User talk:NapoliRoma/Archive 5

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Nomination for deletion of Template:US executive actions introduction

Template:US executive actions introduction has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — Train2104 (t • c) 02:53, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

facebook

Facebook Sew mehon (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks re Talk:Curation

At first i overlooked the fact of the precision with which you reverted: you separately remedied the two kinds of damage that a single edit session had created, showing the "keen eye and ... cool hand [that it takes to make] a three-rail billiard shot".
--Jerzy•t 17:36, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Oh, it comes back to me now, i left out either "and..." or "to...", "... score in a balkline game" ... i guess bcz i have no idea what that phrase means. But i now see that "we have it covered". "Cheerio!"
--Jerzy•t 17:49, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Graduate of Theology moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Graduate of Theology, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please follow the prompts on the Articles for Creation template atop the page. — Insert CleverPhrase Here 09:36, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks: Info on Obama conspiracy theories

Obama conspiracy theories talk page, 3 July 2017

You: “Few candidates prior to Obama were ever pushed to prove their citizenship…It turns out that for 2012, the Secretaries of State of at least two states did ask for and receive proof of Obama's citizenship.” - User talk:NapoliRoma

Indeed, as few as zero I recall. Thanks for this item. Birther was the nuttiest media flap I’d seen in 53 years—and Fox, esp. Sean Hannity, just spent wads of air time on it. I made my talk page comment not to re-open Birther, but because rules governing candidate bona fides, not known for clarity, must somehow have allowed the thing to start. Of course, no one’s gonna run for president not a natural-born citizen and pass January, much less November. Yet I thought a section describing those rules worthwhile—I won’t try to write it, as it’s too complex for me.

So please help; why do you think Birther could get on TV? I’m pretty old; TV would not have carried more than 20 minutes on it back in 1972. What’s with media in the Internet dominance era?

If you lack time, where would I find info on how 4chan chitchat can fuel the growth of major media flaps? To me this seems impossible. 4chan is a joke. Jessegalebaker (talk) 17:39, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Quikly for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quikly 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/Quikly until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:36, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Graduate of Theology concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Graduate of Theology, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Graduate of Theology

Hello, NapoliRoma. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Graduate of Theology".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, NapoliRoma.

I've seen you editing recently and you seem like an experienced Wikipedia editor.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. —usernamekiran(talk) 22:48, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Graduate of Theology (March 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jake Brockman was:

The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at Theology. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Graduate of Theology is a fork of Theology. That article discusses the acedemic side and therefore the ThG should be included there. The article presented does not show sufficient notability for a stand along fork

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Graduate of Theology and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Graduate of Theology, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

_pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello, NapoliRoma! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Down To Earth (McLeod's Daughters Episode)

Hello NapoliRoma. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Down To Earth (McLeod's Daughters Episode), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: R3 only applies to recently created and implausible redirects. Use WP:RFD if you want deletion. Thank you. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Graduate of Theology

Hello, NapoliRoma. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Graduate of Theology".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Sam Sailor 12:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Re: Your thought on Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories

Hi. You posted on my talk page months ago (almost a year). Sorry to take so long to get back.

I looked at the issue/discussion. It's pointless. To me, the people insisting the theories be labeled as false are no better than the people promoting them. But then, I worked for news organizations when we weren't allowed to make statements such as "President Trump falsely claimed . . . " without a source.

Both sides in this issue are beligerent and wrong, in my opinion. When news organizations and others state there is "no evidence" of something or other what they mean is they don't have any evidence. Obviously they could not have talked to every human on the planet, investigated and read every relevant document, etc. Yet they are happy to say there is "no evidence" of something. This has become a popular way of inserting an opinion disguised as fact. People don't fall for it - yet publishers and Web sites keep doing it.

Bias on one side is no better than bias on the other side. Stating that these theories are false makes Wikipedia appear biased.

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” - George Orwell

I wish you luck.

Rblack2001 (talk) 19:35, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Politrukki (talk) 15:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Window Washing.png

The file File:Window Washing.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

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 files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

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

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:02, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)