Liz is currently experiencing significant
stress that may affect their ability to work on Wikipedia. They may choose to work in quieter areas and avoid complicated tasks or areas prone to conflict. They may also respond to talk page or email messages more slowly than usual, and your patience is greatly appreciated. Thank you.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, this user asks you to take precautions:
1. Maintain social distancing by starting new posts in new sections, to avoid contaminating other users.
2. Follow the one-way system by putting new posts at the bottom.
This page was last edited or modified by
Matrix (
talk).
Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{You've got mail}} template to this page. I check my Wikipedia email account infrequently.
Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position. Basaliskinspect damage⁄
berate 4 August 2013 Well said!LizRead!Talk!
While Wikipedia's written
policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia,
ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through
consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves
may be changed to reflect
evolving consensus. (
WP:NOT)
I am an employee at E.ON Next, the gas and electricity company based in the U.K. We are looking to create our own Wikipedia page, as we currently don't have one to direct our customers too. The most we have is a subsection on E.ON UK's page, as they are our parent business. I can see that in March 2022, you created a draft article for E.ON Next, but it appears to have been abandoned. May I ask what stage you were at with this content? Would it be better for you to delete the article so we can create a new one from scratch? Please let me know what you would best advise. Many thanks, Maria.
Maria Savage (
talk) 10:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, could you restore Jason Perlow to draft? The article was recently deleted but I think there is enough sourcing out there to demonstrate GNG is met. Thank you,
Thriley (
talk) 00:47, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The AFD which resulted in deletion of this article just closed today. I'd advise you to approach Explicit and request his help. I don't want to step on anyone's toes. Is that okay? LizRead!Talk! 01:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Good idea. I just left him a message. Best,
Thriley (
talk) 01:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz. This newly created article is a copyvio cut and paste from a blog site. Twinkle won’t let me tag it for G12 as the source site is on the spam blacklist and it blocks the link, so it may need an admin’s attention. Thanks
Mccapra (
talk) 05:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz. You recently closed the
AFD discussion for
John Dunlop (chess player) one day after it was relisted to generate a more thorough discussion. I would suggest that 24 hours is not long enough to generate a more thorough discussion, and would ask that you reconsider the closure. I have located contemporary sources that would allow an expansion of the article, e.g.
this item from the New Zealand Herald of 6 January 1921.
Paora (
talk) 00:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm open to your suggestion if you can state that you will participate in this AFD if it is reopened. As it was, if it wasn't me, another admin would have closed it similarly at the state it was at. LizRead!Talk! 00:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz. Thanks for your prompt response. Yes, I will participate in the AFD if it is reopened.
Paora (
talk) 01:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I noticed that you left a npov template on
Gangs in the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department without any explanation, even though one is recommended per the templates page. Could you provide examples or reasons as to what made you decide to append this template to said page? I personally didn't think the page is biased but I may be blind to what you see. Thanks!
Fluffy89502 (
talk) 00:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Fluffy89502 (
talk) 00:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)reply
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar
Thanks for your tireless work for the closure of AfDs.
Tehonk (
talk) 04:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey there Liz. Could you help take a look on
this issue? Correct me if I'm wrong, but said IP address appears to be showing chronic and persistent behaviour, from repeatedly making edits with no ES to avoiding any sort of discussion on their talk page. Appreciate your help on this. Thanks.
hundenvonPG (
talk) 08:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Said IP address has even made a rather aggresive reply too in ANI.
hundenvonPG (
talk) 09:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Jack Lindsay - Add parentheses/disambiguator
Hi Liz,
You undid an edit I made, comment: "Unnecessary page move".
Could you help me understand what makes a page move necessary?
Nawwaf Hannan - Deleted Page "Ariful Hannan" due to unamibgious content
Hi Liz,
You deleted an article I recently wrote on this individual, and I was wondering if it is possible to rewrite the article with a more neutral tone and less specificity, mainting neutrality and consicion. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Nawwaf.hannan (
talk •
contribs) 03:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I assume you are talking about
Draft:Ariful Hannan. We generally don't restore content that is judged to be promotional. But if you go into your Preferences to your account and enable email access, I'd be willing to email a copy of the content. Then you could use content, off-Wikipedia, and try to write a new draft that isn't so promotional. I recommend you work on it in your User space, like a User sandbox. Then you can submit it to
Articles for Creation for review. Let me know when you have email enabled and I'll send it to you. If you are being compensated for your work, please review
Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and follow the guidelines presented in the policy page. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 02:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia Library message
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024
Bristol University Press and British Online Archives now available
I hope this message finds you well. I recently learned that the Wikipedia page detailing my acting career (Adam Jamal Craig) was deleted under the belief that my contributions are insignificant. This decision also led to the removal of my name from my college's list of notable alumni and omitted references to my involvement in culturally significant works, including television series such as 'The Office' and 'NCIS: LA', among others.
As an actor and business owner actively working and living in Los Angeles, I respectfully request a reconsideration of these changes. The landscape of art and media is evolving, and my contributions, albeit not always captured through traditional formats, are part of this continuous change.
Please, I ask for your support in undoing the deletions, allowing my career's ongoing story and contributions to be recognized and shared. Thank you for considering my request, and I look forward to any possibility of dialogue on this matter.
I am new to communicating in this wiki-based format so please forgive me if I have responded in some improper way. Edit -> Not sure how the "Books & Bytes" section appeared above. Again, sorry. I'm new at this.
Warm regards,
Adam Jamal Craig
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
You are fortunate. Wikipedia has 3 forms of deletion,
Speedy Deletion,
Proposed Deletion and
AFD Deletion Discussions. Restoring an article can range from being simple to being close-to-impossible. The article you are concerned about was a Proposed Deletion (or PROD) and that can be restored upon request, which I have done. However, the article still might be nominated for a deletion discussion or AFD because the article right now is very weak and has poor sourcing. You or your representation should not edit the article as you have a
conflict-of-interest. But it really needs some valid references to establish your
notability. This is typically done through independent, secondary sources from mainsteam newspapers, journals, books, websites, etc. that provide
significant coverage of you and your career. Do you have a website where you list media coverage? That would make the process easier.
Two more things. If you have questions about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, you are encouraged to bring them to
the Teahouse. There experienced editors can address your questions and concerns about the project's complicated processes. And, second, you are commended for not being angry about this article deletion or taking it personally. It can be very difficult to demonstrate notability as Wikipedia defines it (see
WP:NACTOR) and every day, hundreds of articles and drafts are deleted. Again, you shouldn't edit the article but you are welcome to share any sources on the article talk page and, hopefully, an editor can added them into the article. What we don't want to see is blatant advertising or promotion which can result in another deletion that is much less likely to be restored. Let me know if you have any questions or you can take them to the Teahouse. LizRead!Talk! 02:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz! Hope you've had a good day. Would you reconsider this since the creator has now been CU blocked? If not, totally understand and happy to take it to MfD. Thanks either way cc @
DoubleGrazingStarMississippi 01:43, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Done I'm kind of a stickler for verifying CSD G5 as many overeager editors will tag articles for deletion when they simply file an SPI case. I just want to see a) that the page creator is a confirmed sockpuppet and b) that the block-evading editor is identified. In some cases, Checkusers do not identify the block evading account and I turn those requests down. I know other admins aren't so strict about G5s but when I first became an admin, I was less rigorous about the CSD criteria and got rightly chastized for that. I don't know about you but I always remember the times when my admin decisions are critiqued by senior admins when I first got the mop. LizRead!Talk! 02:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
No worries. It all makes sense. Thankfully there is progress being made with the SPI backlog which will make all of our lives easier.
I totally understand your decision, and hope it didn't come across as not. Just wanted to save us seven days of MfD if the info was now resolved to your satisfaction but didn't want to re-tag over your decline. Unfortunately I think we'll be seeing more of this draft.. Have a good evening and you're totally welcome re: link above. No treasure hunts needed.
StarMississippi 02:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
At least "overeager" is not the worst thing I've been called. Ho hum. --
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 06:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh,
DoubleGrazing, I wasn't referring to you, not at all. It's a comment coming from 10 years editing on the project, not about any editor specifically. Sorry for any misunderstanding. LizRead!Talk! 06:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi - I hope you don't mind my contacting you; I'm doing so simply becaause you came up top on the 'recently active admins' list. There's an article
Pumi dog that is blanked out because of an alleged copyvio, which concerns a single sentence where the wording followed that of the American Kennel Club breed standard. Unfortunately the reporting editor has placed the flag at the top of the article, rather than in the relevant section, thus removing the entire article from view. I've followed procedure and posted an amended version of the article, which deals with the matter, at
Talk:Pumi dog/Temp, and I hope it's just a question of an admin copying this back to the main page and removing the flag? But this has been pending now for five days, and with the world's biggest dog show starting tomorrow, this is a period when dog breed pages always get more views. Could you or one of your colleagues kindly drop by
here and take a look, please? Thanks in anticipation....
MapReader (
talk) 08:05, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I apologize for the delay in responding to your query. It looks like an involved discussion has been occurring at
Talk:Pumi dog#Regarding removal of content.. To be honest, the only times I deal with issues of copyright violations is when there is a blatant copyright violation in an article that has been tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G12. I recommend you go to
MER-C, an admin who regularly handles copyright issues. They have already commented on
Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2024 March 2. MER-C has experience on this subject that I do not possess and I think they would be a better judge of what is possible. Since this has been brought to an investigation page, I can't just revert the actions of the other editor as an inquiry is currently in process. There is also an issue of content attribution and I'm not sure it's appropriate to just use your new version over the existing, problematic version. MER-C would be a better judge on this proposal.
I'm really not blowing you off, I'm sending you to someone who could possible offer you the help you are requesting. Good luck. LizRead!Talk! 03:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Dear Liz, I have noticed you do consistently wonderful work on categories, but you have just rolled back my edit at
VB-4 and I wonder if there may be some mistake.
If you review Chapter 1 at the linked page -
https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/naval-aviation-history/dictionary-of-american-naval-aviation-squadrons-volume-1.html, you will find that at the height of the Pacific War in World War II, U.S. Navy aircraft carriers were operating a number of Bombing Squadrons, the most famous being the ones that fought at Midway and Coral Sea. All of these squadrons were redesignated several times over, and many now have articles within
Category:Strike fighter squadrons of the United States Navy under their later VFA designations. But to link them properly when they fought the Japanese, a new category will be necessary - this category which I have created. I believe it will easily surpass 20 entries.
Buckshot06(talk) 08:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If you disagree with my edit, just revert it. I just saw a category that only contained a redirect and redirect categories are rather optional. But if I acted incorrectly, just undo what I did. I'm not a subject matter expert here. LizRead!Talk! 08:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Please specify deletion reason
Talk:Xianfeng Gu Article Talk Read Edit Add topic View history Tools From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Why is Xianfeng Gu the only missing page for Morningside Gold Medalist? What are the criteria for creating Xianfeng Gu (born Nov 2, 1970) page in Wikipedia? Chinese Wikipedia page for Xianfeng Gu presently contains contents that deviate from the original contributor's intention but "somehow was inserted" by a group of seemingly more than 10 (a "Japanese" wiki bot, somehow, too) zh-wiki users (that are changing and on average use more than 4 simplified zh accounts with Japanese "real" person names, with targeted interest in HK, TW, Dalian, graphics, computational chemistry/topology) including a user ID Shizhao publicly demonstrating (DBLP/Google Scholar) academic tie to Microsoft (Xianfeng Gu's student Wei Zeng) possessing publications in CVPR (Xianfeng Gu a many-time program committee member, general chair, reviewer for CVPR). Competitive (Chinese Olympiad) chemistry base is in Jilin University (guided by Yanbo Sun with serious connection to Dalian University of Technology where Xianfeng Gu works heavily with a high-rank Secretary Na Lei Professor connected to Yanbo Sun as of 2023 which has been and is of course open information to chemical Olympiad competitors) Already in wikidata. Harvard CS PhD 2003 (Gortler & Yau) Harvard CS Master 1996-1997 (Mumford) graduate fellowship Tsinghua TCS 1994 (1989-) undergraduate fellowship
216.165.211.223 (
talk) 09:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the explanation,
MarkH21, I think there is a question in here somewhere amongst the gibberish and conspiracy theories. But it's hard to discern what they want. LizRead!Talk! 02:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Badun page deletion
Hello Liz
This is in regard to the page deletion for the danish music group
Badun, which I would like to dispute.
Badun is most certainly a very notable danish music group. They have existed for 20+ years and released 10+ albums, which are available in both physical and digital format:
They have been well covered and reviewed in the media and played several hundred concerts around the world, and they have collaborated with and inspired many artists.
A quick search on google for 'Badun' yields a first page almost exclusively with results about the band, which should validate its existence and wide notoriety:
Sorry for the delay in responding to your query.
Badun was deleted through a
Proposed deletion so it can be restored upon request. I can either do this or you can make a request at
WP:REFUND and the admins there will handle it. Please know that the article can still be nominated for deletion at
Articles for deletion but this would give you time to improve the article and participate in a discussion and put forward your argument. Just let me know what you would like to do. LizRead!Talk! 02:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If you could make the request to restore it for me, that would be wonderful, thank you. :)
83.89.251.164 (
talk) 14:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If you could make the request to restore it for me, that would be wonderful, thank you. :)
Janusnovak (
talk) 14:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz,
Did you request for the
Badun article to be restored? I don't see that it has come back up...
Janusnovak (
talk) 09:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Maybe you didn't see my replies, since I didn't mention you like I do now. So I would still like you to restore the
Badun article if you would? Then I will add reliable sources to it. :)
There was a problem as
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2025 Women's Bangladesh Premier League wasn't set up appropriately as a bundled nomination, the other article was just thrown into the deletion nomination. So, XFDcloser didn't delete it when the discussion was closed. But an editor later tagged
Women's Bangladesh Premier League for speedy deletion and since the editors participating in the AFD were in favor of deleting both articles, I went ahead with that deletion.
I wasn't 100% comfortable to handling it this way but it's fairly common that AFD nominators don't set up bundled nominations appropriately (more the rule than the exception) and the consensus did seem to favor deletion. There is already a draft at
Draft:Women's Bangladesh Premier League that was created before the AFD closed so perhaps an improved version will eventually be approved. I hope this addresses your concern. LizRead!Talk! 02:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I would have deleted it, but it was not clear from your close that you considered it was a valid bundled nomination so I decided to post a note here. Thanks. --
Whpq (
talk) 03:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Damage done by User:Fhektii
Hello Liz, hopefully you are doing good. Although, usually questions are asked on
the Teahouse, however, since you are familiar with the case, I thought I should ask you. Hopefully you won't mind.
This was my first time, as you might have noticed, so initially I was just going around. I saw the edit history of the
User:Fhektii, I saw the deletion discussions, for crafting my own comment. In the process what I discovered was that there were few very old accounts that were commenting for deletion, however, to the best of my knowledge, it seemed that they were ignoring
WP:GNG and
WP:GNP. I don't want to assume anything bad about any one, maybe I have missed something or misunderstood, if you could find the time and look into it. I will be truly grateful. Thank you. (
talk) 00:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Could you specify which AFD(s) you are concerned about? Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 02:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I am concerned about a senior editor. User:Oaktree b.
S/he/they commented for delete, on almost half of the
User:Fhektii nominated for deletion. On the pages
Sharon Tay and
Jennifer Gilbert specifically, are not making sense to me. Not assuming bad about him, maybe I have misunderstood. Thanks.
Ms.Aloisia (
talk) 00:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Leila Feinstein
Hello, it appears you may have mistakenly soft deleted the page
Leila Feinstein. I don't think it was eligible, as it had previously been nominated in the
Fidel Vargas batch. Unless there's some kind of misunderstanding on my part.
AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (
talk) 04:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, you are absolutely correct. I didn't catch that. I will revert my actions. Thanks for your sharp eye. LizRead!Talk! 05:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hallo Liz, thanks for closing the AfD, but why "Merge", rather than "Redirect"? There is no content not included in
Lowick, Cumbria other than the coordinates and an image.
PamD 06:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry, ignore that: I now see it didn't previously have a mention, so its existence needed to be merged!
PamD 06:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm glad you found your answer. In the discussion comments, at least one editor proposed a Merge and while editors can recover content when an artice is transformed into a Redirect, it's easier if you close a discussion as Merge. Plus, after any usable content is removed, the page then does become a Redirect which is the result you seem to have wanted. I think I'm a very neutral closer but I do favor an ATD if one is proposed, if only to repurpose content from weak and unwanted articles to other articles where it might provide some value. LizRead!Talk! 02:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Revolutionary Communist Party (UK, 2024)
Hi Liz,
Thankyou for closing
the AfD on this and reverting the article per AfD.
However, I believe the AfD called for more than a simple content reversion within the page. The article was renamed by
User:Tedgrant1917 ([
[1]]), and the article requires moving back to the title
Socialist Appeal (Britain), since the article is about Socialist Appeal. Unfortunately because it is still at the title
Revolutionary Communist Party (UK, 2024), editors have continued attempting to rewrite the article about RCP, which is non-notable (and doesn't even exist at this point). I am unable to complete this move as
Socialist Appeal (Britain) has multiple revisions and therefore a normal editor cannot complete the move.
I may have caused confusion here by stating "Keep, Sort of" in that I was advocating to keep the edit history, more than the title. The content needed reverting, but so did the title.
In either case, it's clearly inappropriate for the article about Socialist Appeal to be under the title RCP, and people will continue to try and replace the logo and change the article contents if it's under that title. TedGrant has caused a right cluster-fudge by usurping/rebranding the original article instead of just creating a new one (which would have failed NPP).
While I could do what you ask, I hesitate to take on more action than came out of the consensus for this AFD. When a closer goes beyond the community consensus, it's called a supervote and the closer can be taken to AN/ANI when they do this which I'd like to avoid.
I'd recommend you taking this request to
Wikipedia:Requested moves and asking the editors/admins there to consider your request. They are experts at evaluating move proposals and dealing with existing page histories and I'd trust them to know what they are doing. The page moves I do are rather simple affairs and this is more complicated. I'd also be interested in hearing their assessment of your plan.
I don't mean to discourage you, this might not be a big deal, I just think that the editors who patrol RM would be better to assess this than I am. LizRead!Talk! 02:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thankyou for the considered response. However, I'm a little confused because the consensus clearly went further than just "revert the content". All bar one of the "Keep" votes was actually "Keep as per Hemmers" or "Keep and restore as per Hemmers". So the restoration of the page title as described in my proposal does seem to be the consensus of the AfD. What's been done so far - reverting the content - is somewhat "half a job". I can take it to RM if you prefer, but from my understanding of the discussion, the following was the accepted consensus:
Keep Sort of. But revert to 17 December 2023, when it was actually a moderately well-sourced article about a long-standing publication/movement (the Socialist Appeal) (done). Then merge the latest edit of Socialist Appeal (Britain) back on top of it and delete that article (not done). Then move the entire stack (with edit history) back to Socialist Appeal (Britain) where it belongs (not done). I'm at an absolute loss as to what the blazing nonsense has gone on with this article. They've moved a long-standing article, blanked it and rebranded it, and then someone's copied the old content into a new article using the old name!?! A quick hunt back through the History shows it is notable - they've just removed all the references to the former name, instead of creating a new article for the new name/body (which likely wouldn't pass NPP). Failing all that, Delete, it's just a shame to lose the edit history for Socialist Appeal (Britain), which is currently underneath this article. Hemmers (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I want to request a review on article on Artist Volvexzshawa the reason for it's deletion was because it lacked enough reference and required more time to be updated with reliable sources of reverence and with my research I do believe the artist is a Notable person and a pioneer in the Kenyan Hiphop Music cited sources across Nigeria National Newspapers and Kenya National Newspapers and Television notability
Teresia Akinyi Achilo (
talk) 15:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
DRV is for if you think I didn't close the discussion appropriately, so it's about my closure, not about the value of this article. The only way I know to overcome a "Delete" AFD decision is to write a new draft, addressing the problems coming up in the AFD, and submitting it to
Articles for Creation for review. If you move a new version directly into main space, it will likely be tagged for speedy deletion, CSD G4 which is what happened the last time it was deleted.
If you have general questions about article creation and Wikipedia's deletion processes, I encourage you to bring them to
the Teahouse. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 02:14, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, I just noticed and was quite surprised that the article mentioned in the title got deleted. I used that page multiple times in the past as reference,
and I was not the only one. I personally do not agree with the deletion, and I'd like to elaborate why that is.
