User talk:Onel5969/Archive 110

Archive 105

←

Archive 108

Archive 109

Archive 110

Archive 111

Archive 112

→

Archive 115

Archive 110: January 2023

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010^Talk 00:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Same to you! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Recent edit

Hello, can you please explain your decisioning for this edit. It is unfair to merge a page based on a biased editors edit without a constructive discussion, in fact there have been multiple discussions about the pages this editor has merged as he had nominated them for deletion multiple times and despite the result of these deletion nominations not being favourable for the editor he persists on merging the pages that were not deleted. This is clear POV pushing and disruptive editing. Kabz15 (talk)

It makes more sense to be contained with the other information in the larger article, rather than as a separate stub. I am not biased, as I could not care less about this subject, one way or the other. Not sure why you are insistent on a separate page, the information is included in the target. If you wish to add/delete information, please do so at the target. Also, retialiatory AfD's are never a good idea.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Arcinfo.ch

Happy New Year! Thanks for your review of La Chaux-de-Fonds Les Forges railway station. I don't quite understand why don't consider it independent from the subject. It's in French (the local language) and published in the region, but both are key to have up to date information on the topic. The French language article includes additional references that could be used to expand it. Enhancing999 (talk) 14:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. The issue is that you need several (usually 3) in-depth sources about the subject to show it passes notability. What I draftified didn't have any. One of them was a short blurb, and the other a simple map, showing it exists. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Arcinfo.ch was present. Besides, what you consider a short blurb is actually a key reference for stations in Switzerland showing that it exists and it's active. It's likely the reason Template:SBB web exists. Also the "simple map" is the network plan showing it's active, the network it belongs to and adjacent stations. For me, it compares fairly well to other Swiss stations. Enhancing999 (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

And still, neither is in-depth. WP:OSE is not a strong argument. If the station is notable, then there shouldn't be a problem with finding those 3 in-depth refs from independent, secondary, reliable sources.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Are there any on the French Wikipedia article you consider suitable? Enhancing999 (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

There is a interwiki link to French language Wikipedia on the article. Enhancing999 (talk) 13:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, so? It is still not clear what you are asking. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Are there any of the sources on the French Wikipedia article you consider suitable? Enhancing999 (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Need assistance in biography for Film Director

Hello, I Need assistance in biography for Film Director , i saw you redirected R. S. Prasanna. I thought he is Director of 2 movies then he could be Notable! Hey It's Patnaite☝️ (talk) 18:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ^⋠T⋡ 20:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

2023 ATP Finals

I saw that you nominated 2023 ATP Finals for speedy deletion due to copyvio? I was wondering your opinion on the matter, since it seems like the source in question uses the Wikipedia article for the 2022 ATP Finals verbatim and even links to Wiki articles. I don't think that still counts as copyvio. What do you think? Adamtt9 (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. If what you say is correct, than that would mean sportsidioten is a mirror site. But I can't see anything on that site which says they took the information from WP, and it does have a copyright notice. Also, if true, then the article's page should include a notice in the history showing that they copied from the other WP page, to provide proper attribution. Did you see something on the source which says it comes from WP? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't find anything that explicitly indicates on the site that they copied from WP, but the English part of their article is an exact copy of the Wiki article and even includes the same Wikilinks that the Wiki article does. Quite a coincidence if it isn't taken straight from the 2022 Wiki article. Adamtt9 (talk) 22:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

I do not disagree with that assessment. Let's leave the tag on and see what one of the admins who specialize in copyvios think. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer of the Year - 2022

		New Page Reviewer of the Year
		For your over 28,000 article reviews, you've been chosen as Reviewer of the Year, for 2022! Your username has been permanently engraved on the cup (again) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, much appreciated. Just trying to help out where I can. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

If you want, you may add this userbox to your user page: {{Wikipedia:New pages patrol/CoY userbox|year=2022}} -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Congrats - just saw this in the NPP newsletter. Don't know what we'd do without you! Happy new year, etc. Girth Summit _(blether) 19:34, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

My congrats as well O. Very well deserved! MarnetteD|Talk 20:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, MarnetteD and {{|Girth Summit}} ... And to answer your question, GS, somehow I think I am eminently replaceable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, we're all replaceable. Which is good, because we wear out, one way or another. I guess all I mean is that I'm glad you're on board. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Additional NPP Award for 2022

		Redirect Ninja Award
		For over 5,000 redirect reviews during 2022. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits to Sally Hernandez

I've been working on this page and noticed that you keep marking it for "may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies" just three minutes after I cited the policies stating how it does meet notability (in the exact policies you used to nominate to delete the article). I'll be removing the template mentioned at the beginning of this using point #3 of WP:WTRMT to justify the removal. I ask that you begin a discussion on either my or the article in question's talk page instead of putting the maintenance template back. Scott the Reporter (talk) 03:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but you simply stating that this person meets notability requirements does not make it so. You must provide at least 3 in-depth references from independent, secondary, reliable sources to show that they meet those requirements. Currently the article has zero. One is from a primary source, and the other is from a non-reliable source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Page review

@Onel5969: I saw you were active recently and was wondering if you could review the page New County Hotel fire. It's an event currently in the news so should probably get up soon. Thanks, Schminnte (talk • contribs) 13:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't reply, but I checked it and it looked fine. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Norbert Matsché

Hi, @Onel5969,

On 2 November 2022 you rejected my submission concerning Prof. Matsché (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Norbert_Matsch%C3%A9 ) on the grounds that the draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. But, because Prof. Matsché was head of our institute for 5 years (from 1999 to 2003) and was responsible for its progress during this time, I see point 5 of the criteria ("university professor") fulfilled. I have now added and referenced the corresponding data. Please inform me whether the data is now sufficient to prove the required criteria and whether the article can be resubmitted. Thank you and kind regards, Hager Irene (talk) 14:25, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Two things, first, you use the term, "our", which would imply that somehow you are connected to the professor. What is that connection? Second, you state that he was head of your institute. What university was that? Perhaps I missed it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Prof. Matsché is one of the former Professors of the Institute of Water Quality and Resource Management of TU Wien (https://www.tuwien.at/en/cee/iwr). He retired in 2007. I now work at this institute. I hope this is not a too close connection. And, as said, he was head of the institute for five years. Best regards and thanks for a short response! Hager Irene (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for getting back to me. So, okay, that is what is known as a conflict of interest. You should read WP:COI, and follow what is required there. Second, that institute would not qualify for the notability criteria. So you'll need to find some in-depth coverage of him from independent, reliable sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, @Onel5969,

Hello, this has now confused me a bit: I certainly know Prof. Matsché, but he has been retired for more than 15 years and has no influence whatsoever on me or my work. When doing serious research on a biography of a living person, it is helpful to get to know him or his working environment anyway. Nor do I have the slightest financial interest in the wikipedia entry. I wrote it in my spare time because I think that personalities like Matsché, who have done very important work away from the public eye in areas that are highly important to society (in his case, water quality), deserve to be mentioned with a short entry in Wikipedia. It is rather sad that the institute, for which the same applies (also on a European level quite outstanding work in the field of water quality management, wastewater treatment, sewage sludge utilisation, sewage gas production, etc...), is considered to be too little qualified, if that is so. What would be an in-depth coverage in regard to Matsché?

If Wikipedia rejects an entry on Prof. Matsché as not relevant despite everything, I will of course withdraw my draft, but admittedly with a sense of sadness. Best regards, Hager Irene (talk) 14:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Please read WP:COI. No one is saying that the man does not deserve an article, but that it needs better sourcing. In addition, based on your comment above, the article was written by someone with a connection, so you would need to follow the instructions there on how to declare that COI. I know literally hundreds of people with WP articles. I do not edit their pages. Regarding in-depth sourcing, it would have to from independent, reliable secondary sources. Newspapers and books are the usual sources, but other online sourcing may be available. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Removal of Lisa m Montgomery the murderer

@Onel5969 I am on an alt right now because I am not on my laptop right now if you are wondering. How did the article I copied from simple Wikipedia fail notability crime? I understand that I should have wrote it on my own but the redirects are unnecessary because someone else might make an article about the murderer. Have a good day! HelpingWorldMobile (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. As per WP:PERP: "A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article". Since she is covered in the article about the victim's murder, that is how it should be handled. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Crookton, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crookton, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crookton, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Casa Rosa, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Casa Rosa, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casa Rosa, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Bignotti, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bignotti, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bignotti, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Fordville, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fordville, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fordville, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Restore 2021-2022 Futsal Championship

Why did you remove page foolishly. Are you indian? Or bad bot? You haven't watch last year match and forced to remove the pages without notice. Request you to restore the data. Wiki1957BOY (talk) 16:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

As was said in the edit summary, "not enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to pass GNG, nor VERIFY". It had been tagged for more than a week without improvement. If you would like me to move it into draft so that you can work on it, let me know. But insulting another editor is a good way to get you blocked from editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Pilot Light

Hello, I hope this finds you well. On October 24, you had approved a draft which I had written for Pilot Light . Since then, it had been deleted, restored so that I could address the issues that led to its deletion, and rejected from acceptance twice. I have sought to address the article's issues by discussing with editors at the help desk and with editors who have declined the article, but I still seem to be getting nowhere closer to its acceptance despite my earnest attempts. As you had originally accepted the article, could I trouble you to take another look at the state it is in now and let me know your thoughts? Do you believe it meets the notability requirements? Or was its initial acceptance simply a fluke? Thank you. Tjblmc20 (talk) 16:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Wow, I'm not quite positive, but I think in all the articles I've approved at AfC, this is the first one that's ever been returned to draftspace. JBW is a very experienced and knowledgeable admin, so I would suggest you re-open discussions with them or with one of the two AfC reviewers who declined it afterwards. And I doubt anyone would ever accuse me of being soft on advert-like articles. In fact there's one admin who has declined well over a 100 of my CSD nominations for advertising (without approving a single one). Regarding notability, the https://inthesetimes.com/ piece and the Channel 7 ABC piece, along with the Medium piece pushes it over the edge to meet notability criteria. This was a while ago, but I think I also may have thought the WTTW piece (not the press release), also gave weight. But the biggest issue appears to be the promotional tone, so you should discuss it with those other editors. Hopefully, this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help. I've reached out to JBW again for any advice. Tjblmc20 (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Greetings and page reviews

Hello! I've just received a notification about your review of an article I recently created, so I wanted to thank you about it. I'm confused about the exact meaning of that operation, though...

Still, I appreciate the support! : D

Oltrepier (talk) 17:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. New articles get reviewed by experienced editors. I'm simply the one who took a look at that article and did not find any issues with it. Nice job. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleted article Alankode Leelakrishnan

Hello. Can you move to draftspace this article which was deleted by you last year? I would like to create an article on the subject. Please note that the subject is a prominent literary figure from Kerala, India. Thank you. Malayala Sahityam (talk) 22:04, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi it was moved to draftspace, and then was deleted due to lack of activity. Click on Draft:Alankode Leelakrishnan, and follow the instructions there for REFUND. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

New Year's Wishes and question =

Happy NY. Could you please indicate how much more and what kind of refs would be necessary? Thanks!

User:Webnetprof — Preceding undated comment added 05:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry: forgot

to mention the article: Arthur Graaff Webnetprof (talk) 05:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi and happy New Year to you as well. It is very well sourced now, but still needs several more refs. For instance the facts regarding his parents divorce (which could probably be deleted as trivial), and his Canisius College need refs, as well as his bibliography, and the Council of Dachau. Those are just a few. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Kanha Shanti Vanam

Hi Onel5969. Thanks for your efforts on reviewing this article. As the article meets Wikipedia guidelines on notability of a place, felt it would be appropriate to have it on main space. Let me know how to take it to the main space as independent centre. Thanks. Shambhavinigam (talk) 11:32, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Even if something is deemed notable in and of itself, does not mean that the best outcome is for a separate stub article. Please see WP:SPLIT, which this does not meet either of the criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Thanks a lot for your reply. I have read the guidelines on splitting the article and understand the same. However, the article has been prepared on the lines of this article and has chances of expanding in future. As I wanted to avoid the promotional part for the article hence did not add more details. Request your guidance. Thanks. Shambhavinigam (talk) 11:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I would expand the section in the target article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Lawn Ki Masjid

Lawn Ki Masjid is a very historical place for Muslims in Patna, Bihar. It's just at the Kargil Chowk, Gandhi Maidan, Patna. How can i make it better? --- Misterrrrr (talk) 12:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. What you need are references which go in-depth about the place, which come from independent, reliable, secondary sources to show that it meets notability. Not just simple mentions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Just a heads up about Tropical cyclones in 2023 article

Good Morning @Onel5969 I'm just giving you a heads up that the article that I created that goes by the name "Tropical cyclones in 2023" will improve over time as more storms form and sources for those storms come out throughout the year just like Tropical cyclones in 2022 and Tropical cyclones in 2021 those articles started almost blank also in January of those respective years, and also I'm still a beginner in terms of creating articles on Wikipedia I typically upload images of Tropical cyclones off Wikimedia Commons for the last 2 1/2 years, I hope you understand that Cheers have a nice day. :) Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 12:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Missed this. Thanks for the heads up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Southtyroleans moved to draftspace

Hello Onel, im very sad that you removed my Article. I put many hours into writing, making Thoughts and searching for Sources. I dont know what else i should make a Reference for, i dont think any Statement is unreferenced?

Can you point me to the Parts you take issue with, that would be useful for me so i could search Sourches. Otherwise i search mindlessly and find Sources, put them in and the ARticle gets still not approved and deleted again.

I dont understand why my Article was deleted, there are so many Articles about Ethnic Groups that are much more sparcely referenced with Sources but are still up. 320luca (talk) 16:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

It would be simpler for me to tell you what is sourced. Almost the entire article is not referenced. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:36, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Batalha do Museu moved to draftspace

Good afternoon Onel5969, thanks for helping me out with my Batalha do Museu article. Just wondering what I could do to further improve the article and remove the conflict of interest you pointed out.

