Jump to content

User talk:St170e/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 7

Article about Josh Garrett

Hello,

The note above the article on Josh Garrett says that "the lead section is very rushed." How may I improve that lead section to meet Wikipedia's standards?

Thank you.

Biskypoodle (talk) 02:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Cars having sold 5 million units has been nominated for discussion

Category:Cars having sold 5 million units, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Vossanova o< 18:07, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Request on 02:44:59, 28 April 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Aannggiiee00


There aren't that many references for this club, only the ones that I have found. This club is important for the LGBTQ youth in the area where the club is. It's difficult to provide more sources from the media without it being a page where the club just gets reviewed. What should I do?

Aannggiiee00 (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)aannggiiee00

Aannggiiee00 (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I appreciate the effort you've put into this article. At Articles for Creation, reviewers apply policies of Wikipedia to drafts and we try and help drafts so that, when published, they do not be nominated for deletion. I believe that this article, in its current state, would be liable for deletion if it were nominated. You need to look at notability before writing a Wikipedia article. Notability must be proved through extensive media coverage and the subject must be significant. Although the club may be important to the LGBTQ youth, it needs to be proved through media coverage or the like. If you didn't have to include sources, it would mean that any club, significant or not, could be included on Wikipedia. You need to only include important facts on the page and try, if possible, to find any sources that are verifiable and reliable. st170etalk 14:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Katie and Amys big adventures

Hi, these girls receive fan videos from people world wide and have worked with some major celebs ... We are massive fans from the uk but here is a couple of fan videos I found in seconds of looking... You must be notable if you have world wide fans! Surely! Www.YouTube.com/cijFM_XXMLg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.234.57 (talk) 10:09, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry but having fans does not automatically necessitate an article on Wikipedia. There isn't enough proof that these girls are notable. Please join the deletion discussion if you want to debate the deletion of the article. st170etalk 21:33, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Alex Gilbert

Hello!

Could you please look and comment on Draft:Alex Gilbert. Are these new sources reliable? https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/im-adopted-alex-gilberts-story - TVNZ and https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/family/article/2016/03/01/website-could-help-you-find-your-birth-parents-through-social-media Special Broadcasting Service. I am having on going issues. The original deletion of this article has nothing to do with the article and with where it is at now. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Gilbert and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Gilbert (2nd nomination). So now the article is salted. I have worked on this article with 3 years of coverage. I don't understand. It clearly passes basic notability. If it went to the mainspace will it really get deleted? --DmitryPopovRU (talk) 20:11, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Flydubai Flight 981

Got a chuckle when I tried to revert the last edit of 981, which had added the irrelevant info about the same flight number of another irrelevant accident. A bunch of red text came up that said someone else may have already accomplished what I was attempting...

While I have not been able to see Ireland myself, my wife says it is absolutely beautiful. I have been to the top of the Eiffel Tower too and found it fascinating bit of engineering. Cheers! EditorASC (talk) 06:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

No problem at all! Chuckled a bit when I saw the edit. Ireland is a beautiful country, you should really make the effort to come see it, I'm sure we'll give you a thousand welcomes st170etalk 10:08, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Alexandros Jakupović listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alexandros Jakupović. Since you had some involvement with the Alexandros Jakupović redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Rovingrobert (talk) 08:54, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of government departments, their agencies and their ministers in Northern Ireland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Justice. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:DAERA Logo NI.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DAERA Logo NI.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

14:22:35, 20 May 2016 review of submission by Artwanker


I disagree that the article is not supported by reliable sources, the sources included are newspaper articles and several academic books. What specifically does not have enough citations so I can remove it, edit or add more sources.

Hello! Please accept my apologies -- the decline reason about sourcing is completely ambiguous on the reviewer options. I had declined the article because you need to use the sources to further prove the group's notability and not because the sources are unreliable. I don't doubt that the group is notable but you need to show this in the article. You say it attracted attention with experimental performance art which is good, but please explain how so and use sources in the lead. The history section of the article is also quite long so you may want to consider splitting it into sub-headings. I will correct the decline reason on your talk page and on the article now. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, and my apologies for the confusion! st170etalk 15:10, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Request on 14:08:15, 22 May 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by DavidBailey


Draft:Kristyn Harris So folk music has been deemed as not notable by Wikipedia except when it was in its heyday and made the Top 40? That's sad to me. From a Western folk singer perspective, Kristyn Harris has won most of the awards available, but you still say it's not noteworthy enough. I've given multiple television, radio, and newspaper references, and I'm unaware of any weasel words used... at all, except perhaps in the name of the awards she's won. DavidBailey (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