The most often mentioned reason in the discussion is
WP:NOTCATALOG. I have looked into said ruleset. It is not a simple listing because it explains what the different numbers in the model number mean, and shows a comparison between model years of different series of models. They are not loosely associated, what is listed is exactly defined in the title. The points 3. through 6. are pretty obviously not involved with this.
It's also not a "brochure-style advertisement", listing of (industry standard) specifications is not an advertisement and the text sections are written as neutral as possible.
"Largely unreferenced, and most of the references provided are primary sources from Dell's support site." I don't see how it would have to be done differently for a page that contains lists of technical products. It's like that for
other list pages for technical devices as well. Also, there's pretty much no better source for the specifications of a product than its manufacturer, because if they lied, they'd be liable.
As for the notability of said products,
Dell has consistently been the largest manufacturer of monitors for the past decade. Coming back to the example of Samsung, it would be like claiming a list of Samsung Galaxy devices is not notable despite them being the largest manufacturer of smartphones for years. And that's also why there are lists for the Galaxy Z, S, A, M, F, XCover, Note, J and Y series.
I'm not in favor of keeping pages just for the sake of it. This page has been legitimately useful for people, including me and those mentioned, and I don't think it's only the three of us using this page for a reference, especially because it goes back so far, which is information hard to come by nowadays.
Punkt64 (
talk) 20:11, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
What I would like to address in further detail is the argument of lack of sources. There are many reviews of individual models (often but not only of the higher end Ultrasharp series) on the internet and youtube. Those could be added in a section for reception for example, here are some
Their monitor series also includes some products that are rather unique in the market, for example some models with 8K resolution, reviewed many times
including popular YouTube channel
Marques Brownlee.
And to clarify, someone in the deletion discussion mentioned that the article does not show why this is just another monitor manufacturer. That's why I referenced and said that Dell has been the single biggest manufacturer of monitors for the past decade. That link and statement could also be included in the article to show the relevance.
Punkt64 (
talk) 20:33, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I actually have no opinion about this article. I closed the deletion discussion,
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dell monitors and the opinion was unanimous for Deletion. Please read over the arguments in the AFD to see why the participating editors believed the article should be deleted. If you do not think I read the consensus correctly, then you may appeal the closure at
Wikipedia:Deletion review. Ordinarily, I normally make an offer to restore the article to Draft space so that it can be improved but the very nature of this article, which was basically a product catalog, is unlikely to be changed by editing. Additionally, the article was full of templates about Dell products and those templates have since been deleted.
If you want an article on this subject, I think your best route is to start over by writing a draft article in your User space, like your Sandbox, or in Draft space. That, and deletion review, are the two options I see as the consensus was clear and I can not revert the closure based on any arguments you make here. I'm sorry but my role is to interpret the consensus in a discussion, not advocate for articles. LizRead!Talk! 20:47, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Well if you say the article in its current form will not be accepted by editing then what use is a Deletion review? I don't know the exact procedures of english wikipedia, I'm usually editing in german wikipedia.
As I do not have the energy or time right now to write a completely new article, a relatively large one at that, I'd like to recreate it in my space for personal use. The missing template is a problem. Is there any way to get this into the user space and then use it? It is not saved in the
wayback machine. I know of no way to get it back without rewriting it myself.
Punkt64 (
talk) 21:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Or better yet, you said you could restore it to draft space. Is it possible for you to restore it to my user draft space, together with the template? That would be very nice and useful. As I said not necessarily for publishing at the moment but for personal use.
I have tried it myself but that was from a wayback save from 6th May of 2023, so probably not the most current version. And it also lacked the template which makes half of the article unreadable.
Punkt64 (
talk) 21:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Punkt64, I'd be willing to restore it to your User space so you could view it. I'm not sure about restoring all of the templates. Just know that if you move it back into main space, it will be tagged for speedy deletion,
CSD G4 as an article previously deleted in an
AFD deletion discussion. The only way I know to overcome an AFD Delete decision is to write a draft and submit it to
AFC. I understand that the English Wikipedia does have a truckload of policies and guidelines that are especially confusing to new or infrequent editors. I'll look into that restoration later tonight. LizRead!Talk! 02:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
G4 in draft space
Hi Liz, you've a couple of times (most recently just now, at
Draft:Ricky Guillart) declined my G4 request on the basis that G4 doesn't apply in the draft space. Could you please point me to where it says that, so I can understand the rules better? Looking at
WP:G4, my reading is that this is true only when the content has been draftified, whereas eg. the Ricky Guillart draft was created in draft space from the outset. Thanks, --
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 07:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
When you are a new admin, there are two ways to learn what decisions you should make as an admin. One is reviewing policy and guidelines. The second is seeing how more experienced admins act and adopting their practices. My action about CSD G4s in Draft space might fall under the latter group. Unless the draft is identical to the deleted article or is vandalism, drafts are typically untagged if they are labeled CSD G4s. The reason why is that there should be a way for an edtor to write on an article subject that has been deleted through AFD and write an improved and better article. If all drafts were subject to CSD G4s, we'd never be able to accept well-written articles on subjects that had once been deleted through AFD.
If this point isn't stated in CSD policy, I'm sure it's been a subject of discussion (probably multiple times) on the CSD talk page and I'll search for that later tonight. If I can't find it, then I think it is worth starting a new discussion on CSD Talk to make that clear. The only aspect that I'm sure of is that I'm not the only admin to handle CSD G4s in Draft space in this way. So, if I'm incorrect, it's not just my behavior that needs to change but the other administrators who patrol CSD categories. LizRead!Talk! 00:44, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Okay, no worries, Liz. I just thought maybe I'd overlooked something obvious, but it seems more of a grey area? In any case, I'm not here to argue with admins' decisions, whether I think they're right or wrong; you guys take enough flak as it is, for doing a difficult job (that I wouldn't do, even if offered!), and I for one don't need to be making it any more difficult. Best, --
DoubleGrazing (
talk) 15:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Undo deletion of Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar)
Mrs Liz, please undo the deletion of
Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar). It is a party that is going to contest in the national elections as part of a major national alliance in a few months. The party has seats in the national parliament and seats in multiple state assemblies. There is no reason to delete it.
While my closure on
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar) was tentative, the consensus I saw was that the article content was inaccurate and if an article exists on this subject, it should be rewritten. Please review the comments made in the AFD. So, I closed the discussion as Delete. I don't think another relisting would increase the participation and because some editors actually thought the information in the article was false, I'm unwilling to restore this article to Draft space.
I see two options for you. If you disagree with my assessment of the consensus of the discussion, you can file an appeal at
Wikipedia:Deletion review. Please know that this discussion will not be an opportunity for you to argue that the article subject is notable, the discussion will focus on my actions and the closure of the discussion and whether that was correct. The other option is to start a new draft in Draft space and submit it to
WP:AFC for review. This is necessary when an article has been deleted through an AFD because another article on this subject put into main space can be speedy deleted, CSD G4. I think that is the most productive route to take but it's up to you. LizRead!Talk! 00:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Or you can just restore it so that editors can correct it if it has false information like it is normally done. Why are you unwilling to restore it? Articles aren't deleted for being incorrect, they are corrected. I don't care for the merits of your actions or all the bureaucracy. I've seen it takes far too long. There is an upcoming election and an major party has gotten its article deleted.
MrMkG (
talk) 02:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
AfD discussion
Hi! The note you dropped on my talk has gotten some engagement. Flagging that, but also
User_talk:Star_Mississippi#Related_issue. Nothing wrong with your relists, you followed procedure. I did not on the close, but I always like to drop a note when I mention people. It's the same discussion we' ve had a lot. It's ineligible for soft deletion, but if no one wants to retain it, why do we bother. Happy Friday!
StarMississippi 18:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm going to piggyback on this in re my AfD for
The Garagiste Festivals, since it's another example of the same issue. Considering the total lack of engagement with this AfD, would there be any issue with a BOLD merge of notable, non-promotional into another article, or do I need to wait until the AfD closes?
Just Another Cringy Username (
talk) 18:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for letting me know,
Star Mississippi, I usually don't join talk page discussions until the end of the day when I have more free time but I'll check out the discussion on your User talk page. I appreciate you letting me know about it as I don't check my pings.
Just Another Cringy Username, please do not Merge content until the AFD is closed but if you want to go that route, please make sure you mention that in your AFD nomination statement so it's clear you are not seeking deletion. But we typically advise that while it's fine to improve articles while they are being discussed at an AFD, large content removals, Merges, Redirects or page moves can be disruptive.
As a closer, if there is low participation, I typically like to let AFDs run at least two weeks although other closers will close them sooner so I'm not sure what will happen with this one. I've actually seen 3 or 4 editors jump into a discussion after 3 relistings so it's hard to predict what will happen. There are some subjects that draw a lot of participants, like contentious topics, subjects in the news and, for some reason, articles about places/towns, but most AFDs are suffering from a shortage of editors interested in participating. I'd estimate that we have half the number of participating editors in most AFDs than there were a year ago. It's an area of the project that many editors burn out on and I can understand why. An editor can spend an hour or more searching for reliable sources and then the AFD is closed as Delete. I'm sure it is very frustrating. But I can't think of an area where an individual editor can have more influence over the content of the project than participating thoughtfully in AFDs. Whether or not articles are Kept or Delete can often come down to one or two editors which, honestly, I don't think is optimal for the health of the project. LizRead!Talk! 00:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Latest from @depthsofwiki Twitter account
Have you seen
this? :)
Owen×☎ 20:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I hadn't seen it, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Fifteen years ago, I spent as much time on Twitter as I do now on Wikipedia so I'm aware of the account but I just am not on the platform any more so I don't see their posts. I think they are on Instagram as well.
It's very flattering but also a bit unsettling as I think most editors work without thinking that anyone is paying attention to what they are doing...unless they make a colossal mistake. And there are many editors/admins who work just as much if not more than I do. I think about editors/admins who create Featured Articles, dig into unearthing sockfarms, handle disputes on Contentious Topics and manage the AE noticeboard and, most of all, those editors who take on the thankless task of investigating copyright concerns. They are heroes to me. The work I do does fall under the rubric of "maintenance" as unglamorous as that sounds, that's what the mop is for. I guess I find it satisfying cleaning out the unwanted pages and welcoming new editors. I just think it is so important what that "first contact" is with newbies, it can drive them away, muttering under their breath about what a bureaucratic hellhole Wikipedia is, or encourage them to spend more time here and try to pick up all of the rules and policies. I think we forget that with experienced editors moving on and retiring, we have a constant need for competent new editors and you never know which ones will turn into those editors who write articles on some subject that is missing from the project.
But thanks for letting me know, it's kind of like getting a barnstar only in front of an audience. LizRead!Talk! 00:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
These two articles might mention the Talent economy phrase in the body of the article because it is part of a title of a book but this term is not part these articles' page titles or a main subject which is what disambiguation pages are for. They just happen to mention a book that has Talent economy in the book title. For further guidance, please review
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages#Specific instances and
Wikipedia:Disambiguation#What not to include or you can inquire about disambiguation pages at
the Teahouse. But in my eyes, this was an appropriate speedy deletion tagging.
If you disagree with the tagging and deletion of this page, you can file an appeal at
Wikipedia:Deletion review and see if the editors there agree with you. Personally, if was me, I would create Talent economy as a Redirect page and use one of these articles as the target page, including a
hatnote to reference the other article rather than create a disambiguation page. But you are free to take what action you feel is appropriate. LizRead!Talk! 23:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
That page was a redirect to
Alpine, Mendocino County, California which was deleted by
PROD. The only edit to this page was one creating this redirect. This page creator created a lot of articles about small towns that have since been deleted along with many redirects to them. I hope this addresses your question. LizRead!Talk! 22:36, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure why the content bothers you so. I just blanked the page, not all User pages with gibberish need to be deleted. I hope this addresses your concern. LizRead!Talk! 22:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
Dr. Squatch. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
108.49.72.125 (
talk) 05:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Some bubble tea for you!
Thank you for all the work you do. I find your contributions to one of the largest free online encyclopedia amazing. Thank you for all that you do.
Maxb133 (
talk) 06:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, Why was the
Jeff Wise article deleted? I'm a new user, so I'm not super familiar with the nuances of this website.
Maxb133 (
talk) 06:38, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
As a discussion closer, I assess the consensus of the discussion. If you read
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Wise you can see the arguments editors put forward for why this article should be deleted. After you have read it over, return here and tell me if you now understand. Would you like to create a new article on this subject?
If you have questions about AFDs and Wikipedia's deletion processes, please bring them to
the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice, support and a second opinion. LizRead!Talk! 03:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, could you restore
Draft:Musk v. OpenAI? The deletion discussion ended in a redirect, but I believe there is enough to meet GNG. I would like to work on it and resubmit. Best,
Thriley (
talk) 22:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You've been around here long enough to know that I can't just revert a AFD consensus decision, especially when no editors were arguing to Keep this article. But since it is a Redirect, the content is still all there. You could move the page to Draft space, creating a Redirect in its place, where you could work on improving the article. Sound good? LizRead!Talk! 03:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh no, I didn’t mean that! Just wanted to move the redirect to draft. Looks like I can do that myself.
Thriley (
talk) 03:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
G5 for non-EC users creating ECP articles?
What is the current status of using G5 to speedy delete articles in ECP topics (in this case, the Arab-Israeli conflict) created by users not yet EC? Should these pages be marked for deletion, and if yes, what is the correct way to do so? I didn't want to imply that the creator was a sockpuppet, I'm sorry.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 03:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
If this is the case, it shouldn't get a CSD G5 tag, tag it instead with {{db-gs}}. I'm not sure if this is programmed into Twinkle yet. LizRead!Talk! 03:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Chaotic Enby, to be honest, very few editors, even page patrollers, know about this speedy deletion code. I only know of two editors who have correctly tagged articles that fit the criteria. Now you are one of them! LizRead!Talk! 03:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Respected Mam can you please 🙏 help me inprove Draft:Yash Shah (contortionist) and make it fit for article space. Mam I had tried my best as much as I can able. But mam now I don't able understand how to improve it further.. So I request you please help me..
Tablasingh (
talk) 04:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
First, I don't work on article or draft creation. Second, could you provide me with a link to the article you are talking about? Then I can look at it. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 04:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi @
Liz: Can you delete this: "Template:People of the German Rote Kapelle resistance group". Another another renamed that template wrongly and I put a G8 on it. I'm not sure if the G8 is applicable. I moved the the template name to something else accidently. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 08:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, its been done by Fastily. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 09:10, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Good because I was asleep. LizRead!Talk! 17:24, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Creation of the page Delonte Hood
Just saw this page was deleted two months ago for "Appears to failWP:SPORTCRIT, cannot find any significant coverage and none shown in article." If I can fix the problem and provide significant coverage about his player could I create this article again? (said If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.). Thank You !
Danjobilly1 (
talk) 17:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
No problem. This was a
Proposed deletion so it can be restored upon request. I can restore it to main space, where it might be tagged for AFD deletion (it's a possibility) or to your User space or Draft space if you would prefer a chance to look it over. Let me know what you would like. LizRead!Talk! 17:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Could you restore it to main space? I can make the necessaryessisary changed from there. Thank you !
Danjobilly1 (
talk) 17:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I see you already recreated this article. But I restored the previous edits which you can check out in case you wanted to know what the original content on the page was. Sorry for the delay. LizRead!Talk! 19:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)reply
hello Liz. just accepted this out of AfC, but I'm unable to move it without the disambiguator. i noticed you were the editor who protected it -- there appears to be a draft at
Draft:Justin Jin, but it is about a different subject, and not currently in the mainspace. could you move these? thank you.
She wasafairy 06:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, I handled this backwards as I only saw your message now. I lifted page protection, then saw that
Justin Jin (entrepreneur) is being discussed at an AFD so it shouldn't be moved unless it is Kept. I should have checked first as the page title appears to me in a pink font, signaling that it has been tagged for deletion or deletion discussion. Sorry for the tardy response. LizRead!Talk! 19:19, 13 March 2024 (UTC)reply
ah no worries, maybe it would be appropriate to keep it at the entrepreneur disambiguation if the other draft is brought into main space. anyways, thank you.
She wasafairy 06:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Just sent you an email
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello. Could I get your advice on the propriety of adding a new page a little late (see the section note to closing admin). Could the AfD be relisted?
Local Variable (
talk) 00:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Could I ask you to clarify your rationale on this close. It looks entirely like no consensus to me. I see no good reason why greater weight should be given to those who believe deputy ministers do not meet the criteria of
WP:POLITICIAN, when the position is, as you yourself say, unclear. Thanks. --
Necrothesp (
talk) 10:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Please restore Elvira Vikhareva's page
Hello, my name is Evgeny Galitskiy, I am writing to you on behalf of my close friend and a Russian oppositional politician Elvira Vikhareva whose page was removed and put in drafts.
This was done after a message from a user Anatoliy Rosdashin (Анатолий Росдашин) whom neither Elvira, nor I don't know. In the piece of code that Rosdashin submitted, he added to Evira's name a derogatory word "bobroedka" (literally translates from Russian as "beaver eater" and is often used when referred to a different person, a Russian propaganda journalist Margarita Simonyan).
Also, Rosdashin mentioned that Elvira is a "too small and insignificant politician according to
WP:POLITICS". This is not true, because Elvira is a well-known oppositional political figure and political journalist based in Moscow, Russia. She ran for a member of the Moscow Municipal Board in 2021, runs her popular YouTube channel where she interviews important russian politicians, journalists and political scientists.
In 2022 Elvira was unjustly deemed a Foreign Agent by the Russian government. Besides that, she has been many times persecuted by the Russian authorities for her political views, physically attacked by people affiliated with the Russian government and poisoned with a neural agent.
All of this shows that Elvira Vikhareva is an important person in russian political life and her Wikipedia page deserves to be restored.
Elvira asked me to write this message to you, because she fears that her account will be deleted from Wikipedia if she does it herself.
Thank you for all your work as an admin. I often notice you checking the history of articles and sending friendly notes to users. I share this habit and always pay attention to article history, so it’s great to see others who respect it as well. –
DreamRimmer (talk) 02:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
AFD advice
Hi, I can see you are very busy so I hesitated to say something. I saw you involved in the
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Lozupone, and I am unsure how to deal with an editor who I believe is not paying attention to policy and I know another admin here
[2] also told them to pay more attention when reverting changes, and you advised the user on their talk page too about closing AFDs, so I wanted to get input. I have been trying to improve the article at AFD, and the user removed some sources, some were not great sources, but also put a lot of citation needed in the first paragraph even though the second paragraph and further provide sources that show these things to be the case.
According to
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section it is common to not need citations in the lead section. I saw that for clarity many pages had stuff in the first section that was backed by citations in the later body, I tried to do that but maybe I did not know the correct procedure. This user also removed some titles from citations for no reason I see, and changed some text to be say something other than what the citation says. Because I created the article even though I was not the only editor, I have been told I can not be that involved so I want another opinion especially an admin who is involved with this AFD. I do not want to edit war over this but the user left a weird message about neutral point of view on my talk page and honestly I am getting frustrated at this whole thing and do not want to act out. Thank you very much if you can offer advice. I would understand if you can not or if I did something off, but I would like to improve the article more maybe but this makes it more difficult. I will see your reply if you reply here.
ThreeBootsInABucket (
talk) 04:24, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I've seen that the page on development consultancy firm Dalberg has been
deleted a few weeks ago, because I'm working on an article that linked to it (
Advance market commitment). I did some google searches, and found a few sources that seem relevant:
Business Daily (2010) -
devex.com (2011) -
Consultancy.uk (2015) -
leral.net (2017) -
Kenyans.co.ke (2019) -
The Star (2023) -
The Ken (2023) -
Forbes India (2023) -
African Shapers (2023). Do you think these sources could together plausibly satisfy notability criteria? If so, what is the correct procedure to start a discussion about this, or start rewriting the article in a more neutral way?
Thanks a lot for your help! –
Ejowan (
talk) 16:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you restore this so that it can be merged to the appropriate article. All the best: RichFarmbrough 16:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC).reply
Thank you!
Hi Liz, thanks for answering my question on that other page re: one vs. three. That's life changing! I've been spending much too much time going through every single source at NPP, AfC and in BEFOREs. Doing reviews can sometimes get exhausting, esp. with such a big backlog or when an article or draft is massively refbombed. I was even translating sources before evaluating them. Good to know only ONE is needed. Thanks again for making volunteering a little bit lighter. Happy Spring,
Netherzone (
talk) 20:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Is it legit moves that somebody mass removal the articles from the cat and then blank the cat page, and then you speedy it? I mean the action by
user:Boubloub. Probably i have no time to investigate who is mass removing the article from cat.