I appreciate your time and help btw ;) Meiaz (talk) 17:32, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Well, what is your connection to subject? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, I watched the rappers battle videos on the internet and found the topic interesting :) Meiaz (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

That doesn't explain your obvious connection. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand. What should I do to better the article? Thanks :) Meiaz (talk) 17:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Address the COI/UPE concern is step one. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, okay, how do I that? Sorry for bad english :) Meiaz (talk) 11:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to disturb, Im sure you must be busyy. And tips for me Mr. Onel5969??? Thanks for help Meiaz (talk) 12:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Not disturbing me. Just trying to overcome the language barrier. I understand. First, you have an obvious connection to the article's subject. The question then is, do you have a simple conflict of interest, or are you being paid to the write the article. If it is simply a conflict of interest, you should read WP:COI, and follow the directions there. If you are being paid, then you should read WP:UPE and follow the instructions there. Hope this makes sense to you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay thank you. Truthfully, I'm not being paid. I will read the WP:COI as you pointed out. Thanks again for your kindness and time :) Meiaz (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Just wondering Mr. Onel5969, should I declare the connection on the article? Would that be the next step then? Meiaz (talk) 21:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, use one of the templates at COI, and place it on the talk page of the article. Ping me once you do that, and I'll review the article for notability, etc. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:43, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I have placed the COI template on the talk page as you instructed. Now then would you rather review the article or should I use the "submit draft" function??? Thanks for all help :) Meiaz (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. You can submit it, and that way another reviewer might be able to get to it before I do. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:08, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay Mr. Onel5969 I understand. Thanks one more time :) Meiaz (talk) 15:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Cramel (Hebrew book series) moved to draft

When you moved Cramel (Hebrew book series) to draft (Draft:Cramel (Hebrew book series)) you commented out the picture to the book cover rev here. What was the reason for this? Shall it be readded before draft approval or after? Also, at which point should the article's categories be readded to the page, before or after draft approval? Relspas (talk) 18:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure why that was commented out. I guess it has something to do with the draft tool. I wouldn't worry about it, it will probably reverse when it gets moved back to mainspace. That's also when the cats will be restored. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Kung Fu (Ranking)

You added notability template to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kung_Fu_(Ranking) the source is a Spanish national newspaper the oldest in the country and absoultely everything in the page is mentioned in the newspaper, the article is a full middle page spread. There is a link to a scan so you can read it yourself. Do you understand Spanish?

Why could you not use a template such as this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Wing_Chun_terms or one that states aditional citations needed rather than going as far as a notability template? Australianblackbelt (talk) 00:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Because the notability tag is the most appropriate. You need in-depth coverage from at least 3 independent, reliable, secondary sources. At the time, you had 1. You still have 1 (the second is non-reliable). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Lancaster, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lancaster, Arizona, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lancaster, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Not ready for mainspace

Can you please provide justification when you WP:DRAFTIFY. "Not ready for mainspace" (on 2023 Liverpool City Council election, World Famous Fairy Tale Series, for instance) is not an actionable complaint for authors or other editors. We should not be moving things to draft space unless they are at risk of an AfD delete consensus so identifying a valid WP:DEL-REASON would be much better than "Not ready". ~Kvng (talk) 22:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, that's not a valid reason for draftification. In fact, if I think they won't pass AfD I should not draftify as a way to avoid a deletion discussion. But at the time it was draftified, it met all 4 criteria for draftification: It had potential merit; it did not meet the required standard (met neither GNG or VERIFY); had not been worked on for over an hour; and did not contain copyright violations. While in draft it was improved, and now you've moved it back to mainspace. So the process worked. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, btw, forgot to mention to thank you for the work you do on both NPP and AfC, it's always a delight to review something that you've already accepted at AfC.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:48, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Request reviewing an article.

Paolo Litta. I tried my best to collect all of the information in at least three different langauges about this extremely obscure Italian composer. 5 citations and such. Thank you in advance. Komitsuki (talk) 13:47, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Nice job! Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you and please have a peaceful 2023. Komitsuki (talk) 14:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability Template Maggie Castle

Hello Onel5969! There are multiple "reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it" included in the existing 32 references in the Maggie Castle article. There's the two part retrospective in dailydead.com for the series Todd & The Book of Pure Evil. Even though it's a small early part in The Jackal there's special mention of her by name as the young hostage in Cult MTL. Many of the Todd references discuss her & her character Jenny like "Todd & The Book of Pure Evil in production for Space". There's an article about her & Todd... co star Melanie Leishman in Sandbox magazine. Also Castle meets the criteria for Entertainers "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" with a lead role in the two seasons of Todd and the Book of Pure Evil plus the animated feature film (for all of which there are multiple refs included that mention her & her character). A regular as a voice actor on animated series Arthur & she was the child lead in iconic Goosebumps episode with the evil ventriloquist dummy that comes to life, as well as multiple roles in films such as The Mad with Billy Zane, The Time Traveler's Wife with Rachel McAdams & Disney's Starstruck (2010). Weirdsville, a smaller film, alone generated commendations from the reviewers for her role in both Variety & The Hollywood Reporter by name, refs that are included in the article. For the average actor that are not in the big league one does need to be realistic about how much space media is going to portion to them but I believe that all the above & more in the article amounts to a pretty solid chunk of notability. Please do note that the previous deletion discussion of the old article (of which nothing was used in this new version) the decision was split for some time & in the end was only 3 to 2 for deletion (with one even being a weak delete) & that was for an article that was much less substantial & barely referenced. I feel confidant this new article is a significant improvement on the old one that only just got deleted last time. Thanks for your time! Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 15:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969! I forgot to mention in the above that Castle is also a Gemini Award winner, though I did include it in the article along with references from media sources for both the nomination & win. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

While I haven't been ignoring you, I have not had the time to go through your lengthy comment above. Will get to it tomorrow. Apologies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969! No worries, I can see you're busy. I'll check back tomorrow. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you, but I wanted to spend a bit of time on your article. She's definitely a working actress, but almost all of the articles, 30 of the 33, are simple mentions of her. One of the other 3 is an interview, and therefore a primary source, so it can't be used to establish notability. That leaves us with 2. The Sandbox piece is the one truly in-depth piece about her. But I have doubts of the reliability of the short-lived magazine, and can find nothing about their editorial policy. Which leaves us with the Free Press piece. While she is mentioned several times, and quoted twice, it's not really in-depth coverage of her. If you could find at least two other articles like the Sandbox one, that would show notability. I don't really see her passing NACTOR. Her one truly significant role was in Todd and the Book of Pure Evil, and maybe you could call her voice work in [[Arthur (TV series)|Arthur]. You've done a very nice job on the article, and what is there is well cited, it's just a notability issue with me, and right now, it's borderline. Even a single additional in-depth piece would push her over the edge, I think. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969! Thanks for getting back to me! Sorry, going to be a fat paragraph again as I respond. :) "I don't really see her passing NACTOR" Except she does easily, I quote "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions". Two season of Todd & the book of... plus the animated feature film, regular voice role on Arthur & most of her films & TV have Wikipedia articles, meaning they are deemed notable. She's got significant roles in Weirdsville, to point her part is mentioned in two highly notable movie magazines, she's got a lead role in The Mad the lead in her episode of Goosebumps with more decent size parts in Dead Mary, Hank and Mike & The Time Traveler's Wife. All of which have references to prove her roles in them. That all easily meets SNG for Actors/Entertainers, it's worth noting that you do not need to meet both GNG & SNG as it can be either/or (or of course both). SNG for actors is placing the importance on multiple roles rather than just having three articles. After all many character actors who have worked for decades will clock up many important roles with very few articles about them, hence SNG is in lieu of GNG. A decades long acting career should trump three articles no matter how significant & that's what SNG is for per their policy page. Additionally she also meets "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards" - "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times", the Gemini Award win. I'd still disagree that she does not meet GNG, "Significant coverage" is really open to interpretation of course, I'd argue that reviewers in notable movie magazines mentioning her by name as a standout is significant. The coverage for Todd and.. alone is definitely significant & covers two seasons/two years. I could pile on more references for those but hate to ref bomb, I felt my refs covered the topics they were next too without going overboard. Side note, while I understand why an interview is to be used carefully for a reference since it comes from the person it is about, I do find it odd that interviews don't count to notability since media is unlikely to interview someone who is not notable in some way. I must say when I look at other actor articles on Wiki I do not see many with better coverage except for A list actors. For instance I took a peak at a few listed on your User Page (please note I'm not taking a dig at you, I kept checking back here & ended up seeing you'd done some actor articles so wanted to see if there was a difference) & many don't have anywhere near the level of notability your asking for in this case. Examples: Adrienne D'Ambricourt, Agostino Borgato, Al Taylor (actor),. None of those meet the exacting standard that seems to be being applied here, almost no article coverage to support them. Though I think they all meet SNG Actors as does Castle. I've been around a lot of Wiki articles for non "A list" actors & all are at a similar level as those, I got a lot of practice with handling refs fixing up many I came across. They meet SNG but would fail what's being asked for here. Still, if you don't agree that's your right, I guess you'll add an AFD & I'll try & argue my case at that. "You've done a very nice job on the article, and what is there is well cited" Thank-you kindly! I'd hoped to write more articles but always seem to have a bad experience here that puts me off for a while. Finding it hard to feel like it's worth all the effort. Thanks for you time on this. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 00:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

You know, you've convinced me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969! Thank-you so much, especially thanks for taking the time hearing me out (sorry for the fat paragraphs when I can see you're very busy). I really appreciate you being reasonable, easy & friendly to deal with. Have a great day & hopefully one not as busy as you've had recently. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Daniel Ganjaman moved to draftspace

Hey again Mr. Onel5969, thank you for moving my article to your draftspace. Just wondering what I could do to improve it, so it could be on Wiki for others to read and obtain information in relation to Daniel's production and music career. Was there a conflict of interest issue here too??? Thanks again ;) Meiaz (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. No, that was moved to draft a couple of months ago simply because it wasn't in good enough shape for mainspace. There wasn't enough in-depth coverage to show they meet GNG, and there wasn't a solid reference showing that they had won the Latin Grammy. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I understand ;) Thankss Meiaz (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023

Hello, I'm Hannelsen. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Thomas Kastanaras have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Hannelsen (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Thomas Kastanaras. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Hannelsen (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Throw around the term vandalism like that could get you blocked. You're article has been tagged for notability concerns for weeks without improvement, then you simply reverted without improving it. NSOCCER, which has already been explained to you, has been deprecated, now you must show notability by providing in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable secondary sources which are not routine sports coverage. Which your article has zero of. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The article has 3 sources but I guess Wikipedia belongs to people who don't like the real football now. So it would be a waste of time to spend any more time for it. --Hannelsen (talk) 21:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Please read my comment above. Not that people don't want "the real football", whatever that means, it is simply that people want quality articles which pass notability criteria, rather than poor stubs. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Kung Fu Ranking

Please explain your problem with the sources on Kung Fu (Ranking) thank you. Australianblackbelt (talk) 22:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

One is fine. The second is from a non-reliable source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

El Español is Australia's oldest Spanish newspaper and it is a National print edition. Australianblackbelt (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay. So? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

So why the notability template on the article if the source is fine? Australianblackbelt (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Have you read the notability criteria. You need at least 3 like that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Query AfD mentioned in move log

Hi,

RE https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft%3AParas_Kalnawat&diff=1113057863&oldid=1112568983 You moved Paras Kalnawat to Draft:Paras Kalnawat. 14:12, 29 September 2022 Edit summary

m (Onel5969 moved page Paras Kalnawat to Draft:Paras Kalnawatover a redirect without leaving a redirect: As per AfD, must go through AfC (via script))

Was there an AfD? - SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Yes. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paras Kalnawat, resulting in it being draftified, with the instruction, "Please do not move to main space until it has received AFC approval." The only difference between the version I returned to draft and the AfD'd version is a 10th place finish in a reality TV show. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I don’t know why I didn’t find that AfD. I am also confused as to why the current page, now in mainspace, only begins at 13:52, 26 May 2022‎. Where are the versions that User:Liz said she’d Draftify at 07:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)? SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

@SmokeyJoe: I had been a prime contributor to actor Paras Kalnawat because of him being a main part of tv series Anupamaa(as I'm a prime contributor there also) till 2022 after I joined this platform in June 2021. After the previous article was draftified(which was I think was actually created in late 2018 or early 2019 whrn I scrolled down the editing history) I submitted it again after making changes. But it was declined as it was "puffery and advertising ". Thereafter I nominated it for deletion to rewrite it again after a break of few months with better language and sources. However a draft was already recreated by the user Jha09 who's currently blocked from editing. I continued to edit the present version of article after I submitted it for AfC in it's draft form but Jha09 did a mistake of directly moving it to main space without going through AfC approval procedure as the actor clearly passed Wikipedian guidelines. But administrators pointed out this mistake and they moved it back to draft space and Jha09 then submitted it for AfC approval procedure and again I continued to edit it. That's why the creation script is available of May 2022 instead of late 2018 or early 2019. Pri2000 (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:RoryMallinson.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:RoryMallinson.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
2. On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Since the other image has been added, and is in the PD, then the final criteria for fair use is no longer apt, so by all means delete it and replace it with the other image. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Article to be rewritten

Hi Onel, I noticed you are active in reviewing new submissions. I have noticed This article on some New Article feeds of a couple of WikiProjects I keep an eye on. I believe the article should be reworked and should not be on the main space. I am not sure if I have the prerogative to move the article to draft space myself. Could you please take a quick look at it and let me know if it is okay for me to move it? Or could you move it yourself? I will leave a note on the main editor's talk page informing them of my concerns. el.ziade (talkallam) 10:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I do not disagree with your assessment (as well as having to be renamed to fix the spelling of Tyre in the title). My rule of thumb is to tag it for improvement, and then give the editor a week to make the necessary improvements. I tagged it on 2 January, so if it remains unimproved on the 7th, I'd normally draftify it then, however, with your added concerns on the editor's talk page, I do not see the benefit of leaving it in mainspace. Thanks for pointing it out to me. BTW, have you ever considered doing any work over at NPP? We could definitely use more help in your area of expertise, especially if you speak Arabic. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I am available and I’d be happy to help you. I speak Arabic and French in addition to English and i often use, and verify sources in those languages. I was a bit frustrated to see some inadmissible articles falling through the cracks and had recently AfD-ed a couple of them. I can keep an eye on articles within the scope of my expertise, and those about Arab world topics. I can also help you out with more general subjects, but I tend to steer away from getting involved in sensitive geopolitical conflict articles. How do I proceed? Shall I apply for NPP reviewer rights? el.ziade (talkallam) 16:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, you could apply for the reviewer right, or go through NPP school (although that's a lengthy process). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:08, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Pelandaba–Mpopoma improvements