DavidBailey (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello. I just want to make you aware that Wikipedia has notability guidelines that dictate who can be included on Wikipedia. Judging this is difficult and, in order to satisfy these notability guidelines, you must have independent, significant and reliable coverage of the subject to prove notability. In this case, I don't believe you have fulfilled this requirement just yet. What I recommend you to do is to add as many sources as you can and explain how this singer is notable. You can find these notability guidelines at WP:MUSICBIO. All of the awards that this singer has won are all from the same association which doesn't have a major article on Wikipedia so I can't base notability on this alone. If you improve the references of the article by adding in more information of the singer then I would be quite happy to review the draft then, with the hope of accepting it and moving it into main space. st170etalk 22:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

John Gifford Stower

I see that you've now relisted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Gifford Stower twice. As article creator, I have set out my arguments, and have nothing to add to the discussion. However, because of Stover's nationality, I suggest that Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Argentina be notified also. It would be wrong for me to do so; only someone impartial should. Narky Blert (talk) 22:38, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Yes, I've re-listed the article to generate more consensus because I don't think there is consensus at the moment. That's no problem at all, I've included the deletion debate in the Argentina-related discussions, which automatically notifies the Argentine WikiProject. This should've been done already when it was originally being sorted. If there is still no consensus by the end of the week I'll weigh into the debate. st170etalk 22:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
TY. WP:CONSENSUS, and a decision, is the goal; not a desultory inconclusive debate that drags on for ever. Narky Blert (talk) 23:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Rox Jewellers (retailer) ‎

My first article was recently declined for submission due to references not adequately showing the subject's notability. However all the references are from news outlets (Scotsman, BBC, ITV News, Herald Scotland, Daily Record), industry related publications (Professional Jeweller) or an well know magazines such as Vogue.

Could you please explain why these do not qualify the article as notable as they are all reliable sources that are independent of the subject.

Any advice to help make the article more notable would be greatly appreciated.

Cushats (talk) 13:27, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Of course I'll help you on this. I rejected this article because I don't believe that the subject is notable, as the article currently stands. As an editor, you ought to show how the subject is notable in order for it to be published on the main space. In this case, I don't believe you have done so. Showing notability is performed through the addition of significant, independent and reliable sources. Whilst Rox Jewellers may indeed be notable, you need to do this by ensuring that every claim is backed up with a reference. At Articles for Creation, reviewers apply Wikipedia policies to articles so that, if the article were published, it would not be nominated for deletion at Articles for Deletion. For this article, what I would do, is completely re-write the article although it is good at the moment. You need to have an introduction to the company and specify why the company is notable (e.g. Rox Jewellers is a British jewellers...). Your lead paragraph at the moment is rather promotional because it includes an external link and shows what the company 'specialises' in. At the moment, the only credible claim is that they won a few awards - so expand on these and show why it is notable. I won't review your draft next time as a courtesy, to allow another editor to give their input. If you need anymore help or clarification, please write back here and I'll be glad to help. st170etalk 14:19, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Iran

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Iran. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Your declining of the redirect request here

Hi St170e. This is actually not true. The title is only automatically capitalized for the first letter. Just letting you know. Omni Flames let's talk about it 08:09, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

If you search 'Angry video game nerd', it automatically takes you to the target which is why I declined the redirect request. st170etalk 09:24, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Huh, that's true. I posted this because when I manually put "Angry video game nerd" into the url bar, it didn't work. My apologies. Omni Flames let's talk about it 09:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

AFDS

Hi St170e, When you close AFDs they need to run for the full 7 days .... I would advise that you read Wikipedia_talk:Deletion_process#The_meaning_of_.22seven_days.22_in_AfD_closures,
If you go to WP:AFD - You'll see on the right there's a link called "closing" - All those listed there are realistically the only ones that should be closed (Speedy/Snow Keeps obviously can be closed whenever)
I personally think the whole 7/8 days thing is fucking moronic however I was blocked for closing AFDs early so unless you want to be blocked I would suggest slowing the closures down to the "closing section" only,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:16, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this to my attention! I was a bit weary of the whole 7 day limit and tried to limit closures according to times, but the whole UTC timestamp/my local time thing is confusing me. I'm also joining you in saying that it is moronic. I think AfD needs a total revamp: I've noticed the same editors contributing to debates with the exact reasoning on each debate with the sole purpose of increasing their statistics at AfD, which is ridiculous. Cheers. st170etalk 00:31, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
If you thought that was bad enough technically when you close AFDs the closure time also needs to match the time of the nomination ..... You couldn't make this crap up! ,
I know the timezones are confusing but I think it all goes in UTC or something here .... not really helpful when it's BST here!,
Some editors here don't put effort in to their !votes whilst others do but I agree it does need a revamp but unfortunately I have a feeling we're a minority on that!, Have you seen the 2005-2009(ish) AFDs ? .... They'd horrorfy you! ,
Anyway thanks & Happy editing :), –Davey2010Talk 01:06, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