Matthew hk (
talk) 10:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, I know. When deleting expired drafts though I kind of let Twinkle do its thing and post notices unless I'm aware that an editor has been indefinitely blocked. But thanks for the reminder. LizRead!Talk! 20:41, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding Timeline of United States inventions (1946–1991)
It seems to me the correct course of action is instead to clean up the original article. This middle ground, where a large chunk of a timeline is simply missing, is quite glaring. Would this be possible, and what might it entail?
Jemidiah (
talk) 21:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, I was tagging this as G11 as "userpage being used only for promotion or publicity, with a username that promotes or implies affiliation with the entity being promoted" as in the userspace of User:Charliesouz. We also already have an article at
Charlie Souza which also appears to have been an autobiography.
AusLondonder (
talk) 08:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This isn't the question you were asking (I'm not sure if you were even asking a question) but I don't think it is time well spent to survey old User pages, looking for pages to tag for deletion. This editor left the platform years ago, readers don't see User pages and it isn't important to delete these types of pages. Unless you have a lot of free time, I don't think it is the best use of your time. In fact, I don't know how you even stumbled upon this old page! It's much more important to safeguard content in the main space of the project and remove promotional content from that namespace. Just my opinion. LizRead!Talk! 23:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your comments Liz, wasn't asking a question. Just giving a clarification.
AusLondonder (
talk) 02:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus
Hello, I don't know many prolific afd closers as you're the only one that came to mind. I would like to ask for your assistance/input in this afd I created of a Roman fella. I asked around and the only answer I got was he's notable cause he existed 2000 years ago but doesn't pass GNG. I'm asking this cause I've never seen an afd of a person like this and would like to know the way forward. Many thanks in advance.
Serrwinner (
talk) 12:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I assume you are talking about
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gessius Florus and it looks like the consensus right now is that this article should be Kept. I'm not sure what help you are looking for. If I were you, I read the responses of participating editors and see why they believe the article shouldn't be Deleted. If it's any consolation, I think of the articles I've nominated for AFD discussions over the past 10 years, I'd guess that about half have been deleted and half have been kept. Other editors often find sources that were not in the article before and our goal is to have better articles, so that is a win-win. LizRead!Talk! 01:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Removal of my friend, Amy Varle who wrote ending homelessness strategy
Hello there Liz, good day to you. I was just writing an article for
https://thepeopleshub.org for Ada Lovelace army project and went to link to Amy Varle's Wiki page and see you have deleted it? Why on earth have you done this? Susan
86.11.241.158 (
talk) 23:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
It's hard for me to know how to respond as you haven't provided a link to the page you are talking about and when I looked at your Contributions, there were not Deleted contributions. So, you must have edited with a different IP address or a registered account. You would really benefit from creating a registered account. Once you provide me with a link to the deleted page, then I can investigate and respond to your comment properly. LizRead!Talk! 01:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Deleted Talk Page
I have a slight apology to offer for accidentally creating a talk page with a longer name than its article page, which was therefore an orphaned talk page. I was trying to create a subpage of a talk page, containing a draft RFC, and I left the slash character out, so it was an orphaned page rather than a legal subpage. There is no way that a reasonable admin could have guessed what I was trying to do (and following the rules is a reasonable course of action). So I think I am doing it correctly this time.
Robert McClenon (
talk) 23:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)reply
To be honest, I look at hundreds of pages every day so I'm not sure what page you are referring to. I regularly delete orphaned talk pages though. If it was a User space page, that is different but without knowing the page, it's hard for me to know what happened. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 01:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't think it makes sense to have a "Lists of..." category when there is only one list. Single page categories aren't very useful but it looks like monthly articles were created starting in the 1990s and so these latter categories are indeed "ListS". If you want to revert me, that's fine, I'll just bring it to CFD. I just didn't think anyone would object. LizRead!Talk!
Hi Liz (or any other admin happening by), can you check if this draft is essentially the same as
William Allegrezza which was very recently deleted via
this AfD. Normally I would not ask this about a draft but given it was just deleted and the creator also reverted your close (I reverted them), I don't want time wasted reviewing it if it is the same.
S0091 (
talk) 16:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, it doesn't look "identical". The old article had been edited from 2005-2023 so it's unlikely that they would be identical unless the editor copied the content from a Wikipedia clone. This version has a lot more sources but I didn't evaluate them to see if they were sufficient. As for me, and other admins, CSD G4 doesn't apply to Dyou raft space. Editors should be permitted to write improved versions of deleted articles and often they are encouraged to. There is some disagreement about G4s and the policy doesn't specify what namespace this criteria covers. But that's my interpretation. I'd encourage you to review but it's not a good sign that they reverted an AFD closure. Thanks for letting me know. LizRead!Talk! 23:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks Liz. My reference to G4 was short hand. I was primarily concerned about it being pretty much a duplicate thus a time waste to review it. Had it been a duplicate, I would have declined it as such rather than requesting it be deleted as I agree with your stance. We shouldn't cut off folks from submitting drafts to overcome an AfD, outside of pure disruption, policy violations or similar.
S0091 (
talk) 20:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello
I am the author of one of the petitions on the
Egov.Press website. It turns out that the Wikipedia article was deleted back in February. I ask you to consider the sources that provide evidence of the significance of the project. In my opinion, this is the same site as
Avaaz,
Change.org, which do not require proof of significance in a particular country.
Did you read my closure statement at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egov.Press? I stand by it. There might be an article on this subject to be written but the one we were looking at wasn't it. This decision won't be reverted but you can start a new draft article and submit it to
WP:AFC for review. I think that would be the best route to take. You can appeal my closure by filing an appeal at
Wikipedia:Deletion review and presenting your argument there but I think working on a new draft version would be a better use of your time. LizRead!Talk! 23:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree. The tool I use to look at categories says that these categories weren't emptied, article by article, but this emptying can happen if an editor changes a template that automatically fills categories. We have a week to figure that out. LizRead!Talk! 23:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I was expecting to find that these were created as part of a set some time ago and have never been filled because those who might write such articles are instead discouraged by having every small step they make deleted by some nit-picking exercise. But either way, we ought to (and used to) move forwards, not forever waste time trying to find excuses to go backwards.
Andy Dingley (
talk) 00:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
It was a mistake made to a new template. I asked an editor who is an expert in templates to track down the problem, it's been fixed and the categories are repopulated. That's why CSD C1s are given 7 days before deletion, just in case it's a glitch that's caused them to empty. LizRead!Talk! 18:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Pinged you because you were part of the related discussion on my Talk. No action/response needed and nothing of yours being questioned, just a courtesy heads up in case you wanted to weigh in.
StarMississippi 02:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I always appreciate notification on my user talk page as I don't track my pings. I'm not sure why this draft was singled out for an MFD discussion but the regulars there usually prefer to let drafts be handled by CSD G13 unless there is objectionable content. I have to go read your talk page archive as it's not clear to me what my involvement is. Thanks again. LizRead!Talk! 02:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Any time, and I disclosed it at the MfD lest anyone just see it here and think I was canvassing you.
From my re-read, we were split on whether SALT was necessary or helped because we were all playing whack-a-sock on the various titles. This one wasn't going to die a G13 death since I think it's linked off wiki somewhere hence random periodic edits. Have a good evening!
StarMississippi 02:58, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm always surprised when some editor can actually track down the actual Tweet or Reddit forum post where users are being canvassed. I guess they frequent those places. LizRead!Talk! 03:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)reply
"Oppidum of Moulay" refund request
"Oppidum of Moulay" could you please email me what was deleted? I fell down another rabbit-hole, you know the drill. I have hopes of coming back to this however.
Elinruby (
talk) 06:26, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Please give me a link to the page you are talking about. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 06:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Pretty sure it would be
Draft: Oppidum of Moulay or possibly [[Draft: Oppidum de Moulay}}. It would a translation of
Oppidum de Moulay [
fr but I doubt I had linked it yet.
Can you please elaborate on why you thought there was a consensus to keep? We typically delete articles on political candidates, and the discussion needs a more detailed close.
SportingFlyerT·C 23:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I read the consensus as the majority of editors wanting to Keep this article, especially post-election. If you read the second half of the discussion, almost all editors are saying that POL is met. I'm not sure how much more commentary is called for. I'd be willing to revert my closure and close as No consensus but I don't see a consensus to Delete or Redirect. I advised editors seeking to Redirect to have a talk page discussion. LizRead!Talk! 00:12, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't think that's true. Most of us quoting NPOL were explaining to keep !voters why their logic was incorrect. Redirecting after the AfD will be very difficult as well.
SportingFlyerT·C 09:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
About one of the U5/G11 tags
Hello - I noticed in your edit summary at a user page you described one of the tags as an overreaction.
This is what the page looked like at the time of nomination. Didn't realize they'd edited out the article after responding to them at my talk page. That's my bad for not removing it in a timely manner.
Though I do have a few questions coming from this - do admins reviewing the CSD category not look into the page history when reviewing, and is the onus on the nominator to remove the tag once it no longer meets the criteria? I know I've had a handful of issues with my CSD tags before, and I'd like to knock those issues out before I keep going and reviewing new user pages. Thanks!
Phönedinger's jellyfish II (
talk) 18:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I didn't look at the page history when I removed the tag and offered that edit summary. Once I did, I could see why you tagged the page. Sorry for any misunderstanding. LizRead!Talk! 18:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Liverpolitan identity
Hi, thanks for protecting the
Liverpolitan identity page. I have taken on board your comment. Would it be possible for to move it to
Liverpolitan as the system is having problems auto finding sources for – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR.
The original title (Liverpolitan identity) of the page also caused friction amongst one of the users and was changed to
Liverpolitan to please them and to diffuse the discussion. Many thanks.
Liverpolitan1980 (
talk) 19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You moved this to draftspace because the author submitted it for AfC review, but AfC is optional. Is there a requirement student editors specifically must use it?
Mach61 21:14, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
First, I didn't know that the article creator was a student editor. I noticed it on the Move log because the page title was 1819BallonRiot. So, at first, I was just going to move the article to a proper page title. Then, I noticed that the AFC tags were still on the page. When I looked at the page history, the editor had submitted their User space draft to AFC and then, moments later, moved it to main space. My guess is that after they submitted it to AFC, they saw that they were in a line with 4,000 other drafts for review and were impatient. In case this was a mistake, I moved the page to Draft space where it was still tagged for submission. I guess that's the long story. The short story is no, unless there is a real or suspected COI or the article had previously been deleted through an AFD decision, there is no obligation for an editor to use AFC. And, if they had objected to my article page move, I would not have moved it back to Draft space. It was just the fact that they submitted the article for review and then immediately moved it before it could be reviewed that prompted me to move it to Draft space.
But, if you are the AFC reviewer, there were no special circumstances that you need to be aware of and I don't plan on following up on this draft article. LizRead!Talk! 21:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
harassment account
Hi, I think you could notify me about this:
/info/en/?search=User_talk:Tehonk_Yav%C5%9Fa%C4%9F%C4%B1
as it's a direct personal attack to me (it means something like "cunt Tehonk"), it looks like he messaged you because he saw your messages on my talk page and thought you would block me by thinking it's my account. I have a guess about who he is but only a guess (I think he started to harass me after I opened an AfD for an article they created), should I open a SPI about it with only a guess?
Tehonk (
talk) 02:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
User: SHOLAASIRU/Sandbox
Hello Liz,
I noticed that my article on Payaza Africa Limited was removed. As this is my first attempt at writing here, I'm finding it challenging to grasp the policies and identify where I went wrong. I also received a notification suggesting I contact you before making any revisions to the article. I appreciate your guidance in advance. @
LizSholaasiru (
talk) 11:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
While it seems that notability is not an issue, the article still has literally zero independent references. Isn't that a reason for deletion? How can the page be allowed to remain as it is? Note that the article is also largely the work of a blatant COI editor who has since been banned.
[3]
Surely this is a draftify? (at the very least). It's an unsourced BLP and last time I looked, we weren't supposed to be doing those!
Andy Dingley (
talk) 18:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
This seems like a good idea, draftifying and "marking its talk page with the tags of any relevant projects as a means of soliciting improvements from interested editors." How can that be done?
IOHANNVSVERVS (
talk) 19:04, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Every single editor in the discussion except for the nominator argued that this article should be Kept. I can't impose my own opinion on the discussion or it would be considered a "supervote", it would be taken to
Wikipedia:Deletion review and overturned. Of course, if you don't agree with my closure, you can take this closure to DRV yourself and try to have it overturned. But I won't revert myself when opinion was almost unanimous. I'm sorry but these are consensus decisions. LizRead!Talk! 18:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I'll take it to deletion review.
IOHANNVSVERVS (
talk) 18:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Actually, I'm not sure if I'm understanding correctly, is that the best next step for me to take this to deletion review? I don't fault your close but rather disagree with the consensus. Like I said, I don't understand how the page can be allowed to remain with zero reliable sources...
IOHANNVSVERVS (
talk) 19:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Request for Deletion Review: John Paczkowski
Hi Liz
I wanted to ask you to reconsider the deletion of this bio:
Paczkowski continues to be very well known and respected important journalist. His reporters have won pretty much every award in the business (Livingston, Polk, Pulitzer, Mirror, SABEW). And he's completely resurrected Forbes tech reporting, which has led the industry on TikTok reporting:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/11/28/tiktoks-china-problem/?sh=550c549c1ee4
He’s an editor now, so he doe’s less reporting, but you can see him promotion his folks’ work on twitter.
https://twitter.com/JohnPaczkowski
I would have recommended that you start creating a new draft on this article subject, avoiding the problems that caused the other version to be deleted, rather than contesting the closure of the AFD I closed but it's your choice on what action you want to take. LizRead!Talk! 19:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
John Paczkowski. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. NW1223<
Howl at me•
My hunts> 19:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for letting me know. There is supposed to be a link in the Deletion review request to the AFD where the deletion was proposed but I appreciate you helping out the other editor. LizRead!Talk! 19:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, I fixed the link to the AfD. Thanks for letting me know about that. NW1223<
Howl at me•
My hunts> 19:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
Yitzhak Reiter. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
IOHANNVSVERVS (
talk) 10:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Tyler Morse
Hi, Liz. Despite creating close to 200 pages and being an AfC reviewer myself, I sent this to AfC because I was on the fence about notability at first. After submitting, there was another in-depth reference that came out and I added but instead of moving I left it there anyway. It was declined by a reviewer (and not casting aspersions) who has very little experience in article creation or AfC. I brought the subject up with them on my talk page. They initially left a response that didn't make sense to me and have failed to respond in about two weeks on my request for clarification. I would prefer to move the draft so that the history is attached as opposed to copy and paste. Of course, it is always subject to AfD if anyone feels otherwise but I think the edit history is important. If you can remove the redirect I would appreciate it. And to be fair, the reviewer declined another submission I had which I am completely fine with as I am still on the fence about that one.
CNMall41 (
talk) 03:41, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I appreciate the explanation. I was a little surprised that you went through AFC, being an experienced editor, but I spend my time on the project reviewing dozens (hundreds?) of deletion requests and I kind of moved on to the next CSD-tagged page after making a decision on this one. I've reverted my CSD decline and moved the draft now. I hope this settles the problem. LizRead!Talk! 21:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks, Liz. When I first started editing I created a few pages in mainspace that I later (once I was more experienced and understood guidelines better) had deleted. Now if I have something that I think others may object to or I am on the fence about I definitely send to AfC for a second look. As ALWAYS, thanks for the help. --
CNMall41 (
talk) 23:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Kimiyo
Hello Liz, I hope you are doing great! :) I had started working on a page for an article called "Kimiyo" and I believe you deleted it a few days ago? There is more information now to add to it. Is it possible to recover the draft for me to edit it more thoroughly, with articles/sources, pictures, etc?
Thank you in advance for your assistance!
Joan Million (
talk) 15:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you provide me with a link to the deleted page? Then I can see why it was deleted and whether or not restoration is possible. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 21:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I hope this is helpful and that we may backtrack on the creation of this article about "Kimiyo".
Once again, thank you for your asisstance!
Joan Million (
talk) 14:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Liz, hope you're well. Were you able to retrace the page for "Kimiyo" that had been deleted? Thank you in advance for your follow up!
Joan Million (
talk) 12:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher) Hi. I'm not Liz but I can answer your question.
Draft:Kimiyo was deleted as a test page. There is no content to recover as the draft consisted solely of the AFC header, and a reference section with no references. You are free to just start creating a draft at the same title. I hope this answers your question. --
Whpq (
talk) 13:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you very much for the follow up Whpq. That's great. I'll start a new one asap. Can I submit it to you once my draft is completed, to get an approval?
Once again, thank you kindly for the follow-up.
Joan Million (
talk) 15:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Whpq, hope you're well. Would you mind helping me out? I wanted to submit an article for review and it was published right away but I would need assistance to make it wiki-friendly, as there are a few issues that seem to need sorting out.
Answered on uner's talk page instead of here. --
Whpq (
talk) 17:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Restream
Hey Liz!
I've been working on a
sandbox article about
Restream and have updated it with some reliable sources. It's looking a lot better now. Could you take a look and give any advice on what steps I should take to get it restored? I'd really appreciate your help!
SudoKudos (
talk) 17:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Wow, you have added quite a few references to this article! I would remove any that are not reliable sources. It's better to have a few really good sources that discuss a subject in significant coverage than to have a lot of sources that are either unreliable (blogs, social media, etc.) or are just "passing mentions" that don't discuss the subject.
For an article that has been deleted through an AFD discussion, you should submit it for review to
Articles for Creation. There is a bit of code that you put on the top of the page. It doesn't need to be moved to Draft space, you can submit it from your Sandbox. What the AFC reviewers will look for is that it doesn't have the same problems with the earlier version that caused it to be deleted. Even though this can take some time, there is a danger in moving a draft article immediately into main space as it will be reviewed by our New Page Patrollers who have high standards and they could tag it for deletion. Sandboxes and Draft space are a relatively "safe space" where you can work on improving an article without that pressure as long as the draft doesn't contain unacceptable content like advertising or copyright violations.
The reason why I suggest that you reduce the number of references to the best ones is that the AFC reviewer is not likely to check all of the ones you have included and if they just check 4 or 5 and they are bad, they might just outright decline the draft. It's not that they want to decline your draft, they just look at a lot of draft every day and if they randomly check a few references and they are bad ones, they might just make a judgement on that.
But it's important to remember that as long as the draft is "declined" and not "rejected", you can continue to work on the draft, ask the AFC reviewer questions about the review or go to the AFC Help Desk for more guidance. I hope this helps. Good luck with your work. LizRead!Talk! 21:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Airlines established in 2024
At the time I re-created the page, the page
Fly Dhaka Airlines was listed as being established in 2024. And no, it was not me or a sock-puppet that added the category to the page. It seems that somebody (else) has now removed the category from
Fly Dhaka Airlines leaving it empty again. My inclination is to keep the 2024 establishment page category - regardless of what happend to Fly Dhaka Airlines, on the basis that 1 or more airlines that begin to run as a business in 2024 will likely gets their own wikipedia page(s) some time in the next 9 months - see the category
/info/en/?search=Category:Airlines_by_year_of_establishment with entries every year for the last 100+ years to see what I mean. There are already 3 entries in the category
/info/en/?search=Category:Airlines_disestablished_in_2024. Your thoughts ?
Pmbma (
talk) 20:34, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
You are an experienced editor so you know you can look at the page history and see who removed/altered categories on that article. I use a script that shows what articles are added or removed from a category and there was another article that was removed when the article was moved to Draft space as draft articles are not supposed to have content categories on them as long as they are in Draft space. As for categories, we don't retain empty categories in the event that they might be needed in the future. There are a few exceptions like disambiguation categories, category redirects, WikiProject assessment categories and categories that are being discussed at
WP:CFD but we delete empty categories in general.
We have database reports that list empty categories just for the purpose of tagging and perhaps deleting them if they remain empty for 7 days. Categories that are deleted simply for being empty, CSD C1s, can be recreated whenever they are needed. But, no, we don't leave up categories that are empty in the chance that they will be used in 3 or 4 months or a couple of years. If you want to restore a category that has been deleted for being empty that you believe will now be in use, you can either recreate it or contact the deleting administrator (or, really, any administrator) or put in a request at
WP:REFUND, no problem. LizRead!Talk! 21:16, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Interreligious studies
Hi. I'm creating a page for the academic discipline, Interreligious studies.