Hi, I noticed that you moved my article Draft:Pelandaba–Mpopoma to draftspace. I've expanded and added more sources, and have submitted it for review. I was wondering if you wouldn't mind taking a look and possibly approving it in its new form, if you are a reviewer. Thanks, Jgefd (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. One of my favorite AfC reviewers, Bkissin, beat me to it and already moved it back to mainspace. Nice job. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

You added a WP:VERIFY to Lady Grizel Winifred Louisa Cochrane page

Hello, could you elaborate what needs addressing on that page please? Iv'e had trouble with another user who's been borderline harassing me because I rubbed him the wrong way with another article and since then, all Iv'e seen is negativity specifically to Grizel's page, if you can tell me what's wrong with it, I can try and address it, regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. First, not a big thing, but it is polite to leave a link to the page you have a question about. Now, about your question, you can look at WP:CIT to see what information is needed to make a reference validly pass WP:VERIFY. For example one of your refs simply states, "Wishaw Press - Friday 29 October 1920". What is that? Is that a newspaper? A publishing house? Where in the publication can I find the reference? It's similar to simply referencing, Encyclopedia Britannica. Hope this helps. But aside from that, I am still not sure this person passes notability. All the refs seem to reflect that her notability was through her husband, and per WP:NOTINHERITED, I am not sure she qualifies. Is there any way to link to online ways to look at those sources? If so, please include them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, apologies for not linking, I will address these issues, yes, Wishaw Press is (was) a newspaper company, but she was a famous huntress, that's what makes her notable (which is mentioned in the article), she was famous for this as famale hunters were very rare at the time. regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Cool. Feel free to ping me if you want me to take another look. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969: thanks, Done [1] Hogyncymru (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

To add, thank you for your work, it's very much appreciated, regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 15:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

University COI issue

Hello Onel5969. Thank you for raising this issue, I have had similar concerns. Is the clue you mentioned related to my recent discussion with them? If not, do you think it would help if I post this evidence? Feel free to email my your response if needed. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Well, your recent discussion led me to reach out to Rosguill, after which I filed a report at COIN. But the clue I mentioned is something aside from your suspicions. Email me and I'll be happy to share with you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:59, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Draftification

Hello, Onel5969,

I have great respect for your experience and understanding of Wikipedia policy. But even if you have doubts about a newly created article, a main space article shouldn't be moved to Draft space more than once. Pleae do not move-war. Feel free to add a tag indicating problems with an article or pursue the deletion of the article if you believe that it is irredeemable. But editors jump through a lot of necessary hoops to get AFC approval for a draft and I am guessing it is pretty demoralizing for an editor to have an approved draft article sent back to Draft space multiple times.

I'll just add that you have a very busy talk page! I fully understand how time-consuming it can be to keep up with responding to queries so good luck there! Thank you for your many contributions to the project. We're very fortunate that you returned to patrolling after taking a break in 2022. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, and the respect is mutual. However, could you provide a link to what you're talking about? I'm pretty careful about following the rules at WP:DRAFTIFY and as per WP:DRAFTOBJECT, so I'd like to see the example to see how I screwed up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Request to review article following cleanup of seemingly promotional language

Hi Onel5959,

I request you to please review the article Gautam Chand Sharma 'Vyathit', which you had tagged a few days ago as containing material that was promotional or could be seen as an advertisement. I have edited it to make it more NPOV-based. Best wishes, Apandeyhp89. Apandeyhp89 (talk) 12:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Nice job on the editing. Keep up the good work. I've marked it reviewed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Apandeyhp89 (talk) 15:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

RJ The DJ

Hello Onel5969 hope you're fine!!

I've stuffed more 13 references to The article RJ The DJ you currently tagged 'may not meet notability for bio'. Hope you will review it again when you have some time. N/B many of the english articles has reffered him as Diamond Platnumz's brother but passing through all 30+ articles, the man is independent to the topic. ANU^writes 18:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Refbombing (see WP:CITEKILL) doesn't help establish notability. In fact, it makes reviewing the article more difficult. Kindly select 1 or 2 of the best citations, everywhere you have more than 2, and remove them. Once that's done, I'll take another look. The best citations are the ones which go most in-depth about the subject, and are from reliable, independent, secondary sources. And please remember that interviews are primary sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello. I removed accumulated citations, Interviews and tidied up the article. Thanks for reminding me about Interviews to be primary sources, I didn't know about that, hope that hint's gonna help me on future articles. ANU^writes 13:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Burmese people in China. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks. Sigh. Now another editor has restored the information in violation of BURDEN and DISRUPTSIGNS. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Fabiano Ferreira

Ciao Onel5969, Fabiano Ferreira won the bronze medal at the South American Swimming Championships in Buenos Aires 2021 (I have added this information) and participated in the World Swimming Championships 2022. Artistic swimming has recently been opened to males ( https://www.fina.org/news/2990453/for-the-first-time-men-eligible-to-compete-in-artistic-swimming-at-the-olympic-games-in-paris-2024 ). It is normal that his career is not long: he is a pioneer. Still, he is one of the best artistic swimmers in the world. Are you sure this article should be deleted? --Dispe (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Not sure that it should be deleted, but as it is currently sourced, yes. Tagged it a week ago for notability, hoping that more in-depth coverage would show up to show that it could pass WP:GNG. But none of those accomplishments meet WP:NSPORTS, unfortunately. If more in-depth sourcing can be found, please add it and feel free to remove the prod. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

George Barasa

You moved this from main space to draft. I just approved it back to mainspace based on a bunch of book references I found online. Wanted to give you the heads up in case you wanted to go AfD with it. I am on the fence but believe its toes are just over the line of notability. Cheers! CNMall41 (talk) 05:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. No, I trust your judgement. I would have preferred a third in-depth source (that's my usual bar - 3), but I have to have severe misgivings about an article to not accept something passed through AfC. Thanks for your efforts over there at AfC, btw. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Laith Wallschleger

Onel5969, The article is well sourced by multiple RR and violates no COI. In my years on WP, I've never been accused of COI, nor have I ever violated it. Why didn't you contact me directly on my talk with any questions/concerns before moving the article to draft? You also didn't identify any specific concerns. Since you didn't, and now have my response, kindly restore the article on your own. Thanks. X4n6 (talk) 05:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, no. There are clear, indisputable, indications of COI with this subject. How do you know them? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but no - you may not make blanket assertions of "clear, indisputable indications of COI" without ever bothering to identify them. You need to explain the specific nature of your claim. So please identify what specific text in the article is either unsupported and/or fails either V, SOURCES or RS and I'll be glad to respond and address any legitimate issues. But the specious and nebulous AGF accusations need to stop. X4n6 (talk) 11:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, no I do not. We do not give out hints at how we spot UPE/COI so that these types of editors can learn how to circumvent them. I would simply request you explain your connection to the subject. I am surprised since you are a long-term editor, but there are indisputable clues that you have a COI with the article's subject. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Pinging some other experienced reviewers to take a look, if they have the time, Rosguill, Barkeep49 and Kudpung.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Your answer suggests you believe you're free to make claims which assume guilt, with no presumption of innocence? That's not only deeply troublesome, but violates AGF to its core. However, you are correct that I am a long time editor - actually, longer than you - just not as prolifically. And there is nothing in that long edit history to suggest COI. To the contrary, I've called out others for it. But I always explained my reasons. So kindly provide the policy/guidelines which will inform me that I've done it wrong by being transparent.

Beyond that, so as to not belabor this even more, I do not know the subject. I met the subject and others at an event where I met and cellphone photographed several notable actors/sports figures. I even contributed some of those photos with the subject to Commons and added two to the article. Because I had Googled the subject and discovered that despite lots of coverage, including mentions in several other WP articles, there was no subject article. So I chose to contribute one - and tried to write a good one from all the RS sources I found. That's it! No COI. No arrangement. No nothing! Just an editor trying to contribute to this project - just like you. But apparently, no good deed goes unpunished. Because there's always someone ready to make accusations. But thanks for pinging other editors. Hopefully, they'll see there's no there there. X4n6 (talk) 12:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

So you do have a relationship with the subject, however tangentially. As per WP:COI, "Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest." It also states, "Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to change an affected article's content." And btw, AGF goes both ways. But finally, your last answer clears up your connection. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but a brief encounter is hardly a relationship by any metric. I've had more of a "relationship" with you here than I had with the subject! But thanks for removing the tag. 13:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

It seems like this particular concern has been addressed, so while I want to acknowledge the ping I've not looked into this beyond seeing it has been moved back to mainspace and there is currently no COI tag on it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Sudhir S. Mehta

He's back... Certes (talk) 10:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Great. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Please don't delete the pages that i have created

Dear sir/Mam, Please don't delete the page of Brokpa, Drokpa Dard and shin , chulichan and Ganokh village as it is created by me and it is realible sources . When i was not login, I have did a edits from my ip address all are uncontroversial edits ,and i apologies and refrain from editing from my ip adress from now on , I promise and always will adhere to the wikepedia policies .Minaro123 (talk) 17:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC) Thank you 17:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure what happened on that one, feel free to remove the tag... Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Minaro123 - I have to really apologize for that. Again, not sure what happened, but I reverted those tags.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Healthcare payment

Please explain why this is "not ready for mainspace".

Also pinging AmirŞah who added the {{Notability}} tag without elaboration. ~Kvng (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Yeah, I was not specific enough in my note to the editor, my apologies. This is really a FORK of Medical billing, which has a section on payment. This should really be added in there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Medical billing is a US-specific topic. Draft:Healthcare payment is broader global topic pertaining to the economics of healthcare. It seems to be a useful piece that would stitch together Bundled payment, Capitation (healthcare), Medical billing and other topics. I don't see any argument for lack of notability so I have removed the tag. If you have nothing else, please restore this to mainspace per WP:DRAFTOBJECT ~Kvng (talk) 20:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

done. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Keep up the good fight

I see what you are doing and keep it up! I for example rescued an article Dawn Areospace. Getting rid of bad articles or cruft forces people to advance their skills. Ask me about air Cryogenic air (talk) 18:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Big Mouth seasons

You know, I was actually going to start expanding the season articles with production and critical reception sections today, until you abruptly undid everything I worked on yesterday. Thank you for that. GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 23:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome. In the future, if you wish to split out pages, the first thing I'd do is read WP:SPLIT, then, rather creating numerous uncited stubs and not working on them, I'd create a single draft article and develop it, then move it into mainspace once it passes WP:VERIFY and WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 05:46, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't have to pass that if its well over 50 episodes and I develop the season articles well enough. The good news is I can just rip the logged version and work on it again. At the time it was 4am and I didn't have the energy to continue at the time.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 00:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Everything has to pass WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:57, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

And I was going to get around adding citations to it the following day, but then the mass reverting happened. I understand you were doing it by the book though.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 08:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

The Lives of Winston Churchill and Alfred Milner

I would like to retrieve and repair this article. Can you send me instructions on how to do that? Thank you. Lord Milner (talk) 02:55, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion page info is shown below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Lord_Milner/sandbox/The_Lives_of_Winston_Churchill_and_Alfred_Milner&action=edit&redlink=1

Hi. You should ask the admin who deleted the article to draftify it for you. That said, I doubt there's any amount of repair you could do to that article to make it meet notability criteria, since it consisted mostly of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 05:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Eduardus Aditya

Hello Onel5969, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Eduardus Aditya, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Draftified in good faith after previous deletion; G4 does not apply. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:18, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for letting me know. I disagree however, it was not draftified as a result of the AfD, but after the AfD was decided as delete. Many times I CSD an article which has been deleted through AfD, and sometimes they get declined, with the notation, "substantially different...". Which I completely get, but since I can't compare the two, I let an admin take a look. However, that was not the case in this instance. I could see the two versions, and they were virtually identical. Regardless, thanks for your efforts on WP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Ichiko Ima

Hey hey, I just saw you added a notability tag to the article Ichiko Ima. Could you please elaborate what you mean with this? The article mentions several reliable sources, mentions awards the person won and how one of their manga series has sold over 5 million times. --Shikeishu (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure. To show notability, you need to have at least 3 references from independent, reliable, secondary sources which go in-depth about the subject. Right now, you do not have any. The best source is the first one, natasha.com, but I am unsure of the reliability of that site. Regardless, it's an interview, which is a primary source, and therefore does not go towards notability. It seems like this person should be notable, just needs better sourcing. Hope this helps. Feel free to ping me if you add refs and want me to take another look. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Think Solutions Engineering

You tagged this article for deletion because of notability. Currently, there are not three independent sources for this article. It will probably be several months before that occurs. What is the best course of action? Should the article be draftified until there are three independent sources? Or should the article be deleted and resubmitted once there are three independent sources? Wikithinksoln (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

If you think that at some point in the future you'll be able to show it meets notability, but cannot do so now, then yes, draftification is the best course of action. Just let me know and I'll move it there for you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:52, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, please move it there. Thank you. Wikithinksoln (talk) 19:57, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Explicit was kind enough to move it to draftspace for you. You can find it at Draft:Think Solutions Engineering. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:37, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Krakoa for deletion.