AfD closing

Hi St170e, the full 7 days has gone on this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soyuz-2 (disambiguation), but it isn't clear from the discussion that the 2nd Keep is valid. In fact, it reads like they changed to delete, so making this a No consensus. As this is a trivial WP:TWODABS delete, a reopening or relisting would establish a consensus for Delete, which can also be read from the AfD (WP:CLUE, ! a vote). Can you reopen / relist (whatever is possible), maybe worth leaving non-obvious closes to admins in future? (see WP:NAC). Widefox; talk 12:03, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

I would have no objection to reopening but I would still be sticking by my original decision. I've relisted the debate for you; I don't think this is not a non obvious close in this case. I have reverted your edits on the article and reverted back to the AfD notice. st170etalk 22:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alliance of Patriots of Georgia. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Committee for the Executive Office, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Irwin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

09:32:00, 06 Ju6UTC 2016 review of submission by st170e



Dear st170e,

thanks for the revision of the document entitled "The European Society for Artificial Organs (ESAO)".

I am writing this article on the behalf of the president of the ESAO, Prof Dr Thomas Groth (Email: thomas.groth@pharmazie.uni-halle.de). Please confirm that Prof Dr Thomas Groth as the president of the ESAO is a "reliable source" you asked for.

If so, please explain how we are able to finalize the ESAO article.

Thanks for your cooperation in advance and best regards

   M. Rusu
I declined your article because you lack independent coverage of the organisation. We are looking for sources that are significant, reliable and independent of the subject. For this, the President of the organisation is not a reliable source as he is directly affiliated with it. You need to add in-text citations and maybe look for news coverage if you can find some and add those in. st170etalk 13:44, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Why you declined my request of the creation of the Category:Movies about nitrate film fire?

Why you declined my request of the creation of the Category:Movies about nitrate film fire?

- 201.81.64.163 (talk) 13:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC).

I declined the request because it was an unlikely category; I doubt people would search for that category. Also, there aren't many pages in the Films about fires category, so it is best left there. st170etalk 13:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alternative for Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Why did you relist this? The only "keep" !vote (by the article creator) has conceded that this is too soon and should be deleted (they even blanked the page at that point). --Randykitty (talk) 07:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I was in two minds over this but, excluding the nominator and the article creator, you were the only other participant in the discussion who actually had a delete !vote. Other editors can back up your view point since its been relisted, but I don't think a relist would do any harm because it serves to encourage further discussion. st170etalk 14:37, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey

Greetings

Many thanks for responding to my request for assistance.

I believe Mr Dassey fits the brief for notable and this was confirmed by another reviewer during the week.

The content was also passed and we are now at the citation and formatting part of the process.

Mr Dassey has a public profile that certainly matches that of Steven Avery and is very worthy of an article, as it addresses very different issues that are forging current dialogues in reference to coerced confessions, use of the Reid Technique and interrogation of minors, so I do believe it is a very valid article on a notable person.

Many thanks

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 01:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not doubting his notability, but I think separating the whole Halbach case from Avery's page would be quite contentious. What you could do though, is have a 'See more' note on Avery's article and explain Dassey's involvement a bit more on his own page. I'll review the draft and post comments on it shortly. st170etalk 01:21, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Request on 01:39:57, 10 June 2016 for assistance on AfC submission by Tracy Symonds-Keogh


Thabnk you very much for your guidance, I will attend to those suggestions in the hope of getting this as close to perfect as possible. 

Many thanks much appreciated

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)


Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jeremy Corbyn

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jeremy Corbyn. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Stop Trump movement

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Stop Trump movement. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft Brendan Dassey

Greetings

You most recently assisted me in guiding me towards changes needed in my article Brendan Dassey. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Brendan_Dassey

I have implemented those changes and would very much appreciate your looking over the article for your advice before submitting for approval.

Is it possible to insert a picture?

I look forward to your response

Kind regards

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 06:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

My apologies about not seeing this sooner, I've reviewed the draft for you. With regards to a picture, you can search the Commons for a picture. If not, you can upload one but please make sure it follows copyright rules. st170etalk 21:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Salam Neighbor Photos