Did you create such a page in January? Was there a problem that the page was deleted? Please let me know ASAP.
ProfGray (
talk) 21:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Are you talking about a page that was deleted? If so, could you provide a link to the deleted page? Just put [[Article title]] between two brackets. Then I can look at the page and see why it was deleted. That would help me provide a response to your question. In general though, I don't create articles and only pages like User talk pages or pages when I move articles so it doesn't sound like something I would have done. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 21:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Liz, hi. I got this message while trying to create the page. It sounds like there's some mistake, if you never to actually create the page:
:A page with this title has previously been moved or deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the user(s) who performed the action(s) listed below.
Liz, hmm. Maybe I mistakenly created the page, an empty page(?) and it was deleted. If so, thank you for that assistance. It's been in my sandbox and I'm about to create it.
ProfGray (
talk) 21:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks,
Jay, I replied earlier today. I don't like to restore CSD deletions but, then, I'm not asked to do this very often. I can count the instances on one hand. LizRead!Talk! 07:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Unilateral speedy deletes (some categories) are a red flag for me. Also, I see G11's would need to be fundamentally rewritten as a clause that if a single editor (or a group of them) is willing to put in the time and effort to "fundamentally" rewrite a page (in draftspace), then it should be allowed. If the editor misunderstood "fundamentally", and made only cosmetic changes, it has to go back to CSD. Jay 💬 07:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't have time to look into this tonight but it's weird because the editor created both articles. I don't know why the created a duplicate. The new page title should probably be a redirect, not an article. You could choose to just revert their edits or tag the new one CSD A10 as a duplicate article. Those are my thought right now but I'm heading to bed soon. LizRead!Talk! 07:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, hope you're well. I see you restored
Category:Companies based in Stephens County, Georgia to
John Carter Racing. Happy to open a discussion on the talkpage but probably won't attract much attention so thought I'd ask you directly. It was a NASCAR Sprint Cup team, not sure if that is really a "company"?
AusLondonder (
talk) 14:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Evaluating and contributing
Hi Liz, I noticed that in this edit
[4] you both relist the discussion and offer a novel suggestion for reaching consensus. In the future please do one or the other, you can't both participate and evaluate. You should now consider yourself involved in the discussion and ineligible to close it.
Horse Eye's Back (
talk) 17:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
WP:DRAFTIFY is a standard procedural comment as a question and it is not certain Liz will close the discussion anyway.
IgelRM (
talk) 23:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding Allan Nonymous
Hi Liz, your Wikipedia editors block someone for contributing edits to suspected sockpuppet articles and participating in AFD discussions but they let an editor who behaves like this
[5], calling other people
idiot which is prohibited by rules and utter the racist sentence "Die, irrelevant Indonesian people articles" in here
[6]. He even put speedy deletion tags on several articles without understanding
terms like here
[7], here
[8], here
[9],
[10], and here
[11], here
[12], and there is no indication that he did
WP:BEFORE before installing the tag. He even nominated several articles for
WP:GNG reason even though they have been cited from various books and news, and as i mentioned earlier there is no indication that he did
WP:BEFORE before doing this, like in
[13],
[14],
[15],
[16],
[17], and
[18]. Im sure that he doesn't even understand the content of the article which he nominated for deletion. Whatever it takes on this so called encyclopedia, i just wanted you to investigating this. I will leave btw and you are free to do whatever you want with my work, thank you and have a good day.
114.10.22.149 (
talk) 02:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, I was wondering what the best approach would be to delete articles by a blocked user for whom other articles were deleted through U5. I assumed U5 was the best approach here, but out of an abundance of cation. I am asking you, what approach you would recommend? I currently reopened an MfD on one of the articles as a sort of "test case", but I feel MfDing all the articles would just clog things up.
Allan Nonymous (
talk) 03:29, 31 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Jacek Deniz Troshupa
@
Liz:, Can you drafifty my article
Jacek Deniz Troshupa so I can work on it and/or use it ass metrial to add to BalkanianActuality's draft? Thanks,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 06:52, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Liz: Hello Liz - I just went to expand the article on the British TV presenter/newspaper columnist Jackie Adedeji and see that you've deleted it.
Please let me know what's up with that - and having caught the attention of an editor/administrator as experienced as yourself, I'd appreciate your help in bringing the page up to your level of satisfaction. The subject of it certainly meets Wikipedia's notability criteria.
Spcranger (
talk) 01:35, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (
T313405)
Arbitration
An
arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
Editors are invited to sign up for
The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve
vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Are you able (and willing!) to shift the page to a User Draft article under my name, or send me a link to the article's history page so I can rewrite the page? I haven't been able to find the old article's contents anywhere - it's like it never existed...but I admit I can't figure out the logs/search/deleted page stuff to save my soul.
Not asking to reinstate as of now - I've been compiling sources for Ceres for a couple years as I come across it but I don't have immediate time to direct attention to it fully. But over some weeks I can get around to it.
Thanks if you can, tears if you can't. Always impressed by your efforts here and hope you're doing well!
I'll look into this later tonight and see what is possible. LizRead!Talk! 02:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Liz
Please can you tell why delete wikipedia Argnesa Rexhepi i have good material for review again please look for this again. Thanks so muxh Liz.
46.99.12.163 (
talk) 19:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
It would help me respond if you provided a link to the deleted page so I could see why it was deleted. I'm not sure, for example, whether it was in main space or Draft space. Once I see the reason for deletion, I'll know what is possible. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 02:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I just noticed this was deleted on my watch list. I would have de-prodded. What's the correct thing to do here?
SportingFlyerT·C 20:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Done With PRODs, CSD G13s and CSD C1s, all you have to do is make a request, either to the deleting administrator (or really, any administrator) or make a request at
WP:REFUND. These are uncontroversial restoration cases. But I do have to tell you that this article had about 90 mentions on other articles that have been de-linked. I don't have the time to revert all of that de-linking but I will make sure that any mentions on templates are reverted. If you feel strongly about it, you can look through my contributions. If I find the time, I'll take care of it but I generally have a busy to-do list here. LizRead!Talk! 02:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
There were no links on templates which is odd because most football teams are mentioned on at least one template for the league or season. So these must have been mentions on articles for other Croation football teams or for Zagreb. LizRead!Talk! 02:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you and no worries, I'll start re-linking everything.
SportingFlyerT·C 03:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Claudia Letizia
Hallo Liz, I am writing you about this
deletion discussion. In the discussion you made a request for a more deep source review and I answered demonstrating that all the TV movies enlisted in the entry about the subjects are just spam as she was not part of the cast of those movies. Nevertheless, you never answered or said your opinion about it, was the source review not enough or what? Thank you, --
Giammarco Ferrari (
talk) 13:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello Liz,
Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.
Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.
Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the
May backlog drive planning discussion.
It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!
2023 Awards
Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the
Awards page and the
Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!
Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.
Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated
NPP Browser tool.
I appreciate the support but I expected it to go to DRV and it has. This is one time where I don't think I need to defend myself. I don't mind this closure getting some extra scrutiny as I can see no closure option that wouldn't have been challenged. LizRead!Talk! 19:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
List of British Airways destinations. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Sunnya343 (
talk) 18:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I expected as much. Thanks for letting me know. LizRead!Talk! 19:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, in the deletion review some people suggested doing an RfC in the style of an AfD, where links to the RfC are left on every stand-alone list. One editor said this method has been used before. It sounds like a good idea, but I hadn't heard of it before. Would you know if this type of discussion is permitted? If it is, I'm unsure how it would be included in the different DELSORT categories.
Sunnya343 (
talk) 17:06, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Question
@
Liz:, Would you be able to draftify
Jacek Deniz Troshupa so I can use its sources to add to BalkanianActuality's draft? If not, would you be willing to send the sources I used in the article to me so I can use them to add to BalkanianActuality's draft? Thanks,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 00:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Move
I didn't move the page correctly and was trying to fix that. The name has changed. I attempted to put a request to move the page in and that didn't work too well.
Emphasis01 (
talk) 05:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm sorry if my message was abrupt but I wanted you to stop blanking the page. If the name of the school has changed, then start a move discussion on the article talk page. If you present your argument, along with a link that backs up your claim, then the article could very well be moved to the title you want it to be at. You have to realize that most of the time when new editors do what you did, they are vandals, causing mischief, especially to school articles, so that is why we respond so strongly. If the school has changed its name, that can be handled very easily as soon as we can see that that claim is true. Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 05:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I am not understanding you. I could simply move the page if we remove the redirects. The name did change, the school district changed a number of school names. The two people who are "sounding off" know nothing of these topics.
Emphasis01 (
talk) 05:27, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I couldn't figure out how to request a page move. See the requisite school district page for the new names.
Emphasis01 (
talk) 05:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Emphasis01: Please stop. First you did a copy and paste move of
Juneau-Douglas High School, and inserted a redirect to
Juneau-Douglas: Yadaa. at Kalé High School into the text of the original article After I undid the faulty redirects and had admins delete the cut and paste copy you moved the article again, properly this time, but again without commenting on the existing talk page discussion questioning whether the new name was actually in common use.
User:Jclemens undid your page move and commented in the talk page thread. You then blanked the redirects from the school's new name (Juneau-Douglas: Yadaa. at Kalé High School) and requested an uncontroversial page move. Clearly it was not uncontroversial since the move had already been undone, and clearly you knew that it had been undone because you deleted the resulting redirect.
Your characterization of Jclemens and me as 'The two people who are "sounding off" ' is offensive, Don't make comments like that. We both know that the school has been renamed, but the article title goes by
WP:COMMONNAME, not by the official name. Discuss the page move on the article's talk page, present any evidence for which name is in common usage, and we'll reach consensus on whether the name should be change, and if so, what the new title should be.
Meters (
talk) 17:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Furthermore, it appears that even if the page should be moved, you had the wrong name. The school and the school board use the name "Juneau-Douglas High School: Yadaa.at Kalé", not "Juneau-Douglas: Yadaa.at Kalé High School"
Meters (
talk) 19:16, 4 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello dear "Liz", negative nuances in the article have been corrected and encyclopedic indicators have been added. I also share the person's OpenSanctions ID with you for reliability. Please share your opinion with us so that the article can be improved and approved. Thanks in advance.
It looks like you just added two sources and I don't think that is not enough change to influence the next AFC reviewer. And that is who you really should be talking to as I don't review draft articles. Have you tried bringing your questions to
Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk? There you will get a response from editors who review a lot of draft articles and they would offer you better feedback than I can.
The Teahouse is also a helpful place to go for help. LizRead!Talk! 04:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I am grateful to you, I have made many innovations thanks to your efforts.
Redivy (
talk) 21:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Brudelman
These edits look like an attempt to game ECP, what do you think?
[20]Doug Wellertalk 08:22, 5 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry for the delay in responding. For this editor, I don't think they are interested in being extended confirmed because they aren't drawn to contentious subject areas. They really focused on category work which is a really unusual place for a new editor to start. But some newer editors are captivating by creating redirects and categories because they can create lots of pages that don't have to meet the demands that are expected for main space article work. What I am more worried about is that we have some sockmasters, whose usernames I can't remember, who also focused on categories. Like Brudelman, they eventually get topic bans and then they sock to get around the topic ban. So, I worry that this account isn't a new editor at all but without a sockmaster in mind, I can't really file an SPI complaint. So, that's where I'm at. They have only been active for a few weeks so if they are a sock, more will be revealed as they continue to edit, I think.
I agree. But they are wasting the time of too many editors. Maybe it’s time to stop them?
Doug Wellertalk 09:38, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Re your note at Ivanvector's talk page
Hi Liz, noticed your note on Ivanvector's talk page. Swapd came up on my radar not that long ago trying to research sources to determine reliability and kept coming across ads there for paid articles in certain publications (ex.
[21]). I then started looking at Wikipedia services. They banned offering Wikipedia services back in 2020
[22] but in August last year started allowing it again on a trial basis
[23]. Google search "Swapd" "Wikipedia" and you'll see all kinds of stuff. See also these YouTube videos from a SEO expert:
[24] and
[25] which he references in the other one. I've debated about posting something about it at AN but need to do some more research. They do appear to be legit as far as they monitor/oversee activity to ensure transparency, prevent scamming, etc.
S0091 (
talk) 17:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)reply
That's very helpful to know. I think the part that bothered me the most was not offering to write articles but the offer to sell a buyer an account with advanced permissions. I know that Swapd is not the only platform to offer Wikipedia services plus there are private companies that claim to be able to write articles that will never get deleted. I think a list of the "marketplaces" and companies would be useful to have in Wikipedia space. I'm not sure where but it's important that editors and admins are aware of what is going on because we tend to assume good faith of other editors, even precocious newbies. Thanks for those links. LizRead!Talk! 04:31, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Blablubbs this might help explain in part what Divine is getting at as far as swapd.
S0091 (
talk) 22:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hassan Houbeib
I noticed that your closure says that " editors arguing for Deletion have rejected the sources brought forward by those editors advocating Keep as being ROUTINE coverage". I have a major issue with this. The definition and examples for ROUTINE don't cover transactions. The examples are about box scores and match reports being used in articles about specific matches. You can't say that there's no leeway because of the recent RFC (unless there's another RFC I'm not aware of since NSPORTS) - it's not applicable (and besides - it never was a rule). Also, I brought forward an
secondary source, and
User:Mach61 claimed it was primary, and making false claims it was primary, and refused to explain why they thought it was primary, other than "I explained why I thought those sources were primary", despite never having discussed the source! When I pointed out the independence of the source, they simply refused to discuss it, and made another mistruth that "Most every source you've brought so far is primary"! When I pointed out that I'd only brought forward a single source (and that they was being uncivil) they simply said that they didn't have to explain. Surely, if nothing else, Mach61's vote needs to be discounted, given their propensity to just make stuff up. Thanks for the detailed, clear, closing statement - even if I disagree with it!
Nfitz (
talk) 23:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Regarding
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hassan Houbeib, as I said, I felt as though my hands are tied with closing discussions on these articles on athletes biograhies. The editors supporting Deletion make very persuasive arguments because, to be honest, the same editors show up to every AFD and they've made these arguments dozens and dozens of times. If I had closed this discussion as No consensus, it would have been brought to Deletion review. I am not going to revert this decision as I do believe it was correct, but you are welcome to take it to
Wikipedia:Deletion review and contest my closure. I won't take it personally.
But, if you want my opinion, I think a better use of your time is to go to the relevant policy page and start a discussion to better define what is considered "routine" news and what is not. That's a step that I think we would all benefit from because, I agree with you, it's not black and white except for the examples cited in the discussion. It's not that policy has to be comprehensive but if there are doubts about certain sources, then clarification is called for. I see ROUTINE come up in AFDs for most athletes' articles so it would be very helpful to get this issue debated and decided. LizRead!Talk! 04:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Articles
Firstly, thank you
for these comments. There seem to be no response from the editor, if that continues I will re-post the articles with maybe a few improvements in the next coming days. As I see no major concerns with those drafts as all of those athletes have won gold or medals at major sports events. Regards.
BabbaQ (
talk) 16:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure how to appeal a Draft decision. Also, I'm not sure the expected responsiveness I should get from an admin; I've requested that the decision be moved to a higher authority but no reply. It does not seem that the guidelines in
WP:ADMINCOND and
WP:DRAFTNOTIFY are being followed.
A long time ago I was assigned autopatrol privileges to prevent this type of unnecessary overhead when editing pages. I don't think I've abused this privilege. It makes creating pages much more frustrating when pages get drafted. Please let me know what I need to do to appeal; this is the first time I've faced the roadblock of an article stuck in Draftspace. Tx.
Nicolas.hammond (
talk) 12:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Sources
`== Sources ==
Hello, Liz, this is the third time I am asking you a question about Jacek Deniz Troshupa, all of which you have not replied to. Assuming you would not be willing to draftify my article, would you be willing to send the links to the sources I used in the deleted article to my talk page so I can use them to add to BalkanianActuality's draft? Thank you for your time,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 02:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
StencilJS
Hi! Re:
your query. Yes the G4 was a mistake but the G11 wasn't. Don't worry, I won't re-tag. If they don't make a real attempt, I'll take it to MfD. Consensus was to draftify, but periodically they just repaste the same thing. Yesterday it was also in mainspace which has since been deleted. They don't appear to have an interest in improvement, just having the company listed. Le sigh. Happy Monday
StarMississippi 12:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Urban agriculture in Barcelona - deleted page
Hi Liz,
I hope you are doing well. I was recently made aware that you knocked
this wikipedia article back to the draft phase. I was hoping you could provide some feedback on how to improve this article as it is my first time contributing to wikipedia. Thank you for your help, and I look forward to hearing your feedback.
Mjgirard10 (
talk) 12:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You're talking about
User:Mjgirard10/Urban agriculture in Barcelona, right? I'd try submitting it to
Articles for Creation for review. Those editors review draft articles a great deal of their time on the project and they can spot any errors that exist and provide some advice. After a review, if you have questions, ask the review on their User talk page or go to the AFC Help Desk for more guidance. I just spend my time on the project on admin maintainance tasks, not reviewing content creation so I don't have much help to offer you. You also might go to a related WikiProject and see if there is someone there who shares your interests who would like to offer you some help and advice. Good luck. LizRead!Talk! 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Email
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
It looks like you got someone else to take care of this. LizRead!Talk! 05:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Okapathana College
It is a comedic hoax created by some one in Sri Lanka. Atthanayaka M. Herath, a popular tv figure in Sri Lanka erroneously mention this on TV as if it is a real fact. Herath was ridiculed for his lapse in fact-checking. I thought I was clear in the edit summary. You can verify this with this podcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o0ldD9_43g&ab_channel=Wajira. Though it is in Sinhala, hope you could get an idea. Chanaka L (
talk) 05:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not going to listen to a podcast in a foreign language I don't understand. For pages tagged for speedy deletion, the problems have to be obvious and I didn't see any problems with this page. Maybe you'd have better luck approaching an administrator who is fluent in Sinhala or familiar with Sri Lanka culture. But I didn't see any issues that warrant deletion here. LizRead!Talk! 05:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I think I have to wait till it moved to main space to nominated it AfD. Thanks. Chanaka L (
talk) 05:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey @
Liz, I want to open an AFD for
Abhishek Kumar article, but on opening the AFD, the AFD has already been taken place in 2011 for another subject that goes by same name. So shall I open the AFD as second nomination because the current article
Abhishek Kumar speaks of other subject i.e an Actor who debuted in 2019. Please guide me for the same.
Imsaneikigai (
talk) 17:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page stalker)@
Imsaneikigai: Yes, if you wish to nominate it, it should be opened as (2nd nomination). The fact that this article concerns a different person with the same name should be noted for the record, especially given that the title had been previously
salted (the article only exists at the current title because an admin had moved it from
Abhishek Kumar (actor)), but otherwise the procedure is no different from a normal renomination. --
Finngalltalk 18:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I can't speak to Liz's intentions, but merged content does not have to qualify for a
Wikipedia:Separate, stand-alone article. It's perfectly fine to merge content about a non-notable subject into an article about a notable subject.
WhatamIdoing (
talk) 23:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hmm okay, I wasn't aware of that. Thank you for the clarification.
BaduFerreira (
talk) 01:17, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Please explain why undeleted the pages I listed on my
subpage. The
banning policy is incredibly clear: "Bans apply to all editing, good or bad"; "...they may not edit at all, even if the edits seem good." If you support allowing sockpuppets of banned users to create pages and feel the need to completely disregard
WP:CSD#G5, please feel free to resign.
✗plicit 00:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
These were just category talk pages. Again and again I see admins and checkusers on SPI case pages say regarding CSD G5 that admins should act in the spirit of policy, not the letter. There was no content here. CSD G5 does not require page deletion, this is up to admin discretion. I don't think deletion was called for in this instance, it seems like you often see the goal of page deletion as a solution for a nonexistent problems. It's the first and only option that you consider. You've deleted over a million pages, when will it ever be enough? It probably never will be enough. LizRead!Talk! 00:42, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I will apologize for interfering in your User pages. That was a mistake on my part. LizRead!Talk! 00:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Where in
WP:CSD#G5 does it say deletion is optional? And how does your opinion negate banning policy? BMB very clearly calls for all page creations to be deleted, regardless of their merits. DisuseKid's abuse was bad enough across projects that the account is locked. They have
60 confirmed sockpuppets and an additional three suspected accounts, which is incredibly prolific. If there is no content, then what desperately needs to be restored and not simply recreated by someone else?