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Krakoa 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/Krakoa (3rd 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. Nekivik (talk) 08:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The Daily Sceptic notability

Hi, why did you add a notability template for The Daily Sceptic article? It has been covered in multiple secondary sources. Isi96 (talk) 13:58, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The current sourcing does not contain any in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

The fact-check pieces cited under the Content section from secondary sources such as AFP, Climate Feedback and Full Fact cover the website's claims in depth. The site has also been covered by The Times and The Daily Telegraph. Isi96 (talk) 14:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Again, nothing in-depth. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

There is more in-depth coverage of the site's content than its history (from the fact-check pieces I mentioned). Isi96 (talk) 14:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Career double play leaders

Hi - I'm puzzled by your removal of material from the lists of career double play leaders; the material is uncontroversial and not disputed, and consist mainly of basic examples. I'm curious to know what kind of sources you would want to have cited for such things - links to random box scores? (And even the box scores and game descriptions don't always go into such detail regarding the exact type of play, trajectory of the ball, etc.) Also, the descriptions of the positions are so basic that even the official rules of baseball don't bother with them, and presume that readers understand the basic concepts. (The official rules define pitchers and catchers, but no other positions, though they are mentioned frequently.) As for the notes on single-season leaders, etc., I already added relevant links for those items. Some of the material was simply carried over from other related lists, where it had been present for a couple of years. MisfitToys (talk) 09:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Please read WP:VERIFY and WP:OR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I've read them; I'd still like to know what material you believe needs citation/verification. The articles for first baseman and shortstop, for instance, present basic descriptions of the positions and how they are played, but there's been no controversy or complaint about the content in over 15 years; the only sourced material regards historical events and statistical records, not basic explanations. MisfitToys (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I really do not have time to review 15 year old articles. WP:OSE is not a very strong argument. This is supposed to an encyclopedia, and some of us take WP:VERIFY seriously. There are statements made in those articles which are clearly WP:SYNTH, like in List of Major League Baseball career double plays as a shortstop leaders, where it says, "Because of the high number of ground outs, shortstops and second basemen typically record far more double plays than players at any other position except first base." You many know that through your love of the game, but none of the sources say that. And I would posit that that's not even a completely correct statement. A better statement would be, "Because the vast majority of double plays involve putting out the runners at 2nd and 1st bases, ....". But my point is, it is not sourced. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Snia Viscosa Tower

Hi, how is it going? I honestly do not understand why you moved this page to the draftspace. We had already discussed about it, and the page already satisfies notability as the building appears on the catalogo generale dei beni culturali… plus, it has multiple independent and reliable sources. I also went over the draft for Cadtle Devachan, adding additional sources. Could you please check if that’s alright and possibly provide feedback or move it back to the mainspace? Thank you! Plumbago Capensis (talk) 11:45, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

It currently does not come close to satisfying notability criteria. As I explained on your talk page, it needs several (usually 3 is a good frame of reference) in-depth sources. Currently it has zero (one is a simple mention, and one is not a reliable source). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Alright, yet this is irrelevant as it appears on the catalogo generale dei beni culturali (equivalent to the US NRHP, for instance). It should thus be moved back.--Plumbago Capensis (talk) 19:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Where does it say that the catalogo generale dei beni culturali is equivalent to the NRHP? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

You mentioned that if a building is listed on a national register, then it satisfies notability. The catalogo is the national register for cultural heritage for Italy. You can find additional information on the Internet. Plumbago Capensis (talk) 21:32, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I also do not understand how you can state that the article has no sources: in the external links section there are links to the national catalog and the regional catalog (where the building is deeply covered). In the references section there are links to the ordine degli architetti (order of the architects, a formal association of architects in Milan), another page from the regional catalog, and a final source I have just added. This amounts to at least three independent and reliable sources. Thank you again.--Plumbago Capensis (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, how is it going? Could you please review the two articles you moved to the draftspace (Snia Viscosa Tower and Castle Devachan)? --Plumbago Capensis (talk) 16:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Deprodding of Tracy Harpster

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Tracy Harpster, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. Instead, I have started a deletion discussion at Talk:Tracy_Harpster, which you may comment on. I have explained my reasons for doing so there. Thanks! DrGvago (talk) 12:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. The issue is that he gets lots of mentions, but neither in the article, or in the additional sources you provided on the talk page does there appear to be a single in-depth source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:26, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Good Morning, here anyway :) - May I suggest we discuss on the article talk page so it is easier for others to find and weigh in? DrGvago (talk) 12:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure thing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Louis Zinkin's notability

Good afternoon/morning, your template about Louis' academic notability, could possibly come off, please? I discover that his 2008 posthumous article on the Self has 53 citations. That's rather good don't you find? Po Mieczu (talk) 14:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I saw that, and no, 53 is not a very good citation numbers. Depending on the specialty of the academic, we look at numbers in the triple digits, and multiple ones of that, to show notability. He has one, on Malignant Mirroring, which is solid, but that's it. I'll ping another editor who is like the guru of academic articles, to see their thoughts. Hi David Eppstein, sorry to bug you, but could you take a look at this and give your thoughts on whether there is enough there to pass WP:NSCHOLAR? Thanks in advance. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Not enough citations for WP:PROF#C1, but as the author of multiple books, he could be notable through WP:AUTHOR if multiple reviews of those books were published. And as the subject of non-paid obituaries in a major newspaper and a trade newsletter, there's also a borderline case for WP:GNG notability. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you as always. That was pretty much my assessment as well. Po Mieczu, are there multiple reviews of his books? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Schilling Ranch Historic District

I noticed your new article Schilling Ranch Historic District (in my notices i think because it linked to some basic general article I started), and have made a few edits. It looks like you were encountering fact that many of the National Register documents which used to be hosted at the National Park Service no longer exist there. FYI, you don't need to go to Wayback machine archives; instead it is better to directly cite them at their permanent locations at NARA. Migration of all the docs to NARA is a good thing; NARA is and always will be competent at serving them up. I'm directly adding NARA link to this article, but in general instructions on searching NARA and example NARA referencing is at wp:NRHPHELP.

About using one big reference or biblography entry, and citing different pages from it, I am not actually good at that. No doubt my changes to your article could be fixed up by an editor who uses that kind of formatting... I myself just cite the big reference repeatedly without page numbers. But I think my changes in that respect are in the right direction, don't you? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 06:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

No, that's brilliant. Thank you. I was unaware of NARA searching. And in dealing with the NHRP articles I'm working on this will be invaluable. Regarding citation style, as long as it's consistent throughout the article, and can pass WP:VERIFY, all's good. What's really good about it, is that Commons did not have any photos of the site, so now I can upload some. Thanks again. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Good. Now I see specific advice at wp:Citing sources, on "short citations", and I will revise in the article again to place the page number type references in a section named "Notes" using the reflist template there rather.

And bad, sort of. About photos uploading, I do see advantage to your being able to see the photos in the NARA version (like if u would see the accompanying photos in the NPS separate photos document which always did exist separately, and always should have been linked by you anyhow). Part of NARA being competent is that they combine them into one document. Including that seeing them informs your text writing. Including that seeing them informs your finding photos already at Commons tagged as "Schiller" or "Winchester Ranch", say, as showing what you need or not.

But the photos being available at NARA does not mean they are in the public domain. Like for the photos when they were in a separate photos document at the National Park Service website, almost all nomination-accompanying photos are NOT public domain, with the exception being photos actually taken by a U.S. government employee in the course of their public employment (common only in the oldest NRHP listings) or contractor thereto (e.g. a HABS photographer, and sometimes also in older NRHP listings the NRHP nominations' accompanying photos are HABS photos).

I just went to Commons to try to find any Winchester Ranch photos per above, and see you actually already uploaded photos from the NARA document. And, checking the NARA document to confirm, yes, they appear to be taken by Louise Henderson, who is a private person who lives at a given address in Wilcox, Arizona and who gives her phone number in Section 11. She was likely working for the owner of the NRHP property, and the photos' copyright is owned by her or the owner if it was contract work, and it is NOT in the public domain. So your uploads to Commons will have to be removed, as copyvios, sorry, and I will start the process to have them removed (with reference to this Talk page discussion), please don't take offense.

Note that William Collins, the other author/editor of the document is a state employee (of the Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, i.e. the AZ SHPO), but if he took the photos they would still not be public domain: state employees works are not automatically PD. To be honest, it is quite possible that both Henderson and Collins might believe that the photos are now PD, and it is almost certain that neither of them would mind taking a necessary step to put them into the PD if you asked them. A few times I or an editor like you that I have interacted with has in fact gone on to get them to take the step (use the wp:OTRS service, of Wikipedia volunteers, for them to provide identity verification and to give their release to PD or by similar open license like CC-BY-SA which Commons can accept, by confidential email correspondence with the OTRS volunteers). Including getting hundreds of great photos in Puerto Rico released, by establishing that one whole series was taken by a contractor working for the Puerto Rico SHPO to document all the really old parish churches in Puerto Rico.

It is entirely understandable that you are probably not aware of any of this. IMHO the National Park Service has been incompetent in not communicating properly to the public about the photos. The NPS itself gets copyright permission for the NPS to use the photos themselves, by terms in the NRHP application. And it jolly well should further require that the copyright be released to PD or similar license, but it does not. And for years the NPS actually used the term "public domain" erroneously in or around links to the photos, which was highly misleading. FYI there is some coverage about copyright in wp:NRHPHELP which I wrote and added to over the years because this has come up again and again. :(

--Doncram (talk,contribs) 15:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

FYI, i placed copyvio templates to the 5 photos at Commons with long message as follows (recording here because msg there may itself be deleted soon):
::This and related photos taken from the NRHP registration document for w:Schilling Ranch Historic District are NOT in the public domain. The assertion displayed by template {{PD-USGov}} which was placed on this page, states "This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code," but that is NOT TRUE. In particular the photos were taken by a private person and copyright belongs to them (or possibly to the owner of the property or other party if the work was done under contract). Note the template further states "Note: This only applies to original works of the Federal Government and not to the work of any individual U.S. state, territory, commonwealth, county, municipality, or any other subdivision", consistent with the fact that if the photos were provided by the Arizona state employee also involved in the NRHP nomination, they would not be in the public domain. The completed NRHP nomination document does seem very Federal-like, and the National Park Service did obtain copyright permission in the NRHP application process for the Federal government to post the photos on their own websites, but it simply does not release photos into public domain. See guidance at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places/Resources#NRHP_nomination_forms and perhaps elsewhere in that WikiProject NRHP help-type document, and one can see many previous discussions in archives of w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places. I have advised uploader User:Onel5969 in section on their Wikipedia Talk page of the non-PD-ness of these photos and that I would start this process to have the photos removed. The uploader is welcome of course to disagree, which I gather will stop this speedy-deletion and turn it into a regular deletion process in which they can make comments and ask questions. (This applies to File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.001.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.002.Rock House.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.003.Hay Barn.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.004.Bunk House.jpg, and File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.005.Tack Room.jpg.)

To be clear, I regard this as no fault of your own. However, have you uploaded other photos previously that might be subject to same issue? Because while specifics may differ, those should be checked too, and I would help if there can be an efficient process to do so. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 16:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for both of your above messages. And the answer is, perhaps. I'll look through my Commons contribs today and tomorrow and self-nom if I find any. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps? I came here to give notice (already given at your Commons userpage) that I started a multiple file deletion request at Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded from npgallery.nps.gov or catalog.archives.gov which lists more than 30 photos uploaded by you so far. It includes all that I can see with text string "npgallery" in your contributions history. Unfortunately I see some more, such as photos of Eagar School, that can't be identified that way. It would in fact be helpful if you would identify some or all additional NRHP photos that were uploaded by you. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

When I said perhaps, it's because I've uploaded quite a few photos, and was not sure which were from NRHP sources, and if so, which of those did not fall under PD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Noted. I added more apparent ones to the list at Commons, and am trying to stop on this topic and get out into RL. It would be good if you could comment there and/or add more items. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 20:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Will do, am just now back on WP after RL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

And no rush to reply to this, but as I said, I'm going to go through the 55 NRHP articles I've done, and check on the photos and text. But question, as I started to do this, the file File:AllentownBridge-1.jpg was uploaded, but it was simply published by the Park Service, without any attribution. So, if in researching the photos I've uploaded, if there is no attribution, that means it is simply PD by virtue of being published by .gov? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

File:AllentownBridge-1.jpg, which is a nice photo, is used in the Allentown Bridge article (and also in List of bridges on the National Register of Historic Places in Arizona), although not in the corresponding NRHP county list-article, National Register of Historic Places listings in Apache County, Arizona (where a different pic contributed to Commons in 2015 is used, instead).

The Commons page for it, created by you in 2017 up to this version, gives its source location in the NPS's Focus system ( it had been at https://focus.nps.gov/AssetDetail?assetID=bb33d783-b4d7-4351-ae5f-b16af9099c83 ) and includes a PD template.

I see in the article's reference to the document supporting NRHP listing is in this case a link to a filled out HABS/HAER form, and that the Wayback machine archive includes both the form and the photo. That form is all very Federal looking, like NRHP forms are. HABS/HAER is a Federal program which started before the NRHP program, and a high percentage of its photos were taken by Federally-employed professional photographers such as the great Jet Lowe, or by photographers working on contract to the NPS, which puts them into PD status. And maybe road bridges, especially if they are on U.S. routes, might be Federally-owned like U.S. Forest Service fire lookouts are, and photographed by U.S. Department of Transportation people?

BUT NO, SORRY, it is not that simple. The HABS/HAER form writer and the photographer of the accompanying photo, for this bridge and literally hundreds more in Arizona, Colorado, and other states, was Clayton Fraser, a private person based in Loveland, Colorado, who operated "FraserDesign" which seems to have usually just been himself. I am afraid he was working under contract with the departments of transportation of the states of Arizona and Colorado, rather than under Federal contract. He definitely did work for states directly, but there's maybe a small chance he also did Federal contract work. And actually I am willing/interested to try to call him directly to clarify, though he's pretty old now; that photo was from 1987. The photo appears to be NOT PD, and I will add it to the list at Commons deletion discussion. It and many others could become PD or CC-BY-SA if Clayton Fraser and/or the states are willing to correspond with wp:OTRS (oh, that is wp:VRT now) volunteers and release them all as a group. Clayton Fraser and the states would probably be perfectly willing to do that. That's really worth trying; it really would improve hundreds of articles if we could use photos from the years of their HABS/HAER or NRHP listings that Clayton Fraser prepared. It would be a productive outcome of this discussion between us, if we could engineer release of all of these.

And, by making the photo available at a URL within the NPS pages, the NPS did not "publish" it and put it into the public domain. See wp:NRHPHELP's section about "Images" where explanation has existed, which I just expanded. (Briefly, you didn't see the disclaimer which governs.) --Doncram (talk,contribs) 10:09, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Again, thanks for your thoughtful, detailed reply. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible copyright violations and plagiarism of text in NRHP articles

Also, I suppose it is possible you have misunderstood also about copyright status of NRHP nomination text. Glancing at text in Eagar School article, some appeared to me possibly to have been copy-pasted from the NRHP nomination text. Quick searching on just one passage, I find that, while the wording has been somewhat changed, that the passage is likely in violation of copyright policy and, pretty-clearly-IMHO, is plagiarized (i.e. it is "too close paraphrasing"). "Too close paraphrasing", in simple terms, means that the author has not been given due credit for their writing, their wording, which is required in addition to giving due credit for the information provided.

Copyrighted text from NRHP nomination of Eagar School: "Apparently well-assured that the bonds would eventually be approved and sold, Copeland went to work digging the basement, pouring the foundation, and laying the brick walls with bricks burned locally and supplied by Francis Day from his kilns beside the Little Colorado River."