Hi. A fan called ebinrt set up a Wiki site for our film Salam Neighbor. They asked for pictures to put on the page and we gave them 10 pictures they could load on the Wiki page. We told them we gave up all rights to those pictures based on Wiki's requirements. They added the pictures, but then the pictures were taken down because ebinrt was said to not own the pictures. I am one of the producers of the film and the film team would like to upload some of thosee pictures, including the official poster. I tried to load the pictures, but the system is prohibiting me, saying this is the same content as a deleted file. How do I get the pictures up since you will not let an independent person do so? I also understand from ebinrt that Wiki considers it a conflict of interest for a related party to load content on Wiki. If that is correct, how can we get the pictures up on the Salam Neighbor page? I see other films have pictures and posters, so I am not sure how these get posted. Mohabk (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello. These photos were deleted because they are copyright and were incorrectly licensed. The user who uploaded them claimed the images as their own work, which is completely incorrect and they need to be licensed properly in order to be used on Wikipedia. They were taken from IMDB's website (from here) and IMDB is copyright protected. You need to find the copyright holder and get them to release copyright on the images before they are allowed to be uploaded. st170etalk 20:52, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, the pictures were not taken from IMDb. As I said, I am one of the producers of the film. I am a co-owner of the company that produces and owns the film Salam Neighbor. We own the copyright on these pictures. We are the ones that loaded the pictures on IMDb and did not provide any copyright to IMDb. These are the pictures we release to the public, websites, news, etc. Many of the articles on the film on the Wiki site use the same pictures. In keeping with that policy, I sent the same pictures to ebinrt. Now, I have been tasked by the rest of the owners to load the pictures on Wiki. So, I have the authority to load and release the copyright on these images. What does Wiki need from me to do this? World Refugee Day is coming up and we are launching the film on Netflix, Google and Amazon Video and would like to upgrade the page with photos, including the basics of loading the film's poster.
Mohabk (talk) 10:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
In that case you need to prove you own the images and release copyright. Ebinrt claimed the images as his own work and the licensing was the problem. st170etalk 12:08, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
We cannot be responsible for ebinrt. You require an independent person to create articles. How should I prove copyright? What do you accept from other movies? Do you need a letter from the two productions companies or the joint venture company? Who do I send it to. The IMDb site shows the full cast, including the producers, including my name Mohab Khattab (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3828488/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast). It shows the production companies, including 1001 MEDIA (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3828488/companycredits?ref_=ttfc_sa_4). We only plan to load pictures from among those on the IMDb site because these are the ones we release to the public. If you go to Salam Neighbor's web site, you will find the team members (http://livingonone.org/salamneighbor/team/). You can send an email to the 4 producers, including myself, asking whether we own the pictures on the IMDb sites and whether I can load them in the Salam Neighbor Wiki page. Is that enough?
Mohabk (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Please provide information as to how we prove ownership of the pictures per Wikipedia rules? I proposed some ways above.
Mohabk (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Mohabk: sorry for the late reply. Wikipedia requires that copyright be extended unconditionally and copyright cannot be granted to Wikipedia alone. That means that you can't grant only Wikipedia sole use of these images. Ebinrt added all of the images from IMDb on to the article; I would advise against this. Pick a few images and upload them yourself as non-free images. Screenshots of the film are allowed as long as they discuss the work in question (see WP:NFCI). In addition, you need to ensure that the images follow the rules set at WP:IMAGERES which dictate that non-free images should have lower resolution. These policies may seem like a pain, but you need to ensure that the correct licensing tags are added upon uploading. Just ensure that they're marked as non-free and you say that they are screenshots of the film, which is considered fair use. st170etalk 21:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
We are releasing the copyrights unconditionally, not just to Wikipedia. I did not say it was only to Wikipedia. We give out these pictures freely. I tried to upload, but I get an error message that says "Something Went Wrong". The I get the message: "There was another file already on the site with the same content, but it was deleted." How do I get through this issue? It has been a week and we have gone full circle and I am still getting the same error message. The film launched today on Netflix worldwide, as well as Amazon Video and Google Play and we do not even have a poster on the Wiki page. Frankly, it is embarrassing.
Mohabk (talk) 12:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mohabk, in that case check out WP:CONSENT. You can click here to be redirected to the Commons, where you can fill out an online form and attach the images. Wikipedia is not allowing you to upload the image again until the issue about copyright is settled. I understand your concern, but copyright is a legal issue. Once you fill out the form, it will be looked at and your images will be uploaded (provided you prove your identity satisfactorily). --st170etalk 12:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey

Many thanks for your patience and guidance, much appreciated

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 08:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

You're very welcome! st170etalk 12:11, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey

Many thanks for your patience and guidance, much appreciated

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 12:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey

Hi many thanks so far I have addressed the requirements and I hope that I have now met them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Brendan_Dassey

Kind regards


Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 15:50, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: Brendan Dassey

Thats brilliant news - persistence and helpful guidance has paid off!

Do I remove the redirect?

Thanks for all your help, I consider it an achievement so thank you

Tracy Symonds-Keogh (talk) 00:49, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tracy! No, you don't need to do anything. I've tagged the redirect for deletion and I will clean up the article when the redirect is deleted, approve it and then move it to its new destination. Do continue to improve the article if you can and add as many sources as you can covering Dassey. You need to prove that it's not your original research and that it's common knowledge incase an editor nominates the article for deletion in the future. st170etalk 00:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox Canadian leadership election. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Expert360, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Private. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Ethnic relations Assyrian People

The artical itself states clearly: Culturally, ethnically and linguistically distinct from, although both quite influencing on and influenced by, their neighbours in the Middle East — the Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Turks, Jews and Armenians.