You seem to be very concerned about the statistics of my account. I don't even keep track of that, but it's your go-to with every interaction,
like you mentioned here. You even
added my subpage to your watchlist as well. Can you focus on your own business instead?
✗plicit 03:53, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, I was wondering why you closed as redirect, only 1 person !voted for that. The consensus looked like delete to me.
LibStar (
talk) 01:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, I didn't see anyone objecting to a Redirect and a closure isn't based on vote numbers as you know. But would you feel better if I reclosed this as a "Delete" then "Redireect"? I'll admit that I do prefer ATDs when possible but I try to take challenges to my closures seriously. LizRead!Talk! 04:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No one argued for "Delete and redirect", you can't assume delete !voters don't oppose redirect.
LibStar (
talk) 04:33, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You know,
LibStar, you do what you feel is necessary. I've decided not to close any more AFDs that you start because you don't seem to be able to accept closures that you disagree with. I hope you have better luck with other AFD closers. LizRead!Talk! 06:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No, feel free to close AfDs I nominate. This is only one instance out of the hundreds/thousands you close that I don't agree with.
LibStar (
talk) 06:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Also I didn't even nominate this particular article for deletion.
LibStar (
talk) 06:50, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I take from your reaction of me taking this to deletion review, you are a little upset? For that, I apologize for. I think you are doing great job, as I said this is 1 instance in thousands.
LibStar (
talk) 07:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
Amy Eden. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
LibStar (
talk) 01:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
"no consensus"?? only one person voted to keep, and that was for technical reasons.
ltbdl (
talk) 07:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You've got mail
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Restore request: Category:Articles with Baidu Baike links
Please restore
Category:Articles with Baidu Baike links. Erroneous edits to the template removed this tracking category from articles. I have reverted the template changes. Thanks. –
Jonesey95 (
talk) 15:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Done These are easy requests to accomodate. This seems to have happened a lot recently with template edits. LizRead!Talk! 06:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Henry Benedict Stuart
Hello! Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. At least one of your edits on the page
Henry Benedict Stuart, while it may have been in good faith, was difficult to distinguish from
vandalism. To help other editors understand the reason for the changes, you can use an
edit summary for your contributions. You can also take a look at the
welcome page to learn more about contributing to
this encyclopedia. Thank you. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Calum707 (
talk •
contribs) 19:35, 11 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've been here for almost 11 years and have over 600,000 edits to my name. You have been here one day and have less than a dozen edits. You don't have to send me a template with a link to a Introduction page. And here I thought you were the vandal. I'm pretty sure you are socking though but if that's so, it will be discovered at some point. Newbies don't know about template messages and policy abbreviations. LizRead!Talk! 06:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello and welcome to the April 2024 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since
December. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members. We wish you all happy copy-editing.
Election results: In our December 2023 coordinator election, Zippybonzo stepped down as coordinator; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Dhtwiki and Miniapolis were reelected coordinators, and Wracking was newly elected coordinator, to serve through 30 June. Nominations for our mid-year
Election of Coordinators will open on 1 June (UTC).
Drive: 46 editors signed up for our
January Backlog Elimination Drive, 32 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 289 articles totaling 626,729 words. Barnstars awarded are
here.
Blitz: 23 editors signed up for our
February Copy Editing Blitz. 18 claimed at least one copy-edit and between them, they copy-edited 100,293 words in 32 articles. Barnstars awarded are
here.
Drive: 53 editors signed up for our
March Backlog Elimination Drive, 34 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 300 articles totaling 587,828 words. Barnstars awarded are
here.
Blitz: Sign up for our
April Copy Editing Blitz, which runs from 14 to 20 April. Barnstars will be awarded
here.
Progress report: As of 23:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 109 requests since 1 January 2024, and the backlog stands at 2,480 articles.
Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from Baffle gab1978 and your GOCE coordinators Dhtwiki,
Miniapolis and
Wracking.
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
Hello, Liz. Thank you.
Hello Liz. I wanna say thanks for contributing one of my files. I know, it's just a little edit (human review and stuff, I know that lol.), but... that means a lot.
Now, since today is my retirement day from Wikipedia, I think I might not come back and edit no more.
If you want to ask why and stuff, just reply to me.
Tell @
Minorax that I say hi.
Cya, Liz!
- The silly editor, Ayzkao.
Dr.Ayzkao! 04:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm sorry that you are choosing to retire. Maybe consider it a WikiBreak. I took one for 6 months and then, later, another one for 2 years. I wouldn't be editing still if I hadn't taken a few extended breaks. I wish you well with whatever happens next for you. LizRead!Talk! 04:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Haha! Thanks, Liz!
Dr.Ayzkao! 05:43, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
First, I looked at several sandboxes that you tagged for speedy deletion as test pages, the rest of them were, I believe, in WikiProject space and I didn't notice that this one wasn't. But there was a time years ago when lots of articles had subpages that weren't archived talk pages, many of them had (and might still have) "to do" pages where editors worked out plans to improve an article. Now that you have corrected me, I don't recall seeing many sandboxes though but the tag for test edit pages specifically say that this criteria doesn't include sandbox pages. Let me think about whether there is a better place where it might be moved or if another criteria fits this page. If the page creator,
User:Jerem43, was around, there opinion would be useful but they haven't edited in many months now. LizRead!Talk! 20:19, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Maybe move to the user space of the OP while suppressing redirects and remove the sandbox template.
AwesomeAasim 20:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Small cats. (not kittens).
What's the thinking with keeping
Category:Schumacher Racing Products? Both pages in it currently are the same article, and I don't see there being scope for aditional articles in that category. --
D'n'B-t -- 19:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, it seemed like an example of "emptying a category out of process" where, instead of nominating a category for deletion, an editor removes all of the contents so it gets tagged for "speedy" deletion (which isn't really speedy) as a empty category. So, I refilled the pages that hadn't been turned into redirects. We do have thousands of categories that only hold one article so it's not that unusual. But now that you've inquired about it, I'll reconsider my actions later today. But, any way, that was the thinking behind my reversions, I couldn't say all that in an edit summary but I could have left a better explanation for you, my apologies. LizRead!Talk! 20:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Joce Nuttall
Kia ora Liz. I see that you moved my article on Joce Nuttall to Jocelyn Nuttall, because "This is the name the subject is referred to in the article body". My understanding is that it is common practice to put someone's full name if known at the start of their article, but that doesn't mean it is the name they are commonly known by, and articles should be under the name someone is generally known by. Jocelyn Grace Nuttall is the subject's full name but she is known as Joce Nuttall in almost all the sources I have seen. Would you please undo the redirect? I have been told previously that if a nickname is a common or obvious one not bother adding "known as" but if it would help we could have "Jocelyn Grace Nuttall known as Joce"? Ngā mihi,
DrThneed (
talk) 05:09, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't have an opinion on the correct name for this article subject. I simply moved the article to a different page title because the article referred to Jocelyn Nuttall in the body of the article. The page title has to be in agreement with the content of the article. So, if you believe the article should be under the name Joce Nuttall then please change the article to reflect that. At the least, the lead sentence should state Jocelyn "Joce" Nuttall so that readers will not be confused. Make sense? LizRead!Talk! 05:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I've done that, now could you move it back please? Thank you.
DrThneed (
talk) 05:24, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh, okay. I thought you could take care of that but perhaps you can't if there is a redirect. LizRead!Talk! 05:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yes, there was a redirect because I thought about the name the article should be under and had made one. I hate getting into a mess with redirects so I'd appreciate you fixing it, given you moved it (sorry if you think I'm being grumpy, but a cursory glance even at the title of the sources would have shown that Joce would be the correct name, and therefore the better edit than moving the page would have been to add "Joce" than to create a mess with redirects).
DrThneed (
talk) 05:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Done but you do sound a little grumpy. I don't think the redirects caused a mess but then I move a lot of pages and as an admin, redirects don't cause any problems for me. To by honest, I didn't know which name is correct (and I still don't), I just wanted the page title and the article content to be in agreement. I hope you have a good weekend. Good night. LizRead!Talk! 05:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Apologies
It is considered a high point when a javanese official or politician speaks for an hour and nothing is really said....My comment at bumi yana (?) was that such a person can be a link in a chain, metaphorically speaking, and yes at face value of the article per se - the deletionists have their point and it should go - but in understanding the cultural and real life connections, a number of non notable things and people can combine to effect things of a larger dimension, and the capacity of an editor to navigate people and things between what might be considered at first view not connected, but then are... The editors quoting rules and things are in the right space in one sense, but then the larger picture can complicate the issue.
JarrahTree 09:57, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag.
✗plicit 14:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, I think R3 does apply. R3 states: This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a
page move, unless the moved page was also recently created (italics added and footnote omitted). Here, the moved page,
DJ Dominic, was created just a few hours ago.
voorts (
talk/
contributions) 04:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Liz, the CitrusAd page was deleted because of "abandonment" and it sounds like it was in a "draft stage" prior to deletion, could you undo this in order for me to make any necessary edits? I apologize in advance for being new here, but learned about the page status in the teahouse- I am hoping there is a way to get a copy of what was here and and advice on anything that needs to be fixed and addressed prior to republishing. Kind regards, TLN27
TLN27 (
talk) 17:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)reply
CSD of Beloit and Madison Railroad
Liz, thanks for taking a look at my speedy deletion request at
Beloit and Madison Railroad. I agree with you that it was just created and when I saw the article I also thought to let the author work; however, what led me to speedy deletion was the discovery of
Draft:Beloit and Madison Railroad, which is an identical article created by the same user through the AFC process where it was rejected back in January with no further edits. The article creator appears to have ignored advice from the AFC reviewer and simply recreated their own article in mainspace with no interest in improving it.
I probably should have noted this in the AFC process. Dan •
✉ 06:37, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Review protection
Hello. I would like to urge you to review your protection
here:
The article was created in 2004 under the title "Pêro da Covilhã" and has been stable ever since. Such title is consistent with reliable sources (examples:
Britannica,
Infopedia).
The page was
moved a few months ago to "Pero da Covilhã" by an account which is currently
banned from his home wiki for long term abuse and sockpuppetry (ban discussion
here).
I did
revert his move immediately, but he
moved it again 3 months later. It was only yesterday I noticed the issue and had the chance to once again undo his move. It's hard to keep track of all the POV-pushing changes, as they take place on different articles, on different projects and sometimes using
anonymous edits to avoid scrutiny and even
tag team with other
globally locked LTAs.
Yet, you have protected the page in the disputed version of an LTA account that goes against RS. So, please, I would like you to reconsider your decision.
JMagalhães (
talk) 07:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello,
Just noting that I won't insist on such disputes, as already stated in Magalhães's talkpage. So I don't oppose moving back the page to the old name. But as I've asked I would like not to be called and LTA, sockpuppet or troll, since I'm simply not one, and I kindly urge you to stop categorizing me as so. What happened on the Portuguese-language Wikipedia should stay there, and it was solely an administrative decision (decisão administrativa) with no reflections on other projects (for instance, I have several flags on Commons, such as autopatroll and rollback).
Phocas Software page deletion - is it best to write a new page based on Wiki template or address issues on existing page
Hi Liz
I work for Phocas Software and we were shocked to see the page deleted. The company has a rich history in Australia, UK and USA and was accredited as a B Corp business in 2021. We have also grown and added financial planning to the BI platform. We would love to be reinstated to Wikipedia. Can you please give us some advice on what's the best approach? Write a new page based on your template or provide 3rd party evidence of the growth, new products and commitment to the environment? Thanks Katrina
Kat CN (
talk) 23:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)reply
First off, I am not a new editor. I have been a prolific Wikipedia editor since 2005. I added an IMDb link to the
Mawqef Micro page and updated its information to reflect the fact that the second season aired in 2016, as confirmed by
the show's official YouTube page. I really don't see why you reverted that. I mean, I hadn't noticed that
Category:2016 Syrian television series endings didn't exist, but there was really no need to remove the IMDb link and the brief sentence about the show's second season.--
LadybugStardust (
talk) 01:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Quantum economics
Hi, the page
quantum economics was proposed for deletion on April 9 and then a decision was made to merge with
econophysics on April 16. The reason proposed for deletion was that this is a fringe subject, however as I noted on April 15, the subject has its own journal with a top academic publisher (
Sage Publishing). It seems that the editors were unaware of this, but there was no response or discussion, and instead a decision to merge with econophysics was made. This choice appears to be due to a single article an editor found on "quantum econophysics". However the field is not normally considered a branch of econophysics, and the expression "quantum econophysics" is unusual especially in more recent works. So it seems the proposal to delete or merge the article was not based on good information, and the decision was rushed through without a balanced discussion. Can you please revisit the decision to merge? I have added some references to the page which include established journals and secondary sources. Also if a merger is to be made, it would seem more logical to merge
quantum finance (which has its own page) with quantum economics, since the latter has many applications in finance but is more general.
Sjm3 (
talk) 13:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Flag up, mail to be delivered :D
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Got it. Thanks for clueing me in. So much I don't know about what's going on here. LizRead!Talk! 03:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Tagging blocked socks
Hello, I have noticed that you have reverted by edits on blocked socks of
User:JayCubby. However, I believe that those edits would be
overall beneficial to the project, despite rules saying otherwise. It would save time for other editors looking for a reason to why they were blocked, and it is not misleading or untruthful in anyway. I have done this on
several occasions, and have not been told this until now. I hope you consider my argument and thank you! 2003LN6 06:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi! Sorry if my CSD tags were a bit confusing, as for some reason we can't use subcriteria when adding several criteria at once. I intended to delete it under the other G3 (hoax, rather than vandalism). The creation of these nonexistent Windows 8.x pages (in reality, versions stopped at 8.1) is typical of
User talk:13.234.2FortytwoUser, who, on top of the obvious username similarities, has been recently active and socking. See
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 5#Draft:Windows 8.4 for an example of a redirect of them that was speedy deleted.
Chaotıċ Enby (
talk ·
contribs) 08:23, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
An editor has asked for
a deletion review of
Quantum economics. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Sjm3 (
talk) 12:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for closing
the AfD and removing the salt tag. Would you also unprotect
Autostrad so
Autostrad (band) can be moved there? Now that there's consensus to keep the article, we can remove the unnecessary disambiguator. Thanks!
Jfire (
talk) 03:11, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Done 3 1/2 years closing AFDs and this is the first time I've seen this happen. The sources must have become available that weren't around years ago. LizRead!Talk! 03:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz! A few days ago you
reverted my edits (
1,
2) at
Q-Be with the reason Reverting edits. Don't change an article to a redirect and then nominate it for AFD. It's a redirect now, not an article. I've read up a bit more on various guidelines and I understand your reasoning, so thank you for reverting – I agree I shouldn't have nominated the redirect for deletion.
However, you said "It's a redirect now", but you reverted both of my edits, including the one that turned the page into a redirect. Was this intentional? My view is that the page should be a redirect to
MobiBLU DAH-1500i because the Q-BE is just a rebranded version of the same product.
The reason I'm bringing this up here is because I was about to modify
my AFD nomination to remove the note about the Q-BE article for the reason you gave in your edit, but I realised that
Q-Be isn't even a redirect anymore: it's now just an article. If you did mean to remove the redirect then I think the article should be deleted per the reasoning in my nomination, but if you didn't mean to remove the redirect then I'll need to remove it from my nomination because, like you say, I shouldn't have nominated it after changing it to a redirect.
Hopefully I've phrased this right – I completely agree with your reasoning, but I am genuinely unsure about whether you meant to revert both edits as you acknowledged the page's new status as a redirect in your edit summary.
As I have still not received a response on this, I have
restored my edit that changed the article to a redirect, but not the edit that nominated it for deletion. I will also edit my nomination to remove mention of the redirect.
AlexGallon (
talk) 22:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Userfication
Hi, Liz, since you deleted my article Jacek Deniz Troshupa without warning, would you be able to userify the article or draftify it so I can improve it or add to BalkanianActuality's draft? Thank you for your time, Thanks,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 22:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you give me an exact link to the deleted page so I can see the reason why it was deleted? By the way, I tried to get to your Contributions to find this out and wound up on your User page. I'm not sure what the problem there is but doing this crashed my laptop SEVEN times! I had my browser open with a tab to your User page, the browser window would automatically open to that page and, BAM! my computer shut down and was unresponsive. I kept rebooting the laptop, opening Chrome and the browser window would open again and again crash. This didn't happen with any other Wikipedia page. Do you have too much content on that page? Do you know why it would cause problems when people try to load the page? LizRead!Talk! 02:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry to hear that, that is very odd, the page was
Jacek Deniz Troshupa and was deleted cuz of G4 but I was surprised cuz the page is drastically different source wise to the deleted page that was deleted 5 years ago. Thanks,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 02:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Liz:, Please see the above response. Thanks,
Das osmnezz (
talk) 06:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You've got mail
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Gnomingstuff (
talk) 20:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Fisherman's Memorial (Palacios, Texas)
Hi Liz, was this page deleted? I don't understand what happened to it. Thanks.
CusterDome (
talk) 00:31, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If you ever have a question about where an article is, either go to the previous location, which will tell you if it had been moved, or go to your Contributions page. I moved this article to
Draft:Fisherman's Memorial (Palacios, Texas) because it was a draft article and you moved it to project space,
Wikipedia:Fisherman's Memorial (Palacios, Texas). Project space is a namespace for policies, guidelines and noticeboards, not articles. So, I moved it to an appropriate location. But if you look at
Wikipedia:Fisherman's Memorial (Palacios, Texas) it will say exactly what happened at the top of the page. I hope this answers your question. LizRead!Talk! 01:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for the reply. I mean to publish the article in mainspace. Is it okay to go ahead and do this?
CusterDome (
talk) 02:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
As everyone (including the nom) is in agreement, wouldn't it make the most sense to close the discussion as keep instead of relisting (though if you really wanted to, you could IAR and place an {{Afd-merge to}} template on
Mastering (audio) to spare the effort of opening a talk page discussion, though I understand if that is undesireable)?
Mach61 23:37, 20 April 2024 (UTC)reply
As long as editors are asking for a Merge that is not possible within the limits of this AFD, there is no consensus I can close on. I can't do a reverse Merge of an article that has not been nominated so, as I believe I said, editors have to change to "Keep", let the AFD close and then they can pursue the Merge they want to see happen. I might leave this discussion for another closer to handle. I definitely won't relist it again. LizRead!Talk! 21:16, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, all of the voters except the nominator have now changed their vote to keep - that's 3 votes to keep against the nom, seems reasonable to consider closing as keep. BrigadierG (
talk) 22:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't review every open AFD every day but I'll check this one out and if it hasn't been closed yet, I'll see if I can take care of it. Thanks for the update. LizRead!Talk! 04:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
April 2024
It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While
friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a
neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are
indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain
point of view or side of a debate, or which are
selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of
consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you.
Tetrainn (
talk) 21:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you give me examples of this "canvassing" so that I know what the hell you are talking about? What "community decision, debate or vote" does this concern and on which users' talk pages did I notify them of this discussion? Please be specific. LizRead!Talk! 21:12, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
the hell I have provided above, look properly. Don't show your attitude here. Be civil and respectful. I am not your servant.
Tetrainn (
talk) 21:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you. But talking about another editor and a dispute doesn't qualify as a "an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote" so canvassing doesn't apply. If we used your example then no editors could mention other editors on another user talk page which happens every day here. My own talk page is full of messages from one editor talking about other editors. And that's what I'll say if you escalate this further but I'll warn you that that decision might not end well for you. Not with your kind of attitude. That's just what I've seen over 10 years here. LizRead!Talk! 21:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Tetrainn: I fail to see how Liz was trying to influence a discussion when asking for assistance in enforcing community consensus. I also still feel comfortable in acting if you continues to violate community consensus, especially after explicit warnings against doing so.
Hey man im josh (
talk) 21:26, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Liz and
Hey man im josh see
bureaucracy. I will not waste my time arguing with you people, but being a *trusted* editor here its my responsibility to point out ongoing canvassing, as I already knew your
fans would come to defend you. But be careful next time. This will not be the case every time. My final note: If the community can make you sysop, it reserves the power to desysop you too........