Article text at Eagar School: "Copeland began digging the basement in advance of the bond issuance, then continued pouring the foundation, and beginning construction of the brick structure.[3]: 10  He utilized bricks from the Francis and Simpson Day brickyard, located on the banks of the nearby Little Colorado River.[4]"

The fact IMHO of plagiarism in this is not changed by your making an effort to give the author credit by giving page-specific references pointing to their writing. It would be changed by quoting. Or it would be changed by summarizing in your own words, if you would read the source text, turn away from it and write. It appears likely that you copy-pasted the source text, then made edit changes to it, which is a pretty good recipe for achieving plagiarism. A rule of mine that I believe should be generally considered, is that what you write must be shorter than the source, it must be a summary. In part because it usually is nigh impossible to convey all the information in a source passage in truly different words. Especially if there is any jargon or technical wording or indeed any expertise shown by the original writer, which you cannot possibly put into completely different wording without signicantly changing the meaning (and likely making mistakes of fact).

I confess that I do myself sometimes copy-past source text and then edit it down, but I am worried about doing so, and I am able to be careful by practiced ways. I happen to have professional experience in real life legal proceedings about whether text is plagiarized or not, and I have attended multiple trainings, and I have read widely and discussed, on copyright issues. In Wikipedia I actually like how we are all equal, and that degrees or certifications or outside experience or other credentials do not matter, but here I feel like invoking experience is relevant, in advising you not ever to copy-paste then edit.

Given a body of work you've done in NRHP articles that is perhaps questionable, right now I don't know what is to be done about that. An extreme treatment would be to open a copyvio/plagiarism investigation process and proceed to identify and delete everything you've contributed. I don't want that, but I am trying to say this is serious, and your actions put a burden on other editors to investigate and ensure some adequate resolution.

I am basically sorry to be assessing this, instead of happily going along and collaborating positively with you on articles like the Schilling Ranch Historic District one (where I started merely trying to help out positively on logistics of short citations and NRHP reference formatting and the like). And trying to address the photos and now to be raising issues about text has already consumed a lot, really a lot, of my time yesterday and today, and I am not happy with the prospect that all this might be very negative, not something that I want in my life right now.. :(

sincerely, --Doncram (talk,contribs) 19:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that was before I was familiar with the {{PD-notice}} - Public domain attribution tag. I'll go through all the articles and make sure that where needed, that is added, or else delete the text. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your replies, and I'll come back later about a question u ask above. I very much appreciate your willingness stated here. But just identifying the source as PD does not address the too-close paraphrasing / plagiarism issue. I suggest maybe ur addressing just one or a few articles, and then discussing, first. It is not a rush, as long as there is some programme going. Over and out. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 21:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Now stop and go do RL stuff. I've wasted enough of your time today. I'll write some questions I have tomorrow, and when you have time you can answer them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Doncram. So I've thought about your comments above. I also want you to know that I take copyvios very seriously (which you can tell by the number of my G12 and revdel requests). While I can not say that I've never copy-pasted and then edited the text, I can say that I rarely use that tactic, for exactly the reasons you describe above. That said, I thought I had paraphrased enough to not be seen as "too-close paraphrasing". Reasonable folks can disagree. I ran an earwig on the Eager example you used above and got a pretty clean report. One thing I do have to question you about is your statement, "But just identifying the source as PD does not address the too-close paraphrasing / plagiarism issue." This could be my misunderstanding of dealing with copyvio issues, but when I send them Revdel or G12, I've been told by numerous admins that if there is that PD notice on the page, there is no copyright violation. In fact, there have been entire pages simply cut and paste on some articles (including at least 2 NHRP articles by other editors), that I've queried admins about and been told they are not copyvio. Several times I've G12'd articles, not realizing they were from PD sites, and had the speedy declined. At Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Public-domain sources, it states, "A public domain source may be summarized and cited in the same manner as for copyrighted material, but the source's text can also be copied verbatim into a Wikipedia article. If text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page" (emphasis mine). Wikipedia:Copyright violations says, "...material from public domain sources or other compatibly licensed sources may also be used in accordance with the copyright policy, provided correct attribution is given". In Wikipedia:Copyrights, in regards to US government sources, it does state, "However, not every work republished by the U.S. government falls into this category. The U.S. government can own copyrights that are assigned to it by others–for example, works created by contractors." Again, using the Eager example above, are you saying that even those this is a U.S. government document, published by the NPS, because it was written by someone from Ryden Architects, that it is not covered under US gov PD? And I'm not trying to argue, I'm simply trying to understand, so that I can go back and correct any mistakes I made, as well as preventing me from making the same mistakes in the future. Has there been consensus in a discussion about this anyplace? Regardless, I appreciate you taking this time with me, and look forward to your comments. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate your response. Basically, the statement "If text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed...." is correct, while what follows there, an assertion it is okay to give attribution merely by use of a PD template or similar, is just wrong. You're not wrong to point out the statement; the previous apparent consensus in Wikipedia guidance is just completely out of whack with normal use of the English language and the plain meaning of "plagiarism". Early in Wikipedia's history, it was considered okay and good for Wikipedia to capture all content of various sources by pasting it in, not violating copyright, and then "mercilessly edit" or some such phrase. This was poor practice, IMHO and with agreement of others, to put in others' text without keeping it in quotes, and only remove the quotes when sensible attribution of the authors for their writing is no longer appropriate (if the material had been adequately summarized and/or restated).

Some background on where I am coming from, within Wikipedia writing: I encountered the unfortunate-IMHO practice in articles about ships produced by enthusiasts in the wp:SHIPS wikiproject, who manufactured articles with DANFS text. In some ways, that was okay, allowing persons without much ability to write to participate in the Great Endeavor. But it was poor in practice for others following who were actually trying to develop articles to Good and Featured status, etc. It brought on a lot of hate and more when I objected to the practice and suggested more clear templating of what the text was. I restricted myself to comments in Featured Article nominations, where it was gradually understood and accepted that all traces of the actually-idiosyncratic DANFS text and style needed to be removed, or fully quoted, else the articles did not deserve being identified as Wikipedia (the collective author of us editors)'s best work. The conflict also directly led to creation and development of the guideline on plagiarism, mainly by one good woman whose username escapes me, who unfortunately died in the last year or two.

I don't know what is current practice in wp:SHIPS for their run-of-the-mill articles, but in wp:NRHP such practice never took hold, and I and others gained clarity on the actual copyright status of NRHP documents. I do recall one editor in favor of such practice importing work of eloquent National Park Service author Laura Souilliere Harrison (or some such name) to create one article in particular, which rubbed me and others badly; it took a lot of time and effort to rework that, and to prevent that practice from spreading. I actually worked ahead to create articles for 10 or 20 or so NPS places that Harrison had written about, using normal style of writing plus explicit quotes showing off Harrison's way with words. And, unfortunately there have occasionally been complete copy-paste jobs created in spurts that had to be addressed, where new-to-the-topic-area editors assumed incorrectly that NRHP documents were PD. Many of these were simply deleted as copyvios. Some other NRHP editors have gone too far at times, IMHO, in terming sensible-in-my-view actual quotes as both plagiarism (correct quotes simply cannot be that) and copyright violation (while selective quoting is normal and acceptable and not copyvio).

There is in fact some gray area about what amount of quoting is "selective" and appropriate (copyright wise). Copyright violation is something legally determined by the US Supreme Court with somewhat vague guidelines, including that probably quoting 10 percent of a given work is okay, quoting more is not. That has been transmogrified into some Wikipedia editors incorrectly thinking that if a quote which is far from 10 percent of an article or book, if that makes up 10 percent of a Wikipedia article, the Wikipedia article is copyvio and must be deleted with use of RevDel. The issue of plagiarism matters a lot in academia, and judgment has to be applied to the extent of implied claim of credit for writing ... a journal article submission "for career credit" must be squeaky clean; a handout in a class where no authorship is claimed, need not be so.

I took time to remember these miscellaneous things and write this, not sure if this fully responds. It comes down to a judgment, apparently inconsistent with some dated and inappropriate-in-my-view Wikipedia policy, that "we" just don't want copied passages loose in articles. In practice "we" see the only sensible way to work is to keep track of what is copied vs. what is not by use of quotes, and it is not okay to have co-mingled(sp?) material. The posting of a PD template is not sufficient to provide original authors with credit due for their writing, and it actually signifies that an article is problematic. Where "we" includes me, certainly, and IMO "we" essentially includes wp:NRHP (tho some past or current editors could possibly disagree, but I only know of some past ones), and I am pretty sure "we" includes other WikiProjects and swaths of work, and "we" includes all editors involved in Featured article authoring and reviewing, and IMO "we" should include all of Wikipedia. (I dunno, should I myself go back, and seek revision of the contrary guidance? It takes a lot to work up proposals and RFCs and follow all the process necessary, with considerable doubt about whether an initative can succeed, but maybe it is time.)

BTW, one great longterm-but-not-now-active NRHP contributor, when new, ran into some of this stuff and ran into me, and they found the discussion productive, I guess, as they forever left it showing on their Talk page.

What do you think, now? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 02:24, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Wow that's a lot to unpack, give me a day or two to respond. But I am grateful for the time and consideration you obviously put into you response. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:33, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, so I just finished unpacking what you said above. Whew. That's a lot to digest. It's going to take me some time to go back through the 55 articles and check them out. Some, like Oasis Court, I'll start with, because based on interactions with some admins, the sparse text was difficult to paraphrase, so I simply copied and used the PD footnote template. Since I had questioned it on other articles, and been told that it was okay. I think you know I feel about the project, and my hopes that someday everyone on here will think of it as an encyclopedia, so I'll take the time to review each one. Feel free to take a look if you want to and let me know which ones you feel are okay, and which you feel are problematic. And again, thanks for taking so much of your time on this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I've found the long-ago (back in July 2008!) discussions I referred to, and sort of summarized from about what i think "we" want. I was in fact referring to the following traumatic/difficult discussion, which now I've gone and looked up. You don't have to read it all, but to me it was very high drama and seeing it brings back a combo of apprehension and relief and more emotions. Relevant here is the pretty clear statement if I do say so myself, including additional legitimate reasoning I wasn't yet recalling, about what and why "we" should not want to have PD text "incorporated", is in (and you might want to skim) my fairly brief initial statement in 1. (which appears also in 2.) and in 3.

See (some of) the following:

1. Featured Article (FAR) review of of Iowa-class battleship topic, where I gave a statement and then there was angry discussion which was later copied in full to the Talk page and edited down within the FAR itself by User:Franamax

2.Full discussion at Talk page

3.This draft version of wp:plagiarism guideline as of July 2008

To you or anyone else, if you read through these, it probably does not come across as hugely traumatic or uncivil, but there was real anger/outrage there on part of two wp:SHIPS editors who were angling towards something drastic, like having me booted from Wikipedia, I understood at the time. I was grateful then to User:Franamax for entering, in response to my short notice given at Talk page of the wp:Plagiarism guideline draft, and how extremely helpful they were, including in their direct defense of me in response to "accusations of accusations of plagiarism" and to accusations of wp:CANVAS violation, which were in fact very serious accusations at the time. Franamax had already contributed, and then contributed a lot more, to development of the guideline. And, I see they are gone from this world (they died in 2012, and they are a "he", contrary to my incorrect recollection that it was a different editor, a "she", who passed away in 2021 or so.  :(

You are very clear that you created exactly 55 NRHP articles, are those listed out somewhere that I could see? --Doncram (talk,contribs) 08:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

If you go to my user page and scroll down I have lists of the articles I've created, separated by categories. Under "Articles on geography" is a sub-cat, "National Register of Historic Places". I do not update the list with any regularity, but I did update it on 1/12/23.

Regarding your other links, thanks for providing those. I agree WP can be a contentious place. Rather than continuing to create new articles, for a bit I'll go back through the ones I've created and see what needs to be done. I'll be tackling them in alphabetical order. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Two questions

1. I deorphaned the Marc Burty as well as putting more information about this person with extra more citations. Would this article be better as a Category:French musician stubs?

2. How does one put an identifier in Wikidata? I can't for some reason. This has been solved.

Thank you in advance. Komitsuki (talk) 07:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, it's not a stub, so that wouldn't be appropriate. But you could add it to: Category:French musician. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I followed your advice and thank you again. Komitsuki (talk) 10:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

MasterChef India (Hindi season 7)

Hello @Onel5969, I hope you're doing well. I have unreviewed a page you have reviewed. It was poorly sourced with copyvio Episode summary section. Thanks for your consideration. C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 14:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. The copyvio thing is disconcerting, since earwig did not give me that report. Thanks again. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

'notability' tag for pages on 'Raymond Ko Mun Cheung' and 'Ng Kwok Chun'

hi there ! i see you have added the 'notability' tag to the pages for 'Raymond Ko Mun Cheung' and 'Ng Kwok Chun' , can you please explain what you want me to do to improve them ? all data within was pain stakeingly gathered from archived newspaper articles on their arrest, trial and executions (links in articles). there is no other source on the internet for the subject the pages are written on and i highly doubt there are any books on the subject either. in other words, the archied news paper articles are the only source available, and since they are actual news paper reports from the time of the events i am sure they are 100% accurate and trust worth too. i await your advice, thanks WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 17:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BIO1E. While these events happened, in their current form, they do not show that they pass notability criteria. Additionally, if they were to be kept, they should probably be named something like "The execution of...", since their own notability is their deaths. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

thank you for the quick reply ! I have created a few of these pages that fall under the Category of 'Hong Kong drug traffickers', the reason i created them is they were notable for being executed in Singapore after being caught trafficking relativly small amounts of drugs via Changi Airport in the late 80s / early 90s. Thier cases could be considered unique as Hong Kong was quite affluent compared to the rest if Asia at that time and i thought they deserved their own article for historic reasons, as well as providing some background to the anti narcotics efforts of Singaporean authorities at that time.

Looking elsewhere in wikipedia, there are many articles on American criminals who were executed that arguable are not notable either , such as Duncan McKenzie (murderer) .... as a way of comparison ;) WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

also, i disagree with your observation that "their own notability is their deaths" ... i would argue that the method of detection by authorities and circumstances of their arrest make for interesting reading , also the various legal arguments presented in each trial regarding the legal definition of 'import' are worth recording for posterity.