A 2008 study on the genetics of "old ethnic groups in Mesopotamia," including 340 subjects from seven ethnic communities ("Assyrian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, Armenian, Turkmen, the Arab peoples in Iran, Iraq, and Kuwait") found that Assyrians were homogeneous with respect to all other ethnic groups sampled in the study, regardless of religious affiliation.[140]

It states that the Assyrian people are ethnically distinct from the named ethnicities and that the Assyrians are ethnically homogeneous with respext to the other groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Problem now (talkcontribs) 17:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Problem now, the article does not state that Armenians are the same; it states that it is related to the Assyrians. I still stand by my original decision on the edit request. st170etalk 12:44, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi @St170e, Where does it exactly says that they are related to the Assyrians? It says clearly that they are homogeneous and distinct. However it states that they are influenced by several ethnicities the Arabs, Persians, Kurds, Turks, Jews and Armenians.Being influenced and being related are 2 very different things. If you don't agree, why wouldn't you include Kurds,Persians and Turks as well then?
Hi Problem now I think this would be better discussed on the talk page of the article where other editors can join in. There you can get consensus on your proposal but I'm not reverting my decision on the edit request. st170etalk 15:41, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Lone wolf (terrorism)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Lone wolf (terrorism). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Re: Hilton Worldwide

Regarding this edit. Thanks for closing, and perhaps I misspoke, but my hope was that someone would make a decision based on comments left by others, and update the article appropriately. Are you willing to make a decision, or do you know where I can request help? Inkian Jason (talk) 21:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

... and thank you so much for your help with the other edit requests. -Inkian Jason (talk) 21:08, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
@Inkian Jason: Please accept my apologies! I had made a decision and had written it underneath but it didn't save properly because of an edit conflict on the page (with myself). I didn't realise because it was in a different tab. I've just updated the RfC accordingly. -- st170etalk 21:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hah! Thanks again. Are you also able to update the article accordingly? Looks like User:WhisperToMe responded again re: logos, but I am not sure what I need to do exactly, if anything. My primary concern is having them removed from the Hilton Worldwide article. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:21, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I've just performed that edit! It looks to me like the logos are licensed for use on the English Wikipedia, so it is up to you to decide whether to keep them or not. (I think I may be missing something here). st170etalk 21:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I responded here. Thanks again for all of your help. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 22 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 Orlando nightclub shooting. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Draft: SIT Group (June 24)

Good afternoon St170e,

thank you very much for your comment below my article.

I understand why you decline the article because there were no sources.

Of course I have sources, the sources of the webpage of the company. Are this sources OK for Wikipedia?

Because I saw some articles about companies which are like SIT and they have also only the sources of the own webpage. Wish you a nice day.

Best regards, NatalieBoebel — Preceding unsigned comment added by NatalieBoebel (talkcontribs) 13:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@NatalieBoebel: Hello, in order to have an article on Wikipedia, you must demonstrate that the company is notable. You must therefore add sources from third party sources, ensuring that the sources are independent and reliable. News articles are good for demonstrating coverage of the subject. Primary sources (the company's website) must not be relied upon and they won't add any credence to your article, so please try and use secondary sources. --st170etalk 14:06, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your fast reply! Okay I will try....Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NatalieBoebel (talkcontribs) 14:09, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
you're welcome. st170etalk 14:09, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Singapore

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Singapore. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Assurant

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Assurant. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't get notified about your reply (fixing a ping like this won't work) but I've dropped the unnecessary protection. Thanks for noticing. --NeilN talk to me 13:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Serial killer

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Serial killer. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Salam Neighbor Update

Hi. It seems the photo issue has been fixed by someone because some pictures are back on, but not all of them. I have worked on adding additional sections to comply with the layout guidelines and make the article more accessible, as requested. I also added the section called Reception, as was requested, but now there is a note saying it is too much like an advertisement for basically the same information. I also tried to deal with the orphan issue through two different citations, one in the article Living on One Dollar, which was made by the same filmmakers, as well as a reference in the article Documentaries. Have I resolved all the problems? Ebinrt (talk) 13:59, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Photography. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton email controversy. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Elizabeth Dilling

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Elizabeth Dilling. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:McCarthyism

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:McCarthyism. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hilton Worldwide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael Clayton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2016 shooting of Dallas police officers. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Orlando

Hello St170e,

I have restarted the discussion about the long-going "Orlando airports" issue at WT:Airports. Your thoughts and opinions on the matter would be greatly appreciated! The discussion is here. Regards—172.58.40.42 (talk) 03:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Theresa May

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Theresa May. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Frank Gaffney

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Frank Gaffney. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Same-sex marriage. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Donald Trump

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Donald Trump. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Frankfurt School

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Frankfurt School. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jill Stein

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jill Stein. Legobot (talk) 04:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Republic of China general election, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

ANI discussion notice

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:SwisterTwister. Thank you. North America1000 06:02, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, 2016. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Philippines v. China

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Philippines v. China. Legobot (talk) 04:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Category:Beaches in Kollam district has been nominated for discussion

Category:Beaches in Kollam district, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 08:37, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jarabulus offensive (2016). Legobot (talk) 04:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

James Franklin Adams

I am the Greatgreat granddaughter of James Franklin Adams. I have inherited his legacy. I have a photo of James Franklin Adams, his military issue civil war Bible and his Medal of Honor if you would like photos to add. I noticed some of your other recipients had photos.