Tetrainn (
talk) 21:47, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Tetrainn: Please feel free to look for support in having me de-sysopped, that is your right to do so. To be clear, your threat will not dissuade me from enforcing community consensus. Your related statements of "trusted editor" are also, frankly, meaningless. We are all expected to work within the lines of policy and within what the community has deemed acceptable. As mentioned, you are misunderstanding canvassing. Keep it simple. Stop moving pages older than 90 days to draft space. That's it, it's very simple, take another route (AfD or PROD).
Hey man im josh (
talk) 21:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, Liz. Apologies if this is the wrong place to inquire, but I have some questions about legitimate uses of alternative accounts on Wikipedia before I do anything further. Outside of Wikipedia I am doing volunteer work with secondary school students (but am not employed by any educational institution) and I would like to use an alternative account to teach my students how to edit on Wikipedia. In the process I hope to assist them in creating their own articles. I have created an alternative account,
Mr. J. F. Lee for this particular endeavor and to maintain my privacy in real life. I have, however, not done anything on that account beyond making my user page declaring my link to my main account (this account). I am aware of
WP:COI.
So, a couple questions:
Is the proper procedure to create articles on my alternative account since WP:COI states one should not review articles they have a COI in? Or should I not edit or create possible COI articles at all? I am in direct contact with students who may create articles about their school.
Because my reason for creating another account is privacy, am I allowed to link to my alternative account on my main account but not to my main account on my alternative account?
I do not receive any monetary or material compensation for my potential work with the students as I am a community volunteer and not an employee of any educational institution. Do I have to prove this fact to the administration team, and if so, how might I do that?
Other questions will surely arise from me, but they escape my mind at the moment. I am trying to make sure I have a proper understanding of these guidelines and that I receive a green-light from an administrator before I open pandora's box. Thank you for your time, and have a great rest of your weekend.
Yue🌙 21:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Chuck Pratt (bird)
Hi Liz, it's a hoax as there is zero evidence that the characters are named "Chuck Pratt"
[26] or "Red Jack Bird"
[27]. Having one of them wrong might have been some typo, but having both wrong? That's just making things up, i.e. a hoax.
Fram (
talk) 08:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not dead yet
Hi Liz. Yeah, it's me. Have you used the "Move" special page recently? Maybe admins have a different interface? Anyway, "Move to mainspace" is one of the options that appear in the Reason dropdown. If that lingo is no longer in fashion, presumably there's a way to edit it somehow?
Could you move SAE J2807 back to the Wikpedia space? Thanks.NE Ent 11:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Why do you want it in project space?--
Bbb23 (
talk) 13:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't. I meant article space. I may not be dead but my WP skills have definitely atrophied. It took me way too long to figure out [[ & [ | (internal, external links)
NE Ent 13:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Illustation provided... FWIW, I'm now embarrassed to admit I have always called it mainspace too :) Classic Holy Grail reference though. "See you Thursday!"
——Serial Number 54129 13:08, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, hope you are well? I noticed your edit and revert on my page. I sent that back to drafts from main space. I don’t know how close it is to the version you deleted. Don’t know if you want to compare and nuke the draft? Have a great day.
Equine-man (
talk) 17:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC)reply
N. Koppelman
I learned by looking at the history of
Fedir Bohatyrchuk that a redlink to
N. Koppelman was unlinked because that article has been deleted. Now I am curious to see the article about Koppelman, or what it looked like before it was deleted. I used the search box at
WP:AfD but it didn't find that. Where might I look for it? Thanks.
Bruce leverett (
talk) 02:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm wondering why you marked a category as
empty here when it had one entry in it (it has since been reverted by an IP). Please elaborate. Maybe you meant to mark it as something else?
Hi Liz. Perhaps you can help this user out. They mucked up archiving their user talk page, and probably all that needs to be done is for them to swap pages. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 03:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Perhaps time to archive your talk page? It's getting a bit long and large...
Fram (
talk) 14:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Growth News, April 2024
The Growth team will now send quarterly reports to keep you in the loop. Growth team weekly updates
are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work.
If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to
subscribe to Tech News.
Community Configuration
Growth features are currently configurable at Special:EditGrowthConfig. This quarter we are working on making
Community Configuration accessible for other MediaWiki developers while also moving Growth feature configuration to the new CommunityConfiguration extension.
An early version of Community Configuration can be tested at
Spanish Beta Wikipedia. We plan to release the new Community Configuration extension to pilot wikis (Arabic and Spanish Wikipedia) in early May, 2024. The first non-Growth team feature to utilize Community Configuration will be
Automoderator.
In parallel with the development, the Growth team will propose Community Configuration usage guidelines, Community Configuration design guidelines, and provide technical documentation.
The Growth team conducted an experiment to assess the impact of the “
Add an Image” structured task on the Newcomer Homepage's "Suggested Edits" module. This analysis finds that the Add an Image structured task leads to an increase in newcomer participation on the mobile web platform, particularly by making constructive (non-reverted) article edits:
The likelihood that mobile web newcomers make their first article edit (+17.0% over baseline)
The likelihood that they are retained as newcomers (+24.3% over baseline)
The number of edits they make during their first two weeks on the wiki (+21.8% over baseline)
A lower probability of the newcomers' edits will be reverted (-3.3% over baseline).
This feature was developed for Mentors as part of the Growth team's
Positive Reinforcement project. When A/B testing on Spanish Wikipedia, we found no significant impact on retention, but we found a significant positive impact on newcomer productivity. However, we concluded that the results weren’t positive enough to justify the time investment from Mentors. We plan to discuss this feature with our pilot wikis, and consider further improvements before scaling this feature further. Meanwhile, communities willing to test the feature can ask to have it deployed. (
T361763)
As in previous years, donors were directed to a Thank you page after donation (
example). However, this year we tested a new “Try editing Wikipedia,” call to action on the Thank You page. This call to action linked to a
unique account creation page. From this account creation page we were able to track Registrations and Activation (editing for the first time). During the English banner campaign, the Donor Thank you page led to 4,398 new accounts, and 441 of those accounts went on to constructively edit within 24 hours. (
T352900)
Future work
Annual Plan
The Growth team and the Editing team will work on the
WE1.2 Key Result in the coming fiscal year. We will start initial discussions with communities soon to help finalize our plans. (
T361657)
We plan to A/B test adding a new Community Configurable module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We are early in the planning phase of this project that will take place first at our pilot wikis and wikis volunteering. We welcome community feedback on initial designs and plans, in any language at
our project talk page.
I tried to archive my talk page and I guess I did something wrong. I am so frustrated because I keep trying to do things by the rules but I don't seem to be able to understand them. But I'll keep trying! This is where my talk page went
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Vajz%C3%AB_Blu_1&action=edit&redlink=1 By the way your Kittehmaster image is cute and got me to smile! :)
Vajzë Blu (
talk) 19:53, 23 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If you could undelete my archived talk page and move it where it should be I sure would appreciate it! :)
Vajzë Blu (
talk) 03:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Sorry I didn't see that you'd already done that for me! Thanks!
Vajzë Blu (
talk) 18:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Presbyterian Reformed Church (North America)
I am surprised that an article which has been around for years about a denomination which has existed since 1965 and was founded under the direct influence of a relatively major figure in conservative Calvinistic theological circles,
John Murray (theologian) can be deleted suddenly in a period of 7 days.
You may say that articles are not prepared professionally, but you have to remember that once upon a time Wikipedia advertised itself as "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" - little did we know back then that this would become "anyone who knows how to jump through the hoops" that would later be enforced by people who by their own admission "delete many pages every day". I was once sickened when my detailed article on a late 19th/early 20th century Scottish Christian leader of very wide influence was deleted and replaced by a present day sporting figure who will no doubt be rapidly forgotten. I frankly don't understand what the motive is of people who delete any but the most frivolous articles. It's not as if extra articles are doing any harm - and just because they are about things or people way outside the knowledge of most, does not mean that they are not important in their context. For instance it has been suggested that the Presbyterian Reformed Church may be the only indigenous North American denomination which holds to the original 17th century Puritan
Westminster Confession of Faith - most Presbyterian denominations hold to a modified American form instead, which is important in the context of the relationship between church and state, something in which American history differs somewhat from that of the countries from which its people largely originated, and which is a matter of live debate at the present day.
PeterR2 (
talk) 01:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Seems an odd coincidence but today someone else (Dclemens1971) has started the process for deletion of
Westminster Presbyterian Church in the United States, and I actually got an email about this one before it happened (I only had notification on the Presbyterian Reformed Church after deletion). I had suggested on its talk page back in 2020 that it should be deleted because as far as I could tell it no longer existed in any public way, if at all, unlike the Presbyterian Reformed Church.
PeterR2 (
talk) 18:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Refund
Hi Liz, can you restore this
Abhishek Kumar article, i want to add new work of this person. Xegma(talk) 07:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Liz, Can you hear me ? Xegma(talk) 06:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello - while I respect your
judgment, but I believe this promotional BLP should have been soft deleted. Despite noting that the page was PROD'd, I highlighted that it was the creator of this BLP who made the PROD request. Even if we discount the votes from IPs (SPAs), the BLP still falls short of meeting the notability criteria, both WP:GNG and specifically WP:JOURNALIST. And additionally, though there's no concrete evidence of paid editing, Faizanalivarya's
admission of editing BLPs on behalf of subjects suggest a potential COI scenario which also raises some concerns as well. sincerely —
Saqib (
talk |
contribs) 15:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)reply
After this, I'm starting to feel like you might think IPs - commented keep - on this AfD were mine too. —
Saqib (
talk I
contribs) 23:36, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Closing AfDs
Hi
I have been part of couple of AfDs that I think you have closed incorrectly.
Can you please fix these retroactively unless you are exercising some kind of
WP:Supervote in all of them without an explanation
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 06:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
might have been the typo in "draftify" actually, it happens ;), I think it should be fixed now. I don't really see to much of a difference between a "merge" and "redirect" close in the two other cases mentioned though? (I am, of course, also not Liz but a (
talk page stalker))
Alpha3031 (
t •
c) 03:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
If merge and redirect are the same, then it might be beneficial to fix how the AfD scoring is done. Performance in AfDs is held against editors when they apply for privileges
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 07:58, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
@
FuzzyMagma mind linking me to what this AfD scoring is? I have no privileges to apply for but am curious as I'm not familiar with it. Thanks @
Alpha3031 for that link. I also wonder if it's because it's a custom option and not one of the built ins. I see it a lot in my contributions. @
Liz hope all is or will be well soon.
StarMississippi 13:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
This is yours. It is checked even when you want to become an admin (like yourself), but typically for when you ask to become a
New pages reviewer, see the "Guidelines for granting" section (point 2).
FuzzyMagma (
talk) 13:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Right now, I'm just doing some basic editing because I'm on my phone in the hospital ER for the past 5 hours. But when I get back to my laptop at home, I'll review these closures. I do sometimes do an ATD as an option if it has been brought up by a discussion participant so it's not a Super Vote. But give me a little more time here. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 04:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
You may want to consider using the
Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on
Zhang Jingyi (actress) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under
section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the
help or
reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see
Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on
notable subjects and should provide references to
reliable sources that
verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request
here.
NoCringe (
talk) 09:20, 25 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, no, I don't think so. I just did an article page move that was requested and this left behind a redirect. So, A3 is not valid because it is not an article. Maybe you should spend some time reviewing
WP:CSD so you understand the speedy deletion criteria better. But thanks for the editing tips, after 10 years here I might need a refresher. LizRead!Talk! 04:02, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Oops, I was trying to fix the interlanguage wikidata for said actress and messed up with the deletion request. Thanks for the link to
WP:CSD I will read up on it!
NoCringe (
talk) 04:16, 26 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh wow. Hey, @
Liz. I decided to come back to Wikipedia. You're probably thinking it's because I regret doing that or something, but no. My project is done.
Speaking about your reply about Wikibreak and a word (I forgot what is it, lol), I'd definitely take it as an advice. Thanks, anyways.
I was tempted to make the same change about a week ago, but wasn't sure of my ground. I didn't realize that the linked article was proposed for deletion.
Athel cb (
talk) 08:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Forgiveness
Hello
Liz,
I had never thought you'do be angry per my comment in that AFD. You can't see that comment that way—as bad. In any regards, I just realized it isn't good and all I please is forgiveness. You know I can't also berate you or at other editor, when you were one of those good faith and advisors who if not for the word, "calm down", I could have landed in ANI or there about. Unless you respond that you are no more angry, I will keep begging. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 08:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page stalker) @
Pppery I'm not Liz, but I will add that U5 lists writings not related to Wikipedia's goals. I would give them the benefit of the doubt. (PS it's 23:14 in Liz time) thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 03:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Benefit of the doubt in the sense that they forgot about the little to no edits part. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 03:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
(
edit conflict) Sigh. Are you (TheTechie) wilfully ignoring the actual text of the criterion? Pages in userspace consisting of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals, where the owner has made few or no edits outside of user pages [...] You can't cherry-pick language like thta to justify clearly invalid deletions, and I've caught you trying to do so several times before. And as an admin with over half a million deletions Liz is clearly aware of what the requirements for speedy deletions are.
* Pppery *it has begun... 03:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I'm not willfully ignoring. I said let's give them the benefit of the doubt that they forgot about that part of the U5 criterion. That's all. Thanks --- thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 14:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
This is probably belated but...thank you for all of the admin and non-admin work you do here. I appreciate, as I think others do too, your tireless work in helping this wiki. (PS I recommend archiving your talk page, I see quite a lot of threads.) Enjoy your evening! :) thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 03:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Looking for feedback on a page moved back to draft
Hi Liz, you moved
Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition back to drafts, I'm looking for feedback. I understand there would have been some discussion of this before the move, but as a basic newbie I don't know where to look. There's nothing on the talk page. I'll declare my interest, these are students of mine and I think they've done good work so I'd like to take the article forward to mainspace if I can get some feedback on what needs to be improved. Thanks.
Bcndz5 (
talk) 13:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Please restore page Draft:Harriet Pullen
Hi there! I wanted to reach out to see if you would please restore my Draft page for Harriet Pullen. It was marked for speedy deletion under CSD G13...I believe this page contact still merits creation and now have time to complete it. Please let me know if you have any concerns! Thanks.
I don't think there is a point in restoring this page as it was just a blank page with no content on it. That's why it was deleted as a Test page as it wasn't an article draft. I'd work on the main space version (thank you,
EdJohnston), or if your "Harriet Pullen" is a different person with the same name, start a new draft. LizRead!Talk! 00:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Deleted page was an actual and updated version of the Band Blue Embrace and not related to previous pages as stated Thank you
Lamusicund (
talk) 20:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I think a better use of your time would be to work on a new draft version and submit it to
Articles for Creation. This is the best way to overcome a past AFD Delete decision. Putting a version you copied from a Wikipedia mirror site into main space will result in a speedy deletion. LizRead!Talk! 00:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, Katya passed away recently[1][2][3], and since I was an acquaintance of hers, I was wondering if you might share with me the contents of the Wikipedia page about her that you deleted[4] in 2020? I am not contesting the deletion - merely interested in its contents for personal reasons.
ʈɧɛ fɨʂɧ (
talk) 00:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
I have restored this article and moved it to
User:The Fish/Katya Kan. It was speedy deleted twice so it needs some work if you are going to attempt to move it back to main space. Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 00:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi! Not your deletion, but since we discussed
Saira Shah Halim following my deletion (also not being queried, so I don't feel this is canvassing), I linked our discussion there. Courtesy heads up, and no action needed unless you choose to participate.
StarMississippi 02:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you for alerting me. I'm so behind on responding to messages here. I found out a week or so ago that a well-meaning editor was telling new editors to come here with their problems, I get a lot of traffic here. LizRead!Talk! 04:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
These need to be restored to article space where they were unilaterally and improperly moved by a user whose competence for moving pages you've already questioned on their talk pages. In short, they need to be restored to the status quo ante bellum, considering the "bellum" was a mess up by someone who didn't know what they were doing. Based on their move summary, it looks
Like they wanted to do a wholesale replacement of the existing article text with a draft on their user space sandbox, without discussion, and are attempting to do that by improperly moving a main space article to draft space and then overwriting the deleted redirect. They need to be stopped immediately and their improper moves undone.
oknazevad (
talk) 04:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention. If you look at the Move log, this student editor had been moving around a lot of pages with this title, from User space to main space to draft space. I should have looked closer at this page's history. I reverted their most recent edits but they also did some work a few months ago. It would help if you could look it over. I appreciate you bringing this to my attention so I could fix it. Is there anything else that needs to be undo/restored? LizRead!Talk! 04:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
No, I think it's okay now. The rest of it can be taken care of in normal editing. I do have to question whether or not the editor in question lacks the competence to be involved in these matters, based on the quality of their edits (or lack thereof) and their obvious errors, but I'm going to assume good faith that it's just inexperience o their part.
oknazevad (
talk) 04:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, CathStudies is a student editor and my experience with them, for good or for ill, is that 95% of them disappear after the school term is over. Very few student editors stick around to do any editing once the course is over. So, I don't think there are any long-term concerns to worry about. LizRead!Talk! 00:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, the inexperience is obvious, but I hope they learn. New editors should always be welcome.
oknazevad (
talk) 01:01, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
No problem. This happens fairly often with categories. LizRead!Talk! 17:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Investigation on someone
Hello Liz. How are you doing.
I need you and some others to investigate on this wikipedian Saqib. He is constantly deleting my articles and he first adds nobility to it and the next he nominates it for delete. He previously also accused me of Sockpuppeter and also though I have connections with someone but I said that I don't have any connection. He is trying to make me block from wikipedia. I have started wikipedia in 2020 and this is my only account which I use till now. I am purely contributing to Pakistani Entertainment. I take sources from newspaper, books, magazine and interviews.
He thinks that my sources are not fine and keeps saying they are not significant but these sources are used in other Pakistani articles as well. I did a litte bit of my search on Saqib and I learned that he has previously did this thing also on other users as well such as deleting their works like of Faizan Munawar Varya whose articles he also deleted. I saw their converison Reporting User Saqib for Harrasing other Users on Administrators' noticeboard in April 21, 2024.
Please do some investigation on Saqib.
Thank you.
Have a very wonderful day.
(12:53, 1 May 2024 (UTC))
First, please be sure you correctly sign all messages you leave on talk page. Secondly, I don't consider my activities on Wikipedia as "investigations" but I'll look over their contributions. :Could you perhaps look over their criticism and see if there is any truth to it? There is a possibility that they have a valid point about your articles and it is just being delivered in a hostile way. I know what it's like to feel targeted but they might have a reasonable concern about your work and some improvements you might make to your editing skills. But I'll see if the attention is verging on harassment.
But if you came to an admin looking for someone to deliver a swift block on someone you are in a dispute with, you came to the wrong administrator. That's not how I operate. LizRead!Talk! 00:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello Liz. I'm not talking about blocking but I only want to investigate on him. I don't know anyone here so that I could have told them to investigate. I will look again at everything and check everything.(
BeauSuzanne (
talk) 05:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC))reply
Well, often when some editors get in a fierce dispute they would rather try to get the other editor blocked than talk out the issues. But I'm sorry if I made an incorrect assumption here. I'll get to this tomorrow. LizRead!Talk! 06:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
It's alright no worries :). Thanks for your help.(
BeauSuzanne (
talk) 08:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC))reply
Help with italic title
Hi Liz. I just came across the article on
Hayley Mills and its title is oddly italicized. As you know articles about people are not italicized. I've been trying to figure out how to change this, but I can't seem to find a way. Any help fixing this would be much appreciated. Thanks.
4meter4 (
talk) 20:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks to
Cryptic who provided an answer. To be honest, I'm not the best admin to come to when there are format/technical concerns. You'd have a speedier response approaching a content creator who is familiar with templates or even go to
WP:VPT where there are usually pretty quick responses. LizRead!Talk! 00:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, Liz. I started an AFD on the page
Tanmoy Roy and everyone has agreed that it should be deleted, and I think we're starting to approach a
WP:SNOW close at this point. Let me know your thoughts and I'll respond back ASAP. Thanks. (please mention me on reply)
NoobThreePointOh (
talk) 10:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Will this obscure toy line qualify for inclusion on WP?
An article on
Woodsey--a very obscure toy line produced by
Fisher-Price at the turn of the 1980s--has sat idle in my
article sandbox for a decade and a half. At this writing, the only coverage thereof is the barest of a one-line mention in the "Historic brands and products" section of its company's article.
Coming back to it this season as I clean out the sandbox one topic at a time (while transitioning to a brand-new
AFC queue), I've found three--make that six--usable citations so far from the fishwrap morgue (via
WP:Library) that may be enough for a standalone page. An ambitious task given that most of the WP Library hits are advertisements; if you or I can find more coverage, then we'll remind you!
