great editor to have around. Sad to see how your time on Wikipedia ended but maybe it is for the better. You left a legacy here and I hope that it is remembered positively. Hamza Ali Shah ^Talk 02:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]