He actually captured a second flag but his horse stumbled and he became a prisoner of war of the confederacy. He was later release as part of a Prisoner exchange. He returned back to the Army and continued to serve until the end of the war. The flag he captured can be found at the Confederate Museum of History in Richmond, Virginia.

Most people do not realize he did not receive proper burial that is reserved for a Medal of Honor Recipient. In 1990, long after he had died, he received proper recognition and full military salute, including flag given to his grandson, my grandfather, and his Medal of Honor recipient tombstone.

Thanks,

Stephanie "Adams" Hutchison — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanie "Adams" Hutchison (talkcontribs) 16:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

16:01:47, 3 October 2016 review of submission by Blankpagestl



I believe I have removed any "peacock" or non objective language, but want to see if you disagree or if you have specific items that need to be adjusted.

Very sorry for the late reply. It seems to have been improved, but I will leave the review to another editor for a second opinion. st170etalk 13:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Draft of Rentalcars.com page

Hello,

I believe you rejected this article 5 months ago on account of insufficient notability. It was re-edited shortly after that point and doesn't appear to have been re-reviewed, is that right?

Are there still items that need to be worked on?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Almurray1986 (talkcontribs) 11:06, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't believe it to be notable. The website needs a wealth of references on the article to assert its notability. For reviewers to have another look at your article, you need to resubmit it for further review. Note that after 6 months of no editing, the article will be speedily deleted under G13. st170etalk 13:19, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Hello!

Would you like to provide your input at this discussion regarding references and the Airlines and destinations tables? Thank you! — Sunnya343✈ (háblamemy work) 22:37, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review needs your help

Hi St170e,

As an AfC reviewer you're probably aware that a new user right has been created for patrolling new pages (you might even have been granted the right already, and admins have it automatically).

Since July there has been a very serious backlog at Special:NewPagesFeed of over 14,000 pages, by far the worst since 2011, and we need an all out drive to get this back down to just a few hundred that can be easily maintained in the future. Unlike AfC, these pages are already in mainspace, and the thought of what might be there is quite scary. There are also many good faith article creators who need a simple, gentle push to the Tea House or their pages converted to Draft rather than being deleted.

Although New Page Reviewing can occasionally be somewhat more challenging than AfC, the criteria for obtaining the right are roughly the same. The Page Curation tool is even easier to use than the Helper Script, so it's likely that most AfC reviewers already have more than enough knowledge for the task of New Page Review.

It is hoped that AfC reviewers will apply for this right at WP:PERM and lend a hand. You'll need to have read the page at WP:NPR and the new tutorial.

(Sent to all active AfC reviewers) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello St170e. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

  • Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
  • Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, St170e. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter (November 2016)

Hello St170e,
Breaking the back of the backlog
We now have 814 New Page Reviewers! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog. Now it's time for action.
Mid July to 01 Oct 2016

If each reviewer does only 10 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by each reviewer doing only 2 or 3 reviews a day - that's about 5 minutes work!
Let's get that over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.

Second set of eyes

Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work. Read about it at the new Monitoring the system section in the tutorial.

Getting the tools we need - 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey: Please vote

With some tweaks to their look, and some additional features, Page Curation and New Pages Feed could easily be the best tools for patrollers and reviewers. We've listed most of what what we need at the 2016 WMF Wishlist Survey. Voting starts on 28 November - please turn out to make our bid the Foundation's top priority. Please help also by improving or commenting on our Wishlist entry at the Community Wishlist Survey. Many other important user suggestions are listed at at Page Curation.


Originally sent to all New Page Reviewers 26 November 2016. This message sent manually. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC).

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

New Page Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC))

BBC 12-hour Editathon - large influx of new pages & drafts expected

AfC Reviewers are asked to be especially on the look out 08:00-20:00 UTC (that's local London time - check your USA and AUS times) on Thursday 8 December for new pages. The BBC together with Wikimedia UK is holding a large 12-hour editathon. Many new articles and drafts are expected. See BBC 100 Women 2016: How to join our edit-a-thon. Follow also on #100womenwiki, and please, don't bite the newbies :) (user:Kudpung for NPR. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

New Page Review - newsletter #2

Hello St170e,
Please help reduce the New Page backlog

This is our second request. The backlog is still growing. Your help is needed now - just a few minutes each day.