"New toys at library". The Sun Times.
Owen Sound,
Ontario. 1981-08-14. p. F12. Retrieved 2024-05-02 – via
Newspapers.com. ("Fisher-Price has produced two sequels to the Woodsey family house, the Woodsey Store and the Woodsey Airport.")
It might as well be an understatement that this quoted excerpt from one of those tie-in books--Uncle Filbert Saves the Day, the one I've always remembered from my primary-school youth in the Commonwealth of Dominica--aptly serves as a metaphor for my efforts those past several days, and (on a wider scale) for those committed to upholding WP's
RS/
notability expectations no matter the subject, vintage, demographic, or obscurity. (H/T
Etsy product pics.)
"When will he [Filbert] settle down?" said Mama [Milkweed], shaking her head.
"Sometimes you have to run up many trees to find the right branch," said Papa, who often said things that took a while to understand.
Please have a look at
this AfD closure. For me it was wrong closure as each of KEEP & DELETE got 3 votes excluding the nomination.
Twinkle1990 (
talk) 15:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Before I possibly get involved, have you approached the closer? That is the first step you should take. If you believe their decision was in error or shouldn't have been closed by a non-admin, outline your reasons ask if they would consider a reversion of the closure. LizRead!Talk! 17:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello @
Liz. I contacted them And they answered {{"he marginally satisfies the WP:GNG. One delete !vote believed that she had not received sustained coverage and that The available coverage is limited in depth, often focusing on her arrest for hate speech or her association with notable figures, rather than any significant achievements or unique contributions.".
Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks.
T280531
XFDcloser usually handles these removals appropriately. I've reverted my edit. Thanks for letting me know. LizRead!Talk! 02:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Floriana First draft
Hi there, I understand you had to follow rules on drafts so I won't complain / blame. But could I have the source code restored to my userspace please or via another method? Thanks very much
Mtonna257 (
talk) 05:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you give me a link to the exact deleted page? Then I won't have to search for it. That will speed things up as I will be on and off Wikipedia over the next few days. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 19:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi @
Liz: a non-admin editor who has no clue has closed it a keep on a contentious Afd. I was planing to address a comment to it. Can you reopen it. scope_creepTalk 20:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Liz, I've been BOLD and undid the closure with an edit summary, and leaving it to your or other admins' discretion. Courtesy pinging @
Scope creep.
X (
talk) 22:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Tracking categories
Those 3 categories that you nominated for deletion. I'd only created them less than three hours earlier. Will be needing them slightly longer than that. However, in a day or two, they won't be needed anymore and I'll delete them. --
WOSlinker (
talk) 21:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi. Don't worry, this isn't some kind of nagging for an undeletion, but I use
Jet Fuel Formula almost daily and as soon as I saw it deleted, wondered why it wasn't simply turned into a redirect with retrievable and 'bookmarkable' history intact. No dice, and while I was pleased that
User:DrPepperIsNotACola recreated it as a redirect, that user stated that
they don't have the power to restore histories. Could you please restore the history, and if you feel the need to still wall it off from restoration, make it a protected redirect? Thanks.
2605:59C8:150D:D610:F9F3:D983:872E:1CB7 (
talk) 23:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the reply. Yes, I noticed it was completely deleted and then a redirect of the same title was put in place, hence the history is gone and the current redirect history is a single entry unrelated to the original. Technically, unless an admin did some something fancy, getting back the history would require at least a brief undeletion of only a matter of seconds before it was turned back into a redirect, if need be with one of those
padlock thingies.
Not to gripe, but I do so wish that were a more common practice, thereby allowing the deletion to stand and the content still be there for weirdos people like me to take a peek or use the content. Everyone's happy. Cake. Eat. Too. (Then there's the matter of someone post-deletion wanting to move the content to elsewhere - like fandom/wikia - but being unable to since the history is gone, or being unable to save the content for their own personal use and can't because they missed their only chance…)
98.97.14.142 (
talk) 02:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm kind of going through a lot right now. I will be glad to help you when my life stops circling round the drain. Not sure when that will be but it won't be during the next 48 hours where I'm sitting with a relative on hospice care. Please do not take this personally. LizRead!Talk! 03:21, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks once again and it is much appreciated. Sorry to hear about the relative in hospice care.
For years when I saw redirects (usually for TV series characters and episodes), I would check to see if there was a history. Sometimes I'd find it used to be only a stub, other times a respectable article that nevertheless was determined best to remain only as a redirect (likely due to it being considered excessive fancruft?). Still, many times it had no visible history to speak of and I was left wondering if the history got wiped out in the decision to delete it and then make it a redirect. When I bothered to check if it got Waybacked, the answer was all too often that the article did once contain quite a bit of info and I don't understand why there was no effort made to preserve a history. Seems harmless.
This particular Rocky & Bullwinkle episode list was different for me since I used it so frequently, and while I of course could just continue on independent of wikipedia by using the (several month old) Waybacked version or the harder to browse list at thetvdb.com, I felt the need to speak up since it seemed indicative of what I consider a bigger problem of an unnecessary purging of histories that could easily live on. It allows for everything from casual reading & browsing of what used to be as well as more thorough saving, copying, or even article export for a new home at a user page or different wiki.
2605:59C8:150D:D610:9C68:F5E4:C9BD:6D3E (
talk) 21:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Liz, answering parallel request on my Talk here for centralization.
Hi @
Usimite. Articles deleted as advertising, which this was, are generally not restored. Can you please advise how you became aware of a deletion discussion that closed before you had this account? cc @
DrmiesStarMississippi 15:44, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
i saw it on article deletion related to Nigeria. I saw this
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Tedja too. I never wanted to create them directly, that's why I reach out to admin because I'm new to wikipedia.
Usimite (
talk) 16:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Usimite, that is little short of miraculous--or unlikely.
Drmies (
talk) 21:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That's what I thought as well @
Drmies. I'm guessing Nansyy wie stale but let me know if you think it's worth paperwork. b
StarMississippi 02:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
User:Star Mississippi, I don't know--yes, maybe, I guess. I had a look (and rolled up one set of socks--look at User:CharlesTaze34, but they were not this one) and found a multitude of accounts on a few ranges in Spamland, but there is so much that I really don't know what to do with it. I just see that
Spicy has kindly checked (thank you!) on an account that pops up continuously in my checks, including this one; Spicy, I hope I'm paraphrasing you correctly when I say that this is just really difficult or tricky, given how busy it is. So, Star Mississippi, maybe there's just no point in it. Thanks,
Drmies (
talk) 14:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the background @
Drmies & @
Wikishovel. I see from
Bovlb's
note that's this farm:
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ukpong1, no wonder they found me after some discussions I hadn't been involved with. SPI is so hopelessly backlogged so unless Drmies or @
Spicy wants to fast track it, I'm not sure paperwork is needed since will end up with a period between edits. Happy to file if someone thinks it helpful.
StarMississippi 02:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Apologies Liz, we'll go elsewhere if this needs to continue
StarMississippi 18:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
ooph
I've never kicked the can down the road as much as I did with today's log. This lack of participation overall and some niche topics. Yuck. Just venting. There are no answers as you well know.
StarMississippi 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I know what you mean, I don't like to relist AFD discussions but when you have a handful of people making valid arguments on both sides (or unruly discussions with editors all over the map), well, I see more No Consnsus closures in the future. Which can mean more visits to DRV my favorite place on the project.
We got a temporary boost in discussion closers when I made a comment on AN about it about a month ago but we also need more thoughtful discussion participants. But people burn out, especially those who are frequntly arguing to Keep articles. But you know all of this, too so I won't repeat myself. We should consider a discussion board for venting or maybe that's what email is for! LizRead!Talk! 16:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yep. I was half tempted to make a plea for participants. There was some definite IARing happening. It may be ineligible for soft deletion but two weeks of silence means what other options do we have? THanks for always listening. I'd totally be here for
WP:ANVentStarMississippi 17:07, 5 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, these can be somewhat reliable sources, but you've thrown in a bunch of unreliable ones too. Plus, even with these ones, not everything they publish would pass WP:RS. —
Saqib (
talk |
contribs) 14:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Majority of the sources included are reliable, the coverage of the subject matters too and the citations covers it in detail.When the sources are reliable, how you can determine which one should pass and which one should not?
182.182.97.3 (
talk) 14:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
User:Drmies,
User:Saqib is involved in making wrong decisions. You can check, my IP doesn't match with
User:BeauSuzanne. Infacf,
User:Saqib is biased in exercising his administrative rights by nominating multiple articles. I'm just voicing his unjust actions, that's why he's accusing me as logged out
User:BeauSuzanne. Kindly provide justice.
182.182.97.3 (
talk) 15:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Saqib. Please don't add my name in everything. I am not doing anything outside my account.(
BeauSuzanne (
talk) 15:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC))reply
I had about an hour and a half of sleep last night so I won't be doing any "investigations" of anyone right now. Feel free to contact another administrator or, even better, talk out your differnces and resolve them through on of our dispute resolution processes. Go to
the Teahouse for details about them. LizRead!Talk! 15:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Take care Liz, get some rest and recharge! —
Saqib (
talk |
contribs) 15:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey @
Liz, thank you for editing Wikipedia. I was wondering, do you use a bot to archive discussions on your talk page, or is it managed through a template? Or do you handle it all manually? -
Macrobreed2 (
talk) 16:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Any chance you could speedy keep this for me please? I found out it was just a case of the wrong article name which can be fixed out of AfD so have withdrawn, and there are no delete !votes on it. Thanks.
Sirfurboy🏄 (
talk) 20:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello, I was hesitant to make this comment because I don't want to sound obtrusive, but I notice that when you delink deleted articles on disambiguation pages, set index articles, etc., you often leave the entry there, such as in
this edit. I feel like this goes against the spirit of
MOS:DABNOLINK/
MOS:DABRED and similar navigational guidelines. Do you think you could take care to remove the entries completely on disambiguations, set indexes, see also sections and hatnotes when the article it's linking to has been deleted? (in the case of hatnotes, the hatnote should be removed completely if it contains only a redlink). Hopefully there's not a misunderstanding on my part. Thanks for all the work you do here!
AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (
talk) 04:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, where is the problem, her article has a reputation, anyway, I was not familiar with Wikipedia's rules
I have read the rationale and disagree that it should have been deleted. Political candidates are subject to significant media interest and pressure. Added to which, having been a columnist at a national newspaper and a television pundit on national news in the UK the subject is more notable than those arguing for deletion suggest. The article should at least be moved into draft; as noted in the discussion it was well-written and detailed.
Toadynudge (
talk) 10:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Toadynudge, hi--you did not read Liz's rationale; what you read was Liz's summary of the "delete" arguments. I see that you did not participate in the discussion. You can take this up at
WP:DRV, but I have no doubt that the consensus there will be that Liz correctly closed this discussion, which is the basis for any decision by the closing/deleting administrator.
Drmies (
talk) 14:27, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Mercuri_Urval_International
DearLiz, We have gotten our page deleted based on this log: Expired PROD, concern was: No evidence of notability - sources are not in-depth, independent coverage. MU are a 66 year old company operating world-wide and we have several sources and independent coverage to add if needed. Please let me know how to proceed to get it edited and restored. Warm regards, Sofia
Sofiahl (
talk) 15:54, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Can you providee a link to the deleted page? Then we can see why it was deleted. It may take a while for me to respond back these days. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 15:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi! I have gotten help to restore it to a draft, so don't need assistance anymore. Have a great day!
Sofiahl (
talk) 07:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for coming to me for help but I have a lot going on in my life right now (see the header at the top of the page). If I don't get to it, I'm sure someone else will tend to it soon. Have patience. LizRead!Talk! 04:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Greetings. I am an administrator and bureaucrat on Wikimedia Commons. It was brought to my attention on a platform not Wiki that there is a problem with some edits on an article
Donald_Young_(choir_director). As stated on that talk page,
[28] I found some problems with some edits on that article and corrected as many as I could. I then went to the page of the editor responsible for the odd citations and found that you recently deleted a draft article on the apparently same topic. The diff is here
[29]
I do not think that the changes that I undid are relevant to the Wiki project. They have been undone by others before. I wish I had more experience with en:Wiki - do you have an equivalent to "check user" to see if there are socks of this user? The person who brought this forward to me suggested that there may be other edits or other accounts involved.
In the interest of completeness, I looked at other contributions of this editor and found
Benedict_Biscop of which the first four citations either do not mention, do not exist, 404 page not found. Later citations at least mention him, and one
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095458439 seems to be the source of much of the en:Wiki article including perhaps full phrases.
Please reply to me at my Wiki Commons talk page
[30] which sends me notifications.
Thank you so much in advance for your time and attention to this matter.
I responded to you on the Commons. The part of the English Wikipedia that deals with sockpuppetry is
WP:SPI. You can find more information there or go to
the Teahouse. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 02:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Restoration of Todd William Schroeder page
hello Liz, this is a page you deleted in on the 26th of April, 2024. The copyright infringement issue has been resolved as the subject's source has added a disclaimer on their site where the links/statements were gotten from. Could you please restore the page, as i have some edits to make to it?
If you'd prefer, you could restore it to the draft space if you have any concerns. Concerns i hope you would share with me so i can correct them.
Thank you.
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Please provide a link to the deleted page. We can't restore content that is a copyright violation. I'm not sure that this declaration resolves the copyright issues. I recommend going to
the Teahouse for specific advice on copyright issues. LizRead!Talk! 02:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Edit summaries
Dear admin-chosen-at-random-who-seems-to-be-active, do you think edit summaries
like this are acceptable? Do I need to raise this at an admin board somewhere? Many thanks.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 08:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I blocked the IP for three days.
Johnuniq (
talk) 09:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you Johnuniq for your timely action.
Martinevans123 (
talk) 09:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Dang boy, not just abysmal, but utterly abysmal!
Drmies (
talk) 23:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for other admins for stepping in here. I'm active but as you can see by the header at the top of this page, I can be slow at responding. Sorry you had to put up with this nonsense. LizRead!Talk! 00:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz. This G8 deletion of yours seems to have been erroneous.
G8 excludes "Redirects that were broken as a result of a page move or retargeting (these should instead be retargeted to their target's new name), except where
R2 speedy deletion would then immediately apply if they were fixed (e.g., redirects to articles that have been
draftified)". (And, of course, R2 doesn't apply to redirects from userspace.) (Do with this comment as you wish; I don't particularly care if it's undeleted.)
SilverLocust💬 06:10, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure I'm following you as
User:Lillyanacut/Gelsen Gas isn't deleted now. But it was previously deleted because it was a broken redirect to
Gelsen Gas Student Article and we delete broken redirects. This was a page that was moved around a lot so it's a little confusing. I try not to make mistakes but I'm a very active admin so it's possible I made an error. What sort of resolution are you looking for here? LizRead!Talk! 00:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, after my comment here the page has been moved back to the title of the deletion, so there is nothing to do now.
G8 says (quite correctly) that broken redirects should be fixed, not deleted, when broken as the result of a page move — unless the fixed redirect would be an R2. The move redirect from userspace was broken when you draftified the article.
SilverLocust💬 00:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Ping
I mentioned you at
Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle#Unlink_and_disambiguation_pages (one of your edits made me think that maybe Twinkle could be improved). Somehow I had forgotten that you are unpingable (when I was reminded, it did ring a bell though). Anyway, here is a proper notification so you know I have not been trying to talk about you behind your back. —
Kusma (
talk) 21:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I don't know if I'm "unpingable" but I get so many pings that I stopped monitoring them. Thanks for letting me know. I'll see if I can wander by that discussion. LizRead!Talk! 22:39, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I was unaware of that. If I am addressing an administrator concern with which you were involved, should I refrain from pinging you? ~
Anachronist (
talk) 02:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well, it's best if it's important to do what Kusma did and alert me on my user talk page. I just post so many welcome messages to new editors and notices about expiring drafts that I get more pings than I can respond to. To be honest, I'm also pretty slow and inconsistent about responding to talk page messages, I just seem to get so much traffic here, I'm not sure why. I found one editor was recommending to new editors to come here if they had any problems and I was like, "Sigh. Thanks but no thanks." Luckily, I have some awesome talk page stalkers that get to messages to supply help. LizRead!Talk! 00:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Request to restore deleted page
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello Liz,
I somehow missed the notifcation from March that an article I edited was proposed for deletion due to "Bandcamp artist spam". This page has since been deleted, titled "
Wally Scharold". If I recall correctly, I updated a dead link on the page to that person's band, which is currently only linkable to their Bandcamp page as the official website of the band was no longer active. Had I been aware of the proposed deletion in time, I would have gladly removed the edit in question. If possible, I'd greatly appreciate it if this page could be restored. Thank you.
AimlessIdler (
talk) 01:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Just checking, you are talking about
Wally Scharold, right? As a deleted PROD this article can be restored. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 23:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, yes,
Wally Scharold. Great news that it can be restored. Will the content from the deleted version of the article need to be corrected upon restoration? Happy to do so if so, just checking. Many thanks for your swift reply and help with this. Kind regards.
AimlessIdler (
talk) 00:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Done All of the content is restored. Please know that the editor who tagged this article as a PROD might nominate it for an
WP:AFD deletion discussion. If it is deleteed via an AFD it will be much more difficult to restore. If you want to work on the article undisturbed, you might move it to your user space for a while. Please look at the PROD deletion rationale so you understand what should be fixed. Good luck. LizRead!Talk! 00:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi Liz, understood and thank you for restoring the page as well as providing helpful next steps. Kind regards. AI
AimlessIdler (
talk) 14:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Draft about surgeon
Dear Liz,
Could you look into
Gregory J. Marchand and examine the circumstances of deletion? It might be possible to restore it to draftspace.
You're definitely right that the AFC process can be tedious and tiresome, we went through a lot of draft revisions to get through! But, as you can see from the logs I did indeed follow the AFC process all the way through. I did not take any shortcuts or post in mainspace without permission, and so CSD may have been mistakenly applied. I really appreciate your help with this. Also, if you have any suggestions to improve the page I will be happy to comply.
Are you a paid contributor? I ask because articles on this subject have been virtually identical and resembled advertising every single time. I'm not willing to restore this kind of promotional content to the project. It would be best if you started from scratch and wrote a draft article appropriate for an encyclopedia and not a business directory on the world's best doctors. The hype of winning world records, for example, was completely inappropriate for an article on a physician. Good luck but I'm doubtful that editors with an obvious conflict-of-interest can write an article that would be approved by an AFC reviewer.
This is what I would advise you to do. However, if you want to contest my deletion, you can file an appeal at
Wikipedia:Deletion review but you have to present a very solid argument to win the approval of the editors who review appeals. I think it would be unsuccessful but it is an option you can take. LizRead!Talk! 23:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Dear Liz, thank you for your quick, detailed reply. If you would be so kind as to review the AFC logs, you'll see that my conflict of interest (COI) was disclosed with the initial AFC submission and continues to be displayed on my userpage. I made sure all editors throughout the AFC process knew of my COI. I'm a published researcher at this institution. My conflict of interest was completely disclosed and discussed during the AFC process, (a lot of the back and forth is also on my talk page,) and we were very careful to avoid promotionality with the help of the nice editors at AFC. I'm not interested in disputing your deletion, but I would like to avoid the 6-12 month process of starting AFC from scratch.
Therefore, from reading all of the above topics you've worked on in this talk page, I see that you seem extremely reasonable, and tend to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I've been open, clear, and obeyed all of Wikipedia's regulations and pillars. If you would be so kind as to allow me to submit a draft of this page to you for consideration, I believe I can perform a rewrite that excludes any promotionality and that you will find suitable for this online encyclopedia.
Oh and congratulations on your new barnstar below! I sincerely appreciate the tremendous amount of time and effort you put in to improving Wikipedia as an unpaid volunteer. Keep up the good work!
Danthemedguy22 (
talk) 18:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
A barnstar for you!