I have written other articles where its been the largest drug bust / first drug mule caught in Changi airport / boyfriend and girlfriend team caught / unique legal arguments / landmark legal ruling / etc .... so as to have some thing relevant and unique to present in each wiki page, and conversely i have left not bothered to write a wiki page for each and every row i added to the Capital_punishment_in_Singapore#Drug_trafficking_cases page, as many follow a similar narrative or there is scant detail available to write a compelling wiki page WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 21:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I think that many of these articles fall under the WP:NOTNEWS category. You might be better served by creating a single over-arching list article of these folks, with brief blurbs about their arrest, trial and execution. Unless there is something compelling about their case, I do not see them as notable. And definitely the folks themselves are not notable, but their executions/trials might be. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

to be honest my fear is if i do that someone else will raise an issue with it, so with all due respect i thinki will leave the pages as is and if they get removed from wikipedia so be it, at least i tried .... also i disagree with your opinion the people in the articles are not notable, each was some ones son / daughter who had their life ended early, some were barely over the age of 18 when they were caught & virtually guarantied to be sentenced to death WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 08:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

That's tragic, not notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Bluff Fort

Good evening, I made some minor corrections to make the tone more neutral. I think it's o.k. now. If you agree, can you remove the tag? I don't want to do it by myself. Thanks, Ronavni (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. The article is full of commentary, like, "the end of a long and difficult journey", "normal paved roads (in the terms of that time)", and "As mentioned, in April 1880 they arrived at the site they began to settle – Bluff Fort!". In addition, there is a problem with the notability of the article's subject. Currently, there is not a single in-depth source from a reliable, secondary, independent reference. You should have several (3's a good number to aim for). Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and hard work

Thanks for your help and hard work in "reviewing" new articles. Flibbertigibbets (talk) 18:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. You're welcome. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Ernesto Erkoreka plaza

Hello! I moved Ernesto Erkoreka plaza back to mainspace after expanding it. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 16:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Marked it reviewed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Heinrich Philipp Bossler

Hello Onel5969,

I have added the requested evidence in the article on Heinrich Philipp Bossler.

It would be great if you could do the review so that the article can go online again.

Many thanks

Greetings --Hector et Achilleus (talk) 20:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Requesting help regarding Draft:Candy (Indian web series)

Please have a look. I see that you have reviewed my article creation. But an editor moved the article to draft space. Please help. Twinkle1990 (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I never reviewed this article, so not sure why you think I did. However, looking at the draft's history, I would suggest that you refrain from using terms like vandalism, which is a personal attack since the other editor's edits certainly were not vandalism. Throwing terms like that around could get you blocked from editing. I suggest you begin a dialogue with that editor on the draft's talk page, and ask them to expand on their concerns with the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. I will do as you have suggested. Twinkle1990 (talk) 03:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969 sorry to bother again. You have reviewed Dharavi Bank (2022 web series) on 13 Deecember 2022 and didn't tag anything about notability of the web series. The same user is tagging notability whereas the web series has enough SIGCOV. Whiteout refbombing I am contributing media, TV show, Film, actors article. Please save the Dharavi Bank (2022 web series) dispute. Thanking you for your endeavors: Twinkle1990 (talk) 12:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

A couple of questions

Hello @Onel5969, I have a few minor inquiries.

1. In the "Capture" section of the Matteo Messina Denaro article, would you consider the sentence "His arrest comes exactly 30 years after that of Riina, who was taken into custody on January 15, 1993, also in Palermo." to be an unnecessary piece of trivia? Or would a mention of the tidbit in any reliable source covering Denaro's arrest be enough for it to warrant it being added to the article? On a related note, should I not feel the slightest hesitation when removing details such as "Ando was born a few minutes before his twin brother in 1941 in Osaka, Japan." (see Tadao_Ando#Early_life)

2. When exactly would one be justified in removing the {globalize} maintenance tag such as the one in the Gag order article?

Thank you! Mooonswimmer 19:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

In answer to the first part of #1, I would leave that, as long as the sources support that fact. The two were connected, and that's a pretty neat little coincidence. The second part is no, you should not feel bad about removing it, that's your prerogative as an editor. If the removal is contested, then as per WP:BRD, discuss it on the talk page. Personally, I would not remove it, as it establishes that he was the older twin. Regarding #2, hmmmm... that's a good question. For which I do not have a good answer. While it is not simply focused on a particular region, like the U.S. or Europe, more than half the article is about those two regions. It now includes Asia and Australia, but has nothing regarding Africa or South America. I think it would be better for you to post that question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. Hope these help. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

thanks

Hi @Onel5969, Thanks for reviewing my articles. Monhiroe (talk) 08:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Tetsuya Yamagami

The suspect of Abe's assassination isn't really only known for the assassination itself as the suspect's personal life as a shukyo nisei is a very notable topic in Japan. Yes, it is the assassination which triggered the discussion, but at least the suspect is no longer known for just allegedly committing a murder. The assassination of Shinzo Abe is already over 10,000 words, as per Wikipedia:Article size it's reasonable to split it, and the suspect section is obviously the best candidate. I have no problem to use a sub-page of the assassination articles for the suspect section, but thank you for removing all of my additional edits about the suspect which were all sourced. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 14:28, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

And you even removed my edits in the "Examination of dissolving the Unification Church" section of the assassination article. Be it edit conflict or not, I do not appreciate you wholesale revert without discussion. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 14:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I was in the process of leaving a message on your talk page, but I'll leave it here. Other than the two concerns I mentioned in the edit summary, which you make a very good argument against, there are two larger issues. First, the redirect clearly states, "This is a redirect from a title that is in draft namespace at Draft:Tetsuya Yamagami, so please do not create an article from this redirect (unless moving a ready draft here). You are welcome to improve the draft article while it is being considered for inclusion in article namespace." Second, and even larger (but can be corrected quite easily), is that you did not provide correct attribution as per WP:SPLIT and Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not going to edit a draft for an on-going event. If you insist to block the split whatsoever, then I will keep it in the assassination page, even though the earlier we split, the easier for future maintenance as the suspect section will bulge even more during the indictment. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 14:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't insist on anything. I explained to you the issues with what you did. There are remedies for all of them. For instance, you could split the article, provide the correct attribution as required by policy, and then request a histmerge for the draft to the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

As I said, you just reverted everything I wrote. You made no attempt to merge my new edits into the assassination article. When another user suggested the split in the talk page, you didn't bother to join the discussion but just reverted everything when the split happened. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 14:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

And as I said, what you did, violated WP policy, and I've given you instructions on how to rectify that. Not going to argue with you. Any more non-constructive comments left on my page will simply be deleted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

If I moved everything I just wrote about the suspect to the draft, what would happen? Would it be reverted by you again. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 15:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I never said to move it to the draft (although you could do that, and then request the redirect to be deleted to make room for a move to mainspace). You are not a new editor, please re-read my statement above (at 14:48), it tells you exactly what you could do, and is relatively easy to accomplish. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:12, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I have to be more upfront, what I am having problem with is your handling of this roll back. I want an explanation if this is intentional to remove my edit or just an accident during your removal of the excerpt added by another editor. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 15:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

And I'll be just as upfront. I couldn't care less what you want. It's been explained to you. Several times. And now, at this point, this conversation is pointless. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:27, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

I acknowledge my mistake of not using the draft, I just want an explanation of your last roll back in the assassination article which also removed my edit. That's all I want to know. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 16:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Someone's edit, not sure who's, broke the syntax on several of the references. I restored the article to the last stable version. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Circus Bazaar Magazine

Hello, I see you marked Circus Bazaar Magazine as reviewed today. Could I ask you to take another look? It was declined four times in draft for the same article creator, and then moved to main space today by a new editor. As noted at creator's talk page, it's almost entirely sourced by the magazine itself, WP:COUNTERPUNCH and WP:IMDB. Thanks, 2A01:4C8:B3:B050:517C:CAFE:2E5C:C1C7 (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Review the article Mangalore Amateur Radio Club

Mangalore Amateur Radio Club article nominated to merge kindly stop the merge. Added more reliable sources. ChiK (talk) 17:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. That's not the way it works. And the additional sources still do not rise to the level of meeting notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:08, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Onel5969, added the live link, which contains the founder's name and other exact contents; please review. Thank you 

Wrt to Draft:PhysicsWallah

Hey,

I noticed that you moved PhysicsWallah from the main namespace (ns:0) to the Draft: PhysicsWallah namespace. Could you outline exactly what the issues are with the article?

-- Sohom Datta (talk) 17:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it's UPE/COI editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Given that I've removed a lot of the promotional material and generally audited and replaced the unreliable sources (as of my last edit), can I move it back into main space, or should I go through the Article for Creation process ? Sohom Datta (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

(Also noting that I'm not the original creator and have no COI/UPE relations with the company that is the subject of the article) Sohom Datta (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I knew you weren't the article's creator, but it should still go through AfC, particularly since it's been deleted through AfD before. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah, okay that does make sense, thanks for the advice :) Sohom Datta (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Blood Bath at Red Falls

Hi! I've noticed you put a notability tag to Blood Bath at Red Falls a page I've recently created. May I ask why? There are 8 sources in total(5 in the article and 3 on the talk page) Timur9008 (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Of the 5 current sources in the article, only one (maybe two) is in-depth from an independent, reliable source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:31, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

fair enough. There were 3 more on the talk page. Timur9008 (talk) 13:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Use the "NRHP infobox generator" tool where possible

In your NRHP articles where you found a NRHP nomination document at NPS, you generally cited the text document but you did not find the corresponding photos document. For the Allentown Bridge, you found, perhaps by Google searching, the text document at URL https://focus.nps.gov/AssetDetail?assetID=bb33d783-b4d7-4351-ae5f-b16af9099c83. There exists "alias-ing" within the NPs pages, so that location can be reached by more readable https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset/NRHP/88001617_text, but no matter. And that can be abbreviated(?) by use of a template call {{NRHP url|id=88001617}}, which expands out to that.

You didn't find your way to the photos document, which would have been at https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset/NRHP/88001617_photos.

The easiest way to get them both into a proper reference is to use the "NRHP infobox generator tool" at http://elkman.net/nrhp/infobox.php, to obtain this report for Allentown Bridge, and from there copy-paste the suggested draft NRHP reference,
<ref name="nrhpdoc-DEMO">{{cite web|url={{NRHP url|id=88001617}}|title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: Allentown Bridge |publisher=[[National Park Service]]|author= |date= |accessdate=January 18, 2023}} With {{NRHP url|id=88001617|photos=y|title=accompanying pictures}}</ref>

References

That works for NRHPs listed before some date in 2013. Or you can copy-paste such a reference from a different NRHP article and then edit it, which will work for later dates too, if the NPS has the documents. Using the NRHP infobox generator tool also gets you an NRHP infobox already partly filled-out and with more fields, such as area, say, than are included in some of your articles.

The NARA version can be harder to find your way to, but it has sensibly combined the text and photos into one PDF. IMO, all 55 of your NRHP articles should be updated to include the accompanying photos into the NRHP document reference, one way or another. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 10:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I am technology challenged (read: Luddite), so I'll have to make several attempts at this. But as I slog through "the 55", that should give me some time to practice. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Question from Clovermoss

Hi again :) I was wondering if it was possible if maybe I could keep going through NPP school but keep the A7 nom open so I can get to it when I can? I don't want to rush it but at the same time I don't want to be stuck in the same spot forever if that's okay with you. I have been watching the new page feed fairly frequently the past few months (and have learned a lot by watchlisting pages I wasn't sure about). There were only three times times I saw something that I could A7, the two that aren't included on the NPP school page were LANSON WONG and Lisa Lopane... I wanted to wait the hour and others CSD'd them so I didn't think that'd "count". Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Doing the NPP school CSD exercises was difficult for me too. Front of queue patrollers tend to get the low hanging fruit CSDs before the 15 minutes/1 hour recommended wait times, leaving slim pickings for the NPP school folks who try to observe the recommended wait times. It may be worth a rethink of those exercises to make them easier. Hope this helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 15:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Of course, you get it. What NL says above is very apt. I've uploaded the next set. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Coalition Living Together

I'd like to know why did you add the "not notable" tag for this article considering it's about a political coalition in Mauritania that has obtained almost 9% of the votes in the last presidential election. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 13:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Because the article only has 2 refs. One is definitely in-depth enough to go towards notability, and the second helps, but the brevity of it does not give the article enough to get over the GNG bar. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability of Lightware

Can you please explain it to me, why did you put the not notable template to the article about Lightware? It is a leading, flagship company of the audiovisual market worldwide, and the article has a lot of data, with proper sources. There may be ones linking to the company's website, but you can find several independent ones in the article. Please, let me know, what can I do to make the article notable. Thanks in advance! MrSilesian (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Because there is not a single in-depth reference from an independent, reliable, secondary source. Most of the refs are press releases or other primary sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

So what can be a true, reliable, secondary source if there are only these pages available? Please, help me, What do I have to do next, to make this article notable? MrSilesian (talk) 09:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, if these are the only types of sources which are available, it could be that the company is not notable yet. What you need are in-depth coverage from independent, reliable, secondary sources which show notability. The most common of these come from newspapers and magazines. I actually think there's a chance this company might be notable, which is why I tagged it, rather than suggesting it be deleted. If you click on the links provided in the tag I put on the article, it will bring up sources which mention the company. But beware of press releases disguised as articles, like this and this. That happens a lot when you deal with industry-specific magazines. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I added some new sources to the article, which don't seem like a press release or a primary ref for me. Can you please check it, and decide whether it's good, or not? MrSilesian (talk) 14:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

RailReview

I have removed the Primary sources template from RailReview because (a) I do not believe it is relevant; (b) I do not believe you are in a position to comment on the article ; and (c) it seems to me you are acting purely out if spite.

(Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 22:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC))

Do not superimpose what your actions would be on me. Sent to AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, a quick note to say, I 100% agree with your assessment of GNG here. No way those sources are sufficient - I don't even think this is a particularly close-run case to be honest. Also, your actions are commendable in the face of significant provocation with the accusations of bad faith motives that have been thrown around. Just wanted to say thanks! Daniel (talk) 10:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Daniel, I appreciate it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I believe I am supposed to post this here

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Edwin of Northumbria (talk) 03:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for Review

	:D
	Hey, thank you for reviewing my article Folk dances of Sindh, have a delight in advance! Bush 10:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Yurii, not Iurii

Hi! You again called the article Iurii Semeniuk, although it is correct - Yurii Semeniuk. why did you do this? Or is there a rule on this Wikipedia: whoever edits for a long time does what he wants? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.58.51.143 (talk) 17:19, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Not there are rules which have been explained to you numerous times, which you continue to ignore. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:25, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Pyra & Mythra

Hello! I noticed that you reverted the edits made to the Pyra & Mythra article. In the description, you wrote:

“Not enough in-depth coverage regarding the real world to show notability”

Can you explain what that means before I make additional edits? Thank you. MomoQca (talk) 13:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

To show notability you have to show notability in the real world, not just in-universe. There should be extensive coverage about the development of the characters, critical reviews of the character (not of actors' performances as the character), etc. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Stefan Obradović notability

Hi mate. I saw that you added notability notice to one of the pages I created. Just wanted to run things past regarding it. As listed here league that his club playes in is considered professional (Serbian First League). Furthermore I provided references to official website of the competition, Soccerway, WorldFootball.net and FootballDatabase.eu which are all as far as I know reliable sources for stub biography of a football player. Nightfall87 (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

That satisfies the old standard of NFOOTY, which has been deprecated, so GNG must be met. Which means it needs several refs from independent, reliable, secondary sources to pass WP:GNG. It should have at least 3 of those, and currently has zero. Please remember that routine sports coverage does not satisfy GNG, and that interviews, being primary sources, do not go to notability either. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Ohhh I didn't know that NFOOTY has been superseded. Thx for letting me know, will have to do some research on new GNG guidelines for a football players when I get some time. Nightfall87 (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, a lot of people haven't noticed it yet (even though it happened quite a few months ago). No worries. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Farid Farjad

Hello. I want to create this article (Farid Farjad) by translating it into English. But I see that the article was created several years ago and deleted. Is this the article that was deleted? Maybe the name was the same. Can I re-create the article? Atakhanli (talk) 17:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not an admin, so I can't look at the deleted article. I also don't speak Turkish, so can't evaluate whether or not that article would pass English WP notability criteria. I didn't look at all the sources in that article, but the person may be notable. If you can provide 3 in-depth references from independent, reliable, secondary sources, than they will pass WP:GNG. If you create it and want me to take a look, feel free to ping me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Iranian demonstrations in Strasbourg

What you do with this? I wanted to draftify it but wasn't able to.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Not sure why you couldn't draftify it. I agree, it is a mess, although looking at the sourcing, it looks like it would pass notability, but I haven't evaluated the reliability of the sources. Usually, I'll tag something for improvement, and then give it a week from the day of tagging it to give the article creator time to fix the issue. If you think there are issues with the article (which I do, looking at it), I'd tag it for those concerns, and then revisit it in a week. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:19, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

You deserve a barnstar

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		I've noticed you've reviewed quite a few of the articles that I've started and it looks like you do quite a bit of work over at WP:NPP. I wanted to thank you for all your hard work by giving you this barnstar! Your hard work isn't going unnoticed, happy editing! TipsyElephant (talk) 18:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Always a pleasure to come across one of your articles to review. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

David Rockefeller Jr siblings pages need to be deleted as well

please deleted David Rockfeller Jr siblings pages if you think his page should be deleted here are there links to there pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Rockefeller_(ecologist) ,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neva_Goodwin ,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peggy_Dulany, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Rockefeller_Growald Clayweintraub (talk) 20:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Clayweintraub you are welcome to propose these for WP:AFD, at which point the community will decide. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Seems they achieved a one week block. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:16, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

See what happens when you just step away from WP for a half-hour or so? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Abu Ja'far al-Madani

You tagged the article Abu Ja'far al-Madani for possible violation of GNG, but it cites 6/7 sources. Arabic sources are acceptable on the English Wikipedia, so why do you think it might not be notable?

Regards,

The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 14:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Because the sources have to be in-depth and from reliable sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

As for the "in depth" part, 2 of them are literally articles which talk about his life story.

As for the "reliable sources" part, can you point out to the source/s on the article which is generally unreliable/deprecated on Wikipedia, so that I can search for other sources instead? The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 15:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Which two are the "literary articles". And regarding reliability of sources, that means they have an editorial staff, and an editorial policy. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I said "literally articles" not "literary" - as in the entire page is dedicated to details on the subjects life. These are the first two sources in the reference list. And these are reliable sources

The rest of the sources are books, whose text is displayed in the links shown. The websites on which the books are displayed - islamweb and al maktaba al shamila, are also reliable. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 15:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Since there has been no response, I'll go ahead and remove the tag. The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 10:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

A few questions

Hello Onel5969! I've got an couple of inquiries again.

1) Gad_Saad#Coverage_and_interviews. "Saad has been profiled in the Toronto Star and his life story was documented by the Télévision française de l'Ontario. His views have also been mentioned in The Economist, Forbes, Chatelaine, Time, The Globe and Mail, and The New York Times." Is it imperative that these profiles and mentions be used to expand the article, with the sources used as inline citations to back up the claims, or is there no issue in simply mentioning the coverage itself?

2) Kosovo–Mongolia relations. Considering that Mongolia does not formally recognize Kosovo as a sovereign state, can we really talk about Kosovo–Mongolia relations? There are multiple similar articles. Most are well sourced. Do you believe they merit being included on Wikipedia, since they somewhat alleviate the article length issue that would arise if any more content was added to International recognition of Kosovo, where I'd suggest merging/redirecting these articles?

3) I'm having trouble evaluating the notability of restaurants. Are there any discussions, essays, or points to consider you would recommend?

4) Dubbing should "almost certainly be divided" as per WP:TOOBIG. Would you recommend splitting the section on ADR, or removing all the unsourced examples/trivia and superfluous language?

Thank you for your time, always appreciated. Mooonswimmer 20:16, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

About stub-class articles

Regarding 2014 All Japan Senior Football Championship and some others, if there is barely any content on it, and the references already cover up the whole article, why it still needs more references? ~~ Skydream1721 (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

It is not a question of WP:VERIFY (there would be a different template for that, simply stating the need for more refs). This is a question of notability, as there isn't a single in-depth reference from an independent, reliable, secondary source. Just because something happens, does not make it notable. I hope this clears it up for you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I understood most of it, but if this is the case, shouldn't the issue of notability be addressed to the original article? (All Japan Senior Football Championship) ~~ Skydream1721 (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

It certainly should. Feel free to nominate it at AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Request to join discussion

Hi @Onel5969:, I request you to join the AfD discussion about the article named "Alliances formed by left-wing parties in the states of India". Thank you.SharadSHRD7 (talk) 01:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

This is an interesting discussion. I was on the fence initially, especially after being asked to express my opinion. Tio me it looks like a difficult article, and I think opinions may be divided on it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I've been pondering it for some time. I agree the article is a mess. I have a video call with someone from WMF in about an hour, after that, I'll probably opine. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I added {{Not a ballot}} to the discussion. At present the Keep element appears almost all, if not all, to be WP:ILIKEIT, whereas the Delete element appears to be policy based. Even that does not necessarily lead to a correct outcome, which I'm assuming should be TNT. Time will tell 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, policy be damned. At one point last year I was keeping track of AfD discussions I was involved in and about 30-40% of the outcomes were based solely on votes, rather than policy. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I tend to use a much more fire and forget approach. There's no point in ever getting emotionally attached to any process or article here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:55, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

lmao. As someone involved in NPP, sometimes AfD is the only way to get folks to even attempt to improve sub-standard articles. And in that vein, I firmly understand WP:DIC. Oh, yeah, btw... haven't said thank you for all the efforts you put in at the project. See your name all the time, and always doing something positive. Keep it up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The appreciation is mutual. Thank you, too, for your work. I suspect we work in similar places so see each other a fair bit. and we each seem to do a great deal to try to keep this strange hobby om some sort of a track.

I've just put my head above the parapet with a rather large number of AfDs of "Songs in Foo, sung by Bar" articles that have been thrust into mainspace without meeting, in my view, the major tenet of verification. We have an editor with an interest in playback singers who appears not to believe in guidance, and ploughs their own furrow. Your view may well differ. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Request to review my article

Hi! I submitted an article about an important festival called Draft:Kherai. It is pending for 35 days. Could you please review my article? Thank you. Northeast heritage (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Rosetti

Hi there. On disambiguation page Rosetti you used DisamAssist to remove the link in the "See also" section to the disambiguation page Rossetti. Was this correct? It now leaves the word "Rossetti" serving no purpose, no link to that disambiguation page, and is inconsistent since the Rosette (disambiguation) link has remained in that section.Masato.harada (talk) 09:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

No, my edit was supposed to change it to a dab link as per WP:DAB, thanks for letting me know. Fixed now. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Review request

Dear Sir, the issues which were there in the article Amrish Kumar Adhana prepared by me have been fixed. Please review it again. Thanks Mpsaharan8 (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Left Alliance

@Onel5969 I haved edited article many times before this discussion. You can check the edit history of the page. XYZ 250706 (talk) 15:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Your point? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969 You said in deletion discussion page that the article Alliances formed by left-wing parties in the states of India has not been edited before deletion discussion. But I haved edited article many times before this discussion. You can check the edit history of the page. XYZ 250706 (talk) 17:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

That is not what I said, I said you pinged at least 2 editors who had not edited the article as a form of canvassing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:24, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Onel5969 User Ok123 has edited the article once before this discussion. XYZ 250706 (talk) 04:23, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Comment

Hello Onel5969. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), patent nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. RZuo (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @RZuo looking through the edit history of Burmese people in China, it doesn't look hasty given there is about 7 days from when the article was initially created and Onel tagging the article... And the CSD criteria is G4 this time, not A1 or A3 as you indicated here. – robertsky (talk) 17:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Can you point to an example where I've done that? I'll give you the answer, no. But nice try. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

This looks like a classic case of "generic warning template didn't say what the editor thought it would" _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

And he's taken it to ANI. Silly editor. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

well, G4 needs an admin to ascertain anyway. He just fast tracked that process. – robertsky (talk) 18:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I left him that message on his talk page, which he deleted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Onel. Following up on the G4 issue: I was thinking to start a discussion at WT:CSD, but I figured you might better articulate the rationale for tweaking the policy on G4 de-tagging. Would you be willing to start up such a discussion? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I started a discussion on Template_talk:Db-meta before seeing this. Deferring to whoever is more appropriate, just came to notify. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 20:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I just replied at the ANI. Yes, I will begin something soon. Will ping you as an interested editor (not canvassing) when I do. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi EmeraldRange and Firefangledfeathers - just wanted to let both of you know, since you were interested, that I started a discussion at WP:NEWCSD#G4 tweak.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For leading service at New Page Patrol, in the face of personal attacks from less knowledgeable editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Coming from an editor of your caliber, high praise indeed. Thank you. Just trying to do what I can where I can. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Tiong Bahru bus hijacking

hi there, could you please have a quick review of Tiong Bahru bus hijacking and let me know if its a candidate for deletion, and if not would any similar articles be acceptable also ? thanks WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 08:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Another reviewer has already marked it as reviewed, so it's all good. On another issue, regarding the articles that are at AfD, you have made a suggestion on those discussions that you create a list type article, which is what I proposed to you a week and a half ago. You might collate the information from those articles into that list before they get deleted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

those other articles were reviewed also, but them marked as Not Notable .... yes i wanted to canvass feedback for the list tyoe article and the varied responses made me conclude it wasnt worth the headache, i will simply put a few of the references beside the associated row on the Capital Punishment in Singapore page instead, thanks WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk) 20:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

About your redirect at 2023 Canberra Tennis International – Women's singles

Thank you for your active notability checks. However, you redirected this page without seeking consensus; well, I think you are not familiar enough with the Tennis WikiProject community. Yes, I know this kind of article really lacks sources to verify the content, but you must know that W60 tournament articles are already widely accepted as notable and have enough sources (previous tournament+this tournament). As there are a lot of similar-topic (W60 tournaments) articles that haven't been deleted (or draftified or redirected), you should not delete one of them without reaching consensus. If you believe that all these articles should be deleted, please submit a proposal at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis to request the deletion of all W60 articles; otherwise I will revert your change. Thank you. Timothytyy (talk) 12:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. And thank you for your kind note. And I completely understand where you are coming from. However, consensus is not needed to evaluate a new article. The article, lacking several in-depth references from independent, reliable, secondary sources does not meet WP:GNG. WP:OSE is not really a valid argument for keeping articles which do not meet notability criteria. I do not believe they all need to be deleted. But I do believe, since I think this is an encyclopedia, and not just some wiki, that they should all be referenced so as to pass GNG and WP:VERIFY. Those that cannot, should be deleted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding moving Chemical Resistomics to draft

Thank you for taking time to review the wiki page. But I still do not understand why the article was moved to draft. According to wikipedia, association to subject matter is not wrong. The wiki article has resulted from research publications which are peer reviewed from subject matter experts. Moreover, it is written in neutral tone and doesn't endorses any person or organization in anyway. The wiki page is well supported by references from genuine sources. SauravBSaha (talk) 13:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)SauravBSaha

Well there are two issues, first is that you are a COI editor, as such, any articles should go through AfC. Second, your article fails GNG miserably. A check of the references does not show the subject of the article discussed in depth at all. Also, it's considered polite that when you post on an editor's talk page you provide a link to whatever it is you're talking about. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @SauravBSaha I have left a review comment on the unsubmitted draft, which covers subtly different ground, and backs up the fact that it is not yet ready to be an article 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

It appears to me that the article had been in article space for three years before it was moved to draft space, and it probably should not have been moved to draft space, but should have been nominated for deletion. It is very hard to understand what the article is trying to say. If a reviewer with a degree in chemistry has difficulty understanding it, a reader with little formal education probably also will have difficulty understanding what it is about. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. The draft was created in userspace in 2019, but was not moved to mainspace until January 2023. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah. Yes. Created in the userspace of a sockpuppet in 2019 and moved to mainspace in January 2023. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The article was written by one of the students in the class. Just because she wanted help, she sent the link. I use to think that Wikipedia is a community driven community where the editorial community is constructively building an encyclopedia. I believe constructive suggestions will improve the article rather derogating new editors. The articles cited in the paper is not just somebody's fictions but have come from strict peer reviewed research articles. Arguments never results solutions but discussions do! SauravBSaha (talk) 13:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)SauravBSaha

Correct, and you have not bothered to address ANY of the issues with the article. Instead, you are simply arguing for the sake of arguing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding moving SC Staaken to draft status.

I did not approve the article being marked for draft status. I have concerns that this method is being used as way to get around the deletion process with Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Incubation. Please take it up with the people who are involved with deletion if you have an issue with it, or I will myself if the issue is pushed. KatoKungLee (talk) 16:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

User:KatoKungLee = The article lacks independent secondary sources. You have the right to move the article from draft space to article space, and other editors will have the right to nominate it for deletion. You have the right to "take it up with the people who are involved with deletion". Some of them may agree with Onel5969, and some of them may think that your comments on your talk page, before you erased them, show a combative attitude. Some of us are working to maintain the quality of the encyclopedia. You have the right to "take it up with the people who are involved with deletion". Robert McClenon (talk) 17:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Undisclosed paid Tag for Nina Eisenhardt

Dear @Onel5969

You have recently tagged one of the pages (Nina Eisenhardt) that I translated as "Undisclosed paid". I just translated this page from German to English which I do for other pages and also translating pages to Persian language. I haven't get paid for such an activity what so ever. Is this what this tag is about?