Getting the tools we need

ONLY TWO DAYS LEFT TO VOTE


Sent to all New Page Reviewers. Discuss this newsletter here. If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC) .

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Bruch

Four editors, including the article's creator(towards the bottom), called for deletion. What does it take to create consensus for deletion, in your view? Why the re-listing? Edison (talk) 23:22, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Edison Hi, thanks for the message! I was quite unsure over whether it should have been re-listed but I decided upon it because there isn't anything wrong with seeking further opinions (in my view). I wasn't aware at the time that SwisterTwister was the article creator and for that, I shouldn't have re-listed it. My reasoning for re-listing it in the first place was due to ST's concerns and DGG's comment that it was borderline notable. I know now that ST is the article creator so that was a misunderstanding on my behalf and I do apologise for this, I'd be happy to revert the re-list if you want? st170etalk 00:41, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
I'm not the expert on closing/relisting AFDs. You be the judge. Regards. Edison (talk) 04:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
I've removed it and updated the logs accordingly. st170etalk 09:12, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion as the result of AfD

Just FYI, if an AfD is closed as speedy delete, it's probably not necessary to create a talk page for a now non-existent article just to record the results. TimothyJosephWood 18:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

@Timothyjosephwood: I actually didn't mean to do that, I was using the AfD closing tool and it seems to have created the talk page. I'll nominate it for deletion now, thanks for telling me about this! st170etalk 19:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


Hi! Thanks for your edits on the page. Don't worry, I will add some sources and references to secure the article notability, there's dozens of them. --Deansfa (talk) 02:27, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

@Deansfa: Don't worry, I'm not doubting its notability, the French Wikipedia shows that he definitely is notable. You just need to expand the article on here because an editor will probably nominate it for deletion in its current state. Good luck and happy editing! st170etalk 02:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)


Miss Israel 1969

I removed your prod for Miss Israel 1969 because I think it has enough support for notability to at least need AFD. However, it does occur to me that perhaps all the Miss Israel 19## should be rolled into a single article titled something like "Miss Israel Winners" (or possibly merged into the Miss Israel article.) RJFJR (talk) 19:29, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

I agree that all of the articles should be merged into one article: the content on them is embarrassing. List of Miss Israel winners might work? st170etalk 19:52, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable to me. Include runners up if we have the data in the existing articles? RJFJR (talk) 14:33, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
That sounds good. I'll have a go at merging them into a List article. st170etalk 13:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas St170e!!
Hi St170e, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

Thanks for all your help on the 'pedia!

   –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 22:35, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much Davey2010! A very merry Christmas to you and your family too. st170etalk 13:58, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome and thank you so much :), Have a great day :), –Davey2010 Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 14:53, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

-Sinn Fein Euroscpeticism

I provided proof Sinn Fein is a member of a euroscpetic group. How on earth isn't that enough? Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:26, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

You need to provide sources that explicitly say that SF are eurosceptic. st170etalk 14:27, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Why? Do you have a wikipedia policy you can point to? if not It should be included. Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:31, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
You're trying to add a controversial claim to an article without sourcing it. Check out WP:PROVEIT. st170etalk 14:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Show me where it says you cant prove that X is Y if X is a member of a group which supports Y. Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:35, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
The party which SF join in the EU are soft eurosceptics, which is fair. Their membership of that party does not show that SF is eurosceptic, what policies do they have that are eurosceptic? They supported the UK staying in the EU, surely a eurosceptic party would advocate for their removal? You need to source your claim from an independent, reliable and verifiable source or else remove it from the article. st170etalk 14:38, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Please do explain why an Anti-Euroscpetic party would support/join a eurosceptic one. Occam's Razor should be invoked. Euroscpeticism has nothing to do with EU membership its to do with opposing EU policies. Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:44, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
What I'm saying to you is to prove that they are eurosceptic, because their membership of a socialist party in the EU doesn't prove anything. Source it. st170etalk 14:46, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
No but a membership of a eurosceptic one obviously does. Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