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For your tireless work at
WP:AFD, I've seen you taking excellent decisions in closing and relisting discussions. Thanks so much for your contributions :-)
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Oh, and P.S. how about
archiving your talk page? It takes a lot of time for me to load due to all of the discussions on here :)
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the barnstar and I will archive my user talk page. I'm helping take care of a parent on hospice care, hence the message at the top of this page. I'll get to it soon. LizRead!Talk! 16:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Dear
Liz, no worries. That sure sounds tough. Wishing you strength during those difficult times
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 16:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Restoration of deleted page
Hi @
Liz, please I want you to restore my sandbox
User:SafariScribe/sandbox, its urgent as it contains part of an ongoing peer review for FA. I thought I had transferred all to the main page before tagging it for speedy deletion. It is urgent and was an error. Thanks for your consideration. Regards. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 20:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)reply
You should ask the admin who deleted the page. I do not have the free time right now to handle these kinds of requests. LizRead!Talk! 16:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Fastily isn't responding though I have requested in
WP:REFUND but it's being deleted and the work in the sandbox is urgent for the ongoing peer review. I will just be patient. Thanks. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 16:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Aight, I explicitly appreciate that. Who am I when I have a good one like you, take it easy also and always take some deep rest. Let me rush to the reviewer ASAP. Safari ScribeEdits!Talk! 16:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Early NAC closures
Since that DRV is now closed, I figured we'll continue this here. You said,
Owen×, I've observed that many NAC closures are early closures. AGF, I think they want to gain experience with closures but with a current shortage of closers, it's usually unnecessary to do closures early. I don't want to single out this closure as it's just a trend I've noticed this year. I've seen "SNOW" closes with only 3 or 4 discussion participants which is not how I interpret SNOW to work.
Personally, I'm not bothered by eager NACs jumping in to close an obvious Keep AfD a few hours before the seven days are up. If consensus to keep is obvious enough for a NAC, waiting the full week is an unnecessary technicality. What bothers me are closures that are completely inappropriate for a non-admin. Almost anything closed as No-consensus is a BADNAC, pretty much by definition. Marginal Keeps are also a problem. Yesterday I had to revert a NAC Keep closure based on a grand total of two Keep !votes, one of which was little more than an ILIKEIT. The closer was friendly and understanding, so this didn't end up with a wheel-war like with that other guy I took to DRV, and the harm was minimal, but these things happen all the time.
We need to find a way to encourage non-admins to get involved with closing AfD, without creating this mad race to the Close button I see as we approach the seven-day finish line. Currently, most of the obvious NAC-elegible AfDs are closed by you, by
Star Mississippi and by
Explicit. By the time I check the backlog, usually all that's left are the contentious, messy, often political ones that no one else wants to touch, and almost invariably end up in DRV. I try to tackle at least one of those whenever I see them. Would it make sense to deliberately leave more obvious Keep AfDs open for NAC closure? I know you hate seeing anything in the AfD backlog, but these are easy, straightforward cases, and no harm is done by having them open for eight days rather than seven. With more opportunities for NACs to hone their closing skills, maybe we'll get fewer of those forced-SNOW inappropriate closures. What do you think?
Owen×☎ 12:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
OwenX, If I may, as the one who performed the NAC mentioned here, I totally agree with what you're saying and had a quick thing to add. How about not allowing AfDs to be closed prior to the 7 days (at least, by non-admins, and still allowing nominations to be withdrawn)? I think that it would help reduce the amount of those SNOW closes from occurring (just as I did with my first couple, unfortunately very much mistaken, closes). That way, NACs could safely happen on eligible keeps after the 7 days and would reduce the occurence of that SNOW trend that Liz mentioned. Obviously, there'd need to be a community consensus for such a change.
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 16:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for joining in,
Cocobb8! If all non-admin closers were as cooperative and as eager to learn as you are, things would be much easier. I'm game for the procedural change you propose, but I doubt it would gain consensus if proposed as a policy change. That's why I'm looking for a change that can be implemented without updating policy, just by changing how the most prolific AfD closers handle the task. But I'm open to other approaches.
Owen×☎ 17:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your reply @
OwenX! I'd be interested to see what other admins and editors think about this procedural change too. Would it be a kind of proposition for which all admins would support and non-admins wouldn't? How here's an additional thought: maybe some kind of "AfD closer" user right can be created through
WP:PERM, so that it works the same as
WP:NPP. But that might be a little overkill too.
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 12:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi! just noting I've seen this and will circle back to it in the coming days. I was offline this weekend and will be again next. (Sorry @
Liz, I know I said I'd pick up the slack)
StarMississippi 02:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Random question
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hi Liz,
I am a student currently writing a paper on gender bias on wiki. I want to ask you a few questions regarding your experiences as a female editor on wiki. If you are not comfortable responding, then no worries about responding. Thanks!
These are the questions I would like to ask for my paper:
1. Have you ever experienced anything that you would classify as a result of gender bias on wiki?
2. How you heard of the "Women in Red" list on wiki> If so, have you tried writing a page for one of the women with a red link? What were your experiences like and what type of edits did you receive from other editors on wiki?
3. Why do you think gender bias exists on a platform such as wiki, or even in general? Is there anything you think that could be done to lessen this divide caused by gender?
Thank you for taking the time to read my post and I hope you have a wonderful day!
Cthmwh0 (
talk) 05:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Cthmwh0 (
talk page watcher) Liz is busy and stressed, as noted above at the top of their talk page. They may not respond to your query. Just a heads up. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Requesting help regarding a deleted article
Could you please advise me on how to fix it or not? Because Draft:AP (Thailand) Public Company Limited has been deleted. I'm not sure where I went wrong.
58.137.32.194 (
talk) 02:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher) Hello, @
58.137.32.194. I am not Liz, or an admin, but I can tell you that the page was deleted as a redirect that goes to a page that doesn't exist. Currently, Liz is very busy, and they may not reply fast. If this is urgent, I recommend asking another admin; we have quite a lot of them, you know. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 02:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Seeking Guidance on Republishing Sergey Smbatyan's Article on Wikipedia
I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to take a moment to express our gratitude for your invaluable contributions to improving Wikipedia content. Your dedication to maintaining accuracy and reliability within the platform is truly commendable.
I am reaching out to discuss a matter regarding an article draft that was deleted last year under your supervision. The draft in question pertains to Sergey Smbatyan, and it was removed due to a lack of reliable sources at the time.
Since then, I worked to gather sufficient and verifiable sources covering Sergey Smbatyan's accomplishments and contributions. I believe that now I have a robust set of references that meet Wikipedia's standards for reliability.
Given your expertise in this area, I would greatly appreciate your guidance on the process of republishing the article. I want to ensure that I adhere to all Wikipedia guidelines and protocols to guarantee the article's compliance and accuracy.
Your insights and direction on this matter would be immensely valuable to me, and I am eager to collaborate with you to bring this article back to the platform in a manner that upholds Wikipedia's integrity.
Thank you once again for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Warm regards
Grigor Khachatrian (
talk) 08:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher) Not done The draft in question still exists, and has been submitted for review, see
Draft:Sergey Smbatyan. I'm not Liz, but I am responding on their talk page as they are very busy and stressed, indicated by the notice at the top of this talk page. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 14:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hey @
TheTechie, thanks for your commitment to improving Wikipedia. Could you please guide me which part is reading like an advertisement, and how can we improve that? Thanks in advance
Grigor Khachatrian (
talk) 06:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
For one thing, your use of the subject pronoun "we" gives me an idea that you are a company. Wikipedia accounts are strictly for one person. I am sure that you are an
SPA, but I'm sure someone will find out soon. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Dear @
TheTechie, Mentioning we I mean me and you, as me and you are contributing of the improvement of the Wikipedia. As you are a senior editor, I am seeking your guidance and help to improve the article. Thanks in advance.
Grigor Khachatrian (
talk) 16:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Please restore and let me know when you've done so. All the best: RichFarmbrough 15:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC).reply
(
talk page watcher) Hi, I'm subbing for Liz on their talk page as they are very stressed. Note: you don't need to ask Liz here, they clearly say in the deletion note: If you wish to retrieve it, please see WP:REFUND/G13. Hope that helps and good luck! thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 02:28, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, I was sorry to hear that Liz is stressed. If she is too stressed to respond here, perhaps it would be wise for her to stop deleting things.
@
Rich Farmbrough given the issues around Immanuelle's translations, I'm not sure about restoring this one. The one prior was a redirect. Was there particular history you wanted to explore?
StarMississippi 12:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I have no idea, since the page is deleted. Once I can see it, and the history, I will be able to form a judgement.
I note that
Draft:Mankind has been deleted since, so perhaps I should take a look at that too.
I have also not been following any issues with any other users editing, and strongly support editing from the standpoint of content rather than authorship.
@
Rich Farmbrough,
Draft:Humankind is restored save for some early bot weirdness. Pinging @
Interstellarity to shed some light on whether the history swaps are useful, but they're restored for now. There is nothing at Draft:Mankind as the text was, in its entirety: Dummy page to use as a reminder to edit
Draft:Humankind.
Mankind should redirect there when the draft is accepted.
Not watching the draft so please ping me if you need anything further.
StarMississippi 00:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
User:Star Mississippi I am puzzled, I can see no reason that I should have been notified that Liz was deleting this draft. All the best: RichFarmbrough 12:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC).reply
Apologies, I didn't realize you operate SmackBot. Those were the edits I described as "bot weirdness" but have now restored. How dare you not immediately recall high impact 2008 edits ;-)
Those are also now restored and likely why you were notified.
StarMississippi 13:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
User:Star Mississippi Thanks! This is just a history of ... well lets be nice. Can you move this draft page back to where it belongs:
Mankind, reverting
User:Immanuelle's move to Draft space. I think you can safely overwrite what's at Mankind at the moment, although if you want to do a history merge, more power to you. Liz should have spotted this, bulk deletion is never a good idea. I'm not sure that
User:Interstellarity's "round-robin" move (that's not what a round robin is) was a good idea, but that's another issue. Once again thanks. All the best: RichFarmbrough 21:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC).reply
At least the end result, I think I messed it up along the way but I'm 99% sure I got what you were hoping for in terms of history at the right title. Let me know if more is needed? I am not the most tech savvy of editors if you hadn't guessed so can't promise I can take it further. Have a good evening
StarMississippi 01:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher) Hello, I'm subbing for Liz as they are very stressed. Not done: It's unclear what you'd like to be done. Please let me know what you are expecting. If you need an admin, please ask another one, this one is going through a lot. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
That ANI discussion about Synthesis seems to be very much on the wrong board. Not a surprise as the editor who brought it there only has made 123 edits in over 3 years. Do you see any behavioral issues that justify keeping it open?
Doug Wellertalk 11:28, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher) Hi, Liz isn't around, for now. As listed above, they're busy in real life with personal issues. I am replying on their behalf because, as noted above, they are stressed because of said personal issues. If you like, you can move it yourself. If you would like a third opinion, please let me know which section of ANI you are talking about, there is quite a lot. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Don't feel bad. I'm helping provide hospice care for my mother along with my brother and sister so there are times when I'm busy off-line and times when she is sleeping where I do basic editing to relieve stress. I just am not up for putting out fires and chatting a lot (I typically leave long talk page messages!).
But we are all dealing with some kind of stress, I know, and even though I archived a lot of messages recently, my user talk page is still pretty full and most people don't see the header at the top of this page. I hope you are doing okay these days, you're all in my thoughts. LizRead!Talk! 16:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Liz, is it ok with you if I keep responding to messages on your talk page? Or would you like me to stop? Please be honest. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:38, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
And I can add the notice to your editnotice too if you'd like. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 16:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I’m sorry that’s necessary but glad you’ve got family to share it with. It’s. Good that your mother can be with her family. I’m doing ok really, living a pretty normal life for my age, although may be having chemo again soon. That won’t be too bad.
Doug Wellertalk 18:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Well,
TheTechie, to be honest, I have mixed feelings about it. I have been blessed by several helpful talk page stalkers who have offered replies to editors' questions before I got around to responding to messages. I have a tendency to either respond to messages immediately (like now) or I can take a few days to get to messages. If it is an editor with a general question and you can tell them where to get help or where to find an answer, then it would be very kind for you to respond. But if it's a question about an AFD closure or some other admin act I've done, then I really need to reply myself. And don't speak "for me" or about me, I'd like to choose when to share about my life.
You can add the "stress" header to my edit notice, that would be helpful but don't, for instance, archive my user talk page. Several years ago, an editor set up automatic archiving for me, without asking, and my talk page archives are still screwed up as the archiving was done to whatever archive page had the most space, not according to date. I can handle that on my own. But thanks for asking me how you can help, if you can work within the limits I describe, then your assistance would be welcome and appreciated, thank you. LizRead!Talk! 18:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Understood. And about archiving someone else's talk page...I do agree that it is going too far. I won't tell others the details, but I will say that you are busy/stressed, and if it is about something you did, well, I'll leave you to it. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 00:43, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hello
I'm having an argument with
User:Toughpigs about whether
Unicron is notable. My stance is that he's just iconic for being really big (there's a difference). As the person who closed the original AFD, what do you think now?
2605:B40:13E7:F600:81AF:FB54:24F5:260E (
talk) 21:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
To clarify, I'm not arguing with you about the article content. I'm asking you to respect
prior consensus, and stop trying to re-nominate articles that have recently been discussed at AfD.
Toughpigs (
talk) 21:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with
Toughpigs. Seems to be well supported with sources at a glance. IP starting with 2605, I'm afraid you'll have to find somewhere else to edit. thetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 00:44, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Correspondentman at AfD again
I saw that you commented at
User talk:Correspondentman § AFDs seven months ago. He's just nominated three more articles in quick succession, all associated with Azerbaijan. He hasn't made any other edits besides AfD. Someone also pointed out at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhan Aliyev that he was banned at az.wiki for sockpuppetry (
az:İstifadəçi:Correspondentman). I'm not sure if this is grounds for
WP:ANI etc., but since you were suspicious before, I thought you might want to know about this.
jlwoodwa (
talk) 04:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I mention this mainly because you appear to be deleting pages directly from the category, so your opinions at the discussion would be appreciated.
Primefac (
talk) 06:35, 16 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure why
Category:G13 eligible AfC submissions has suddenly become empty, it typically contains several hundred drafts that are coming due for G13 speedy deletion over the next month/4 weeks.
But the three admins who typically handle G13s (me, Explicit and Hey man im josh) actually make use of daily lists generated by
User:SDZeroBot for this purpose (see
User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon). SDZeroBot's lists are more complete that this category ever was. Years ago when SDZeroBot started helping with G13s (Sept. 2020), I asked the bot operator, SD0001, why SDZeroBot's lists were more accurate than this category, but we didn't figure out an answer beyond the possibility that not all expiring drafts were tagged for this category. But I have no idea what bot was in charge of tagging drafts to be in this G13 eligible AFC submissions category in the first place!
But I've never seen this category completely empty before, this is really strange!. Did someone change a template or something? We have editors who tag expiring drafts with CSD G13 tags and they typically use this category, not SDZeroBot's lists. It's a very small group of admins and editors who handle tasks related to G13s so we kind of have a routine operating procedure. Again, I'm not sure if a bot stopped tagging drafts or what that would cause this category to empty out. In the past, it has gone down to, say a hundred drafts and I'd ask DGG for help and he seemed to know how to fix the problem and the category would fill up again but, unfortunately, that's not possible any more. There might be a query about this at
WP:VPT from years ago when this would sometimes happen. LizRead!Talk! 20:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Good afternoon! You recently closed this AFD as "keep", yet you relisted
this AFD earlier in the day with the comment "A comment to "procedural keep" is not an argument on why an article should be Kept. I'm relisting this discussion." I am curious why one merited a closure as "keep" when the other was relisted.
Bgsu98(Talk) 20:40, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
You filed dozens of AFD discussions for articles on this subject, most of which were relisted because we have low participation right now in AFDLand, especially when there are so many AFDs filed on the same day on a similar subject. We have a limited pool of editors who participate in AFDs.
I'll have to look into this tonight when I usually have more time to address talk page queries. I do recall that I saw another closer close an AFD on a skater that had similar comments as a "Keep" and that might have influenced my decision. But I'll have to look over the daily AFD log page and both AFDs to be sure. I was handling so many of these AFDs you filed yesterday, this one isn't sticking out in my memory. Hope to have an answer for you later in the day. LizRead!Talk! 21:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Syringa Pinnatifolia
Hi Liz, I see you've moved or deleted a page (Syringa Pinnatifolia) I was trying to move to mainspace. Thank you; I'd made a mistake with the page name (I think I inadvertently created a userpage with that name somehow) and I was trying to see how I could correct it. Is there a way of restoring it under the correct name, please? (You'll have guessed I'm rather new at this). Anyway, any help you can offer is appreciated.
ArthurTheGardener (
talk) 22:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)reply
What's possible can be seen by looking at why the article was moved or deleted. Can you provide me with a link to the page that was deleted that you are concerned about? That would speed things up. Thanks. LizRead!Talk! 23:11, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you: I'm very new to this, and I'm happy to start again if needs be. I think this is the link to the draft page (although I can't for the life of me find where it is now).
Draft:Syringa PinnatifoliaArthurTheGardener (
talk) 17:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, Liz, I came to ask you what you see in the sources for
Magdalena Hinterdobler (who is clearly notable per Michael Bednarek's first comment), but as you point at stress I just send best wishes. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk) 10:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old OTD. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk) 14:58, 22 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Exemplary
This is exemplary and maybe I can learn from it. Small steps though.
NebY (
talk) 22:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to request permission to recreate the draft for the article on RG Qluck Wise, a Ghanaian record producer, author, and graphic designer.
I understand that previous attempts to create this article were met with deletion due to various reasons, including concerns about notability and promotional language. I have carefully reviewed the deletion log and taken steps to address these issues:
Notability: I have conducted additional research to ensure that RG Qluck Wise meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians, authors, and graphic designers. I have gathered reliable, secondary sources to establish his significance in these fields.
Neutral Tone: I have revised the content of the article to remove any promotional language or bias. The tone is now neutral and factual, focusing on providing an objective overview of RG Qluck Wise's career and achievements.
Draft Status: Instead of resubmitting the article directly to the main space, I plan to recreate it as a draft. This will allow for further refinement and review before seeking publication.
I believe that the revised draft meets Wikipedia's standards and guidelines for inclusion. Before proceeding, I wanted to seek your guidance and approval to ensure that I am following the correct procedure.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I am open to any feedback or suggestions you may have for improving the article further.
Hello, I would like to thank you very much for helping me move the article. Because I am a newbie, I need help in many places. However, this article is an assignment left for me by my teacher. The teacher’s request is to put it on my personal homepage in, So I'm moving this post back,Thank you very much for helping me, have a nice day
Mcx8202229 (
talk) 10:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
(
talk page watcher)@
Mcx8202229: Please see the message I left for you at
User talk:Mcx8202229#Your userpage because, as Liz mentioned in her post at
User talk:Mcx8202229#May 2024, your userpage is not really intended to be a place to work on drafts for future articles and leaving the content there only increases the risk that it will either be moved to the draft namespace again by another Wikipedia administrator/user or even possibly tagged for speedy deletion. If having your work in the draft namespace is really undesirable for some reason (though it's hard to think of good reason why that might be the case), then you should create a
userspace draft and
copy-and-paste the content there instead. Once you've copied-and-pasted the content into a userspace draft, you should remove from your user page. Whatever you do, please don't try to
WP:MOVE your user page to the userspace draft because doing so will create a whole new set of problems that will need to be cleaned up. Finally, as I also posted at
User talk:Mcx8202229#Non-free images and article namespace categories, non-free content can't be displayed on user pages per relevant Wikipedia policy, and article namespace categories can't be used on pages in the user namespace per relevant Wikipedia guidelines; so, please don't re-display the non-free file or re-enable the categories until after you're draft has been approved as an article. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 11:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Strategic Consortium of Intelligence Professionals (SCIP)
Hi Liz,
I noticed that you deleted the wikipedia page for Strategic Consortium of Intelligence Professionals (SCIP). I want to edit the content for the page to update it with the most latest information. Can you guide me on this?
AakritiBasnett (
talk) 17:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Heads up
I've just been contacted (via WhatsApp)
by someone (Ali Al Suleiman, Arabic: علي محمود السليمان) whose article you once deleted. Wanted me to help him restore the article, to which I said no without even looking into it. I was then told that he's got a draft (in Arabic?) ready that's just about to go into main space, "hence there shouldn't be a problem". Interestingly, there does not appear to be a Wikidata entry for this person. Do we care about people's autobiographies in other language Wikis? Schwede66 03:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)reply
The editor was reverted trying to file, it seems.
Daniel (
talk) 05:17, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Changing the title 'Manu Munsi' to 'Manu Munshi' and 'Kumkum Munsi' to 'Kumkum Munshi'
Hi,
Recently I created 2 articles with the title 'Manu Munsi' and 'Kumkum Munsi'. But, from