The original page is made by some colleagues from Wikipedia and they review the contents of these pages which are about politicians.

A person from Wikipedia (Bkissin) also confirmed this page before getting published.

Cheers, Eh.eb 14:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

There are obvious signs that you have a connection with the article's subject. How do you know them? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Onel5969

Would you please tell me one of these sings, because I translated these pages word by word from the original German page which is made by German Wikipedia at the beginning of every parliament period. You can just simply switch the language to German.

I know them because I live in Germany, and I am from the same state (Hesse), and I am following the news about Green party of Germany and I am interested in German politicians who are also involved in international matters.

And obviously I am getting involved with Wikipedia by the topics that I am interested in but I just translate! And as I said, this page was double checked by the User: Bkissin before getting published.

I also translated pages from English to Persian. Both from German politicians and medical topics such as ADHD which is also a topic that I follow.

Cheers, Eh.eb 16:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Notability of individual songs

Hey, I just saw that you turned the "Dirty Day" article back to a redirect, citing the fact that the info in the article wasn't substantial enough to justify the song having its own article. That's fine and all, but I just want to ask for further reference:

When deciding whether a song is notable enough for an article or not, is it a matter of the editor(s) being able to find enough sources and info to create a substantial article as to prove its notability, or is it in most cases that a song just flat out is or isn't notable regardless of the article's content. As for the "Dirty Day" article, I tried to use other U2 albums (and Zooropa itself) as a guideline for whether or not it should have an article - what I mean by that is that with Zooropa having multiple album-only tracks with their own articles (the title track, "Daddy's Gonna Pay for Your Crashed Car", "The Wanderer"), and with other albums such as All That You Can't Leave Behind]] having articles for (almost) every one of its tracks, I felt that it'd be appropriate to keep that going and fill out the few tracks that did not yet have articles.

I'm asking this mainly because I do have the intention of continuing work on the "Dirty Day" article in a sandbox and then submitting it as a draft to see if I can get it to the point where it has enough substance to become a standalone article. But if that's a moot point, then please let me know! thanks! Elephantranges (talk) 20:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

What you'll need to do to get it approved is find in-depth coverage about the song from several independent, reliable, sources. Usually three of these will suffice. In-depth usually means at least 3 paragraphs which talk about the song in-depth. And while that is a good way to learn how to write/structure articles, by looking at similar articles, it is not foolproof, since WP:OSE, and there is a bunch of stuff on WP that snuck through the cracks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

That's fair, thanks! Elephantranges (talk) 21:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

If you want me to take a look at it in draft, feel free to ping me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The Media Project article in draftspace

I'm hoping to get clarification as to why you moved the draft I wrote on The Media Project back to draftspace. I both wrote and cited that TMP has received funding from Google, key figures in the organization like Paul Glader are published in the Wall Street Journal or editors of books published with Oxford University Press, journalists in the TMP network have won notable third-party awards, and the organization is a partner with the Institute for Nonprofit News. I struggle to see how this doesn't fit the requirement for notability. Thederekjohnson (talk) 23:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

As I said on your talk page, it needs more in-depth references from independent, reliable, secondary sources. And when I say more, in this case I really mean any, since there are currently 0 of these types of sources in the draft. Brief mentions are not in-depth coverage. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Si Jenks
Rita Flynn

Hi @Onel5969:, could you please create articles for American actor Si Jenks who had starring roles in films such as The Rider of the Law, Oregon Trail, The Cowboy Star, Zorro's Black Whip, The Great Train Robbery and has already an article in the French Wikipedia, and for American actress Rita Flynn, who appeared in with James Cagney and Jean Harlow in The Public Enemy (1931) and also has an article but in the Italian Wikipedia? 190.140.147.233 (talk) 00:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure. I actually knew who he was, and never thought he wouldn't have an article.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding removed article

I see you removed my article due to sources, I’d like to know what sources I need? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AshClare13 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

removed article

can you please tell me why my article got removed and what sources I need? AshClare13 (talk) 12:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Notability issue on Robert Connell Clarke

Hello! There have been sources added by me and other users, and I believe the article now meets the notability criteria –at least more that the article for the company (Hortapharm B.V.) to which the page of Clarke was previously redirecting. But there are some sources like the Life mag article focused on Clarke that are only available on paper, I could consult some at the University libraries but not find open access versions online, unfortunately.

Been thinking about it, and maybe actually it may be worth proposing the deletion of Hortapharm and adding its contents as a section on the page of Clarke.

Best Teluobir (talk) 13:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

notability flags

hi, thanks for the suggestions on Miracle Man and Rocket Girl, will get looking for more sources for both when I'm back from the weekend as I've learnt a bit more since writing them. However I'm struggling to see how Terror Assaulter fails as it has sources from Paste, CBJ and CBR, which seems to more than satisfy any reasonable criteria. BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 18:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't tag Terror Assaulter: O.M.W.O.T. (One Man War on Terror) for notability, as you are correct, those refs pass the GNG bar. I tagged it because the article is almost solely a plot summary. Hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

it does indeed! sorry, I am not good with the mobile interface. a lesson in holding my horses there! many thanks BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. Glad that got cleared up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Lanlana Tararudee

FYI just stumbled across this, got moved back to articlespace immediately. Just a heads-up in case you want to flick it towards AfD. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 22:00, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. This is one of those instances where the current draftify rules suck. Clearly still not enough coverage to pass GNG, and does not meet NTENNIS, so my only option is AfD. Thanks for the heads up. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

A few more that probably require an expert set of eyes regarding GNG/NTENNIS (which I am certainly not), all from the same author: Saki Imamura, Katarina Jokić, Katarina Kozarov, Sharmada Balu, Nina Stadler, Anna Klasen. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 00:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Gee. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:SF Intra-city

Hi Onel5969! I cam across an interesting issue with paid editing, and I'm trying to get my head around what is happening in the case. I noticed that you moved this to draft with the note "Moved UPE editing to draft as per discussion on editor's talk page". The only editor I can see working on it was Limnewiy but I can't see where the discussion was, and I just want to confirm that it was Limnewiy that you suspected. The reason I ask is that another paid editor was hired by - I think - Limnewiy to fix the page, but I can't see where that second paid editor has made changes. However, I can see where Limnewiy edited an article that the second editor was hired to do, leading me to suspect that the second editor may be using the Limnewiy account, suggesting that it has been compromised. - Bilby (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

For the life of me, I can't remember this instance. It was over two weeks ago. I checked my talk page, Limnewiy's talk page and the draft's talk page, and I can't find the discussion either. That's not one of my standard edit summaries when I draftify. Usually I'll only say, "Segregate UPE/COI". I should have linked to the discussion I was referring to. So as this point, no, I can't confirm it, and other then the usual tell-tale UPI signs (SPA account, promotional content) I can't point to a specific tell. Sorry, wish I had linked the discussion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

No problem! I'll see if I can find something. At this stage I'm pretty sure that it is compromised account, in that the paid editor is using the Limnewiy account to do the editing on their behalf, but I think I need a bit more before I can send it to CU. - Bilby (talk) 03:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay thanks. If you wouldn't mind, now I'm curious, could you let me know how it turns out? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Shall do. I've passed it on to paid-en to see if they think there is an issue, as once I put it all in a timeline it fitted far too well. I'm convinced that something is going on, but I think it is ether that the client's account is being used by the paid editor, or the paid editor is very much holding the client's hand. Unfortunately, the paid editor concerned is one who is disclosing, even if reluctantly and with prompting, so I am hoping they might not have made a mistake like this one. - Bilby (talk) 10:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing our Article

Dear sir I am Parwiz Ahmadi , one of the Wikipedia Users from Afghanistan. I did Write an Article about one of the senior Military Officers of Afghanistan which now He is fighting against Terrorists groups , I hope You will review this Article and you will Make it better . thank you for your time have a good time The article name is (Hasib Qoway Markaz)Hasib Qoway Markaz Parwiz ahmadi (talk) 13:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Your request for additional sources on Tamás Tóth (film director)

Hi there, you ask for additional sources on Tamás Tóth (film director) - aren't the citations from Hungarian National Film Institute website serious enough? As far as it concerns his CV, most of it can be found in the detailed interview with him held on occasion of the 28th Hungarian Film weeks in 1998 whose link I also added, so what do you miss? And as far it concerns the remaining sources I used, they actually provide a patchwork or kind of mosaic of data, one time mentioning this, another time another piece of his filmography, so that this WP article represents kind of a compilation of all of them in a most complete form, and from this point of view my effort to contact Mr. Tóth in order to confirm the correctness of what I collected should rather be treated as a merit, and not reason for deletion. Unless you want to discourage me to furtherly contribute anything to the WP. But I hope, you won't. Greetings, Qniemiec (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In terms of WP:VERIFY, there are several things in the article still unsourced, like the entire second paragraph in the Biography section. And I have not doubt this person is notable, but what you need is to include some more in-depth coverage of him. Unfortunately, interviews do not count, as they are primary sources. Your first two refs are good, but short. If you have a few more like that, you'll be fine, or two really in-depth articles about him, that would also work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

The review of Masterchef Hindi Season 7 article

Dear @Onel5969, You seem to be quite distraught about the MasterChef India (Hindi season 7) article. I understand that you want every bit of information inside the TV show article verified by a legitimate source. But you removed the most legitimate source ('link to the OTT website where the episodes are released') by reverting the ''Episodes'' section edit. When I cited the sources from the websites of private media companies, they were removed citing that they were unreliable according to Wikipedia’s policies (when in fact they were quite reliable). In India, mainstream news and media companies do not post television show updates as in the USA. Their articles just provide the info about the launching dates of upcoming shows.

Please DO NOT mindlessly follow Wikipedia’s verification policies. They aren’t applicable everywhere identically. Just leave the edition of this unimportant article (“Low-importance” according to Wikipedia’s scale) on a community who is reading it, hoping it’ll not be unnecessarily vandalised. Having some information about a topic at hand as Wikipedia article is much better than having nothing. WikiVolunteer (talk) 06:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Please follow WP policies. They are there for a reason. And personal attacks will eventually get you blocked, so I would avoid them. Oh, and by the way, no it's not okay to have unverified information, it is not "better than nothing". This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not some fan wiki.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not creating a fan wiki. If I were to, I could have added so much information (or say gossip!) about the show in the article. I have followed the same format as Masterchef American Season 12 Wikipedia article. (And if you see Masterchef American season 12 article, the elimination table and the episodes table have literally no references. I advise you to strike there first.) WikiVolunteer (talk) 05:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Request for a review of article on 'Raaja Bhasin'

Dear Onel5969, thank you for reviewing the page 'Raaja Bhasin' and the suggested edits related to its notability and advert-like content. I have done several edits in an attempt to improve it on these two fronts. I thereby request you to please review this article again, so as to see if the edits done are fine. Best wishes, Apandeyhp89. Apandeyhp89 (talk) 15:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to let another reviewer take a look at it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Matt White (Paraclimber)

Hi Onel5969. Back in October you reviewed my submission and declined on the grounds of a conflict of interest (we subsequently had a conversation and you agreed that my explanation was sound and I had no affiliation with Matt White other than attending paraclimbing competitions where I saw him compete).

Also at the time, you explained that I needed additional evidence to support the validity of his record (a fair point). I've now added links showing results from the British Mountaineering Council (BMC) - UK's governing body for Climbing, as well as the official GB Climbing Team page showing he is a member. What do I need to do next to get the article accepted and turned to a proper 'live' page. Thanks in advance. T Trevorstocall (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Looks okay now, have accepted it into mainspace. Could use some more in-depth coverage. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Awesome thanks...my first submission accepted :)

As I find more content and coverage I'll add it! Trevorstocall (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

David Braun (American football)

You said almost all the coverage was sport’s coverage, shouldn’t that be the case because he is a sports coach. Bigmike2346 (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Actually, what I said is routine sports coverage. Look at the 4th and 5th bullet points in WP:SPORTCRIT. BTW, the articles you write are very well written, and certainly pass WP:VERIFY. My issue is sometimes with the notability of some of them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:05, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Netherlands Commission for Unesco

Hi @Onel5969 I have added a reference to the (Dutch) newspaper Het Parool (June 1947) where the start of the Netherlands Commission for Unesco is mentioned (Netherlands Commission for Unesco) Timmietovenaar (talk) 14:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi. What you need is several in-depth references about the commission from independent sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the extra explanation. I’ve added a book on the history of the Netherlands Commission for Unesco. Timmietovenaar (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Pinaveta, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pinaveta, Arizona 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/Pinaveta, Arizona 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.

Mangoe (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of South Fort, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article South Fort, Arizona 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/South Fort, Arizona 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.

Mangoe (talk) Mangoe (talk) 15:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Paul is Dead

How is author commentary not a valid source? Why are you block-reverting the whole section rather than putting in a Citation Needed, especially as part of it is sourced? How are we to avoid this whole "one article is lacking because it is just a plot summary whereas this one is having additional information lopped off" thing? BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 15:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you read WP:CIT? And what needs to be included in a reference in order to make it a valid reference? I said nothing about the sources not being valid, but the references. They do not have enough information. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

So you block revert a whole section by default, without any attempt to discuss it first? Same goes for your high-handed decision to turn the Tri-Man article into a redirect to a different article where barely any if the salient information (e.g. the character having been notable enough to have appeared in comics by Grant Morrison, Alan Moore and Mark Millar) retained without even a moment's discussion. if sources found through the helpful "find sources" link aren't notable, what the heck are? Why is there discussion about some deletion and mergers or sometimes you just deciding to wipe articles or sections thereof without even a cursory attempt at improving them or any sort of consensus and co-operation? Why is there no uniformity to the way this being treated? BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 20:51, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

"When you find a passage in an article that is biased, inaccurate, or unsourced the best practice is to improve it if you can rather than deleting salvageable text." BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 21:01, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Goodwater, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Goodwater, Arizona 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/Goodwater, Arizona 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.

Mangoe (talk) 20:30, 31 January 2023 (UTC)