That isn't enough for Wikipedia sourcing. Please source it or remove it - it's obviously a disputed point and everything needs to be verified. st170etalk 14:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Again unless you can point to a wikipedia policy that prohibits this kind of sourcing it shouldnt be removed. If you can't just say so. Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:51, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
If a source is in dispute, then you need to find another one. Per WP:PROVEIT:
Attribute all quotations and any material whose verifiability is challenged or likely to be challenged to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article. Cite the source clearly and precisely (specifying page, section, or such divisions as may be appropriate). See Citing sources for details of how to do this.
Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.
The cited source 'must clearly support the material'. Membership doesn't clearly support the material, so please find another source to back up your controversial claim or else remove it from the article. st170etalk 14:56, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Membership of a eurosceptic party doesn't support the claim? How? Apollo The Logician (talk) 14:59, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to debate this anymore. The fact is that you haven't complied with the above policy that explicitly explains your point. You can find a source or else remove it. You can't assume their views on the EU based on who they sit with in the EU parliament. --st170etalk 15:00, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
If you can't prove that being a member of a eurosceptic party doesn't imply Euroscpeticism then it will be added. The burden of proof is on you. Apollo The Logician (talk) 15:03, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
It's you that's making the claim that they're eurosceptic - not me. The burden of proof is on you to prove it or else you'll be in direct violation of WP policy. st170etalk 15:04, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
Also - just wanted to remind you that you don't own the article, per WP:OWNERSHIP. st170etalk 15:05, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
I already did. I provided a link showing sinn fein is a member of a eurosceptic party. You denied this was proof. It's up to you prove that it doesn't qualify as proof. Re WP:Ownership, likewise your unbacked up claim doesn't dictate what goes in the article. Apollo The Logician (talk) 15:10, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't explicitly (remember the word explicitly) show that Sinn Fein are eurosceptics. You can argue this all you like, but the source doesn't show this. Take it the talk page of the article. There is no need to be awkward: I haven't claimed anything, you have. Now, take it to the talk page of the article and discuss it there. st170etalk 15:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

You need to show where SF say explicitly on their own website or manufesto that they oppose the RoI's membership of the EU. Wanting the EU to change from being (a) creeping neoliberal cabal or (b) a Marxist conspiracy [depending on your pov] is not the same thing. Guilt by association is not good enough. Everything you have said above amounts to wp:syn and you should recognise it. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:25, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
You don't even know what euroscepticicism is. It has nothing to do with wanting to leave theEU Apollo The Logician (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Euroscepticism includes the view of secession from the union, although it refers more broadly to criticism. Again, you've failed to come up with anymore evidence to back up your claim. Tell me this: the UK is part of the EU - if the EU decides to have a European army, does that represent the view of the UK? No. st170etalk 17:56, 25 December 2016 (UTC
I never denied it included the view of succession. Sinn Fein campaigned for a no vote for the Lisbon and nice treaties. If that's not euroscepticism I don't know what is.Apollo The Logician (talk) 17:59, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Have you ever thought that they might actually be opposed to the content of the treaty rather than just the treaty for the sake of being eurosceptic? Many members of SF would take issue by being called eurosceptic, and at the end of the day, we need a blatant source that outlines this because at the moment you seem to be drawing your own conclusion from your own research. st170etalk 18:26, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Irish refugee travel document.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Irish refugee travel document.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:42, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Closure of 2016 Zurich attack deletion discussion

Hi St170e,

I don't believe there exists a "clear consensus" on the 2016 Zurich attack deletion discussion. The discussion was 9–4 in favor of keep based on raw votes alone when including the nominator; the nine "keep" votes were made within two days of the opening of the discussion, but all subsequent votes were in favor of deletion. Considering recentism with regard to notability, I don't believe that the discussion was clearly in favor of "keep", especially considering the early votes for "keep" versus the later trend towards deletion. If it's possible, I'd rather see the discussion continue for several additional days and listed in an appropriate venue for further discussion. Thanks for your attention on this issue. Mélencron (talk) 03:39, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Mélencron - thanks for your message. I did consider re-listing this, but I believe that my decision to close it as keep was the right one. The contributors have shown that the incident received a lot of attention and the article is well sourced (remember that the nom nominated it for its notability). I did see clear consensus here to keep, although I did also note that there was concern that the naming of the article was incorrect and I've reflected on this in my closing remarks. There were only three delete votes, and one of those only took issue with the naming. st170etalk 03:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Not that it makes much difference, but that AfD looks like one delete and two keeps. One of the contributors was a sock who was discredited on the discussion by User:Drmies. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 04:22, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

I did see that on the debate before I closed it. If you do want to reopen it for discussion I'd be happy to. st170etalk 04:28, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm sorry but that is a terrible close; I agree with Magnolia677. Besides the problem of the sock edit, you failed to notice that not a single piece of evidence was brought forward by those who wished to have the article kept. Stating something is notable and proving something is notable are two different things, and admins know that. Please undo your close. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:18, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
I've undone the close for you, but I'm still going to stick by what I did. I've relisted it so other editors can contribute to the discussion. For the record, I didn't fail to notice anything; if an article requires expansion then it should be tagged as such and not taken to AfD, and that was the view brought up in the discussion. I will also reiterate that I noted your comment before I closed it; I was fully aware of the sock. st170etalk 17:20, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
I appreciate that, but I repeat that closers need to pay attention to the arguments, and in this case, with only one single "delete" vote, that warranted some commentary from the closer. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for answering my edit request! :-) Ron Schnell 04:02, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Happy editing! st170e Happy New Year! 17:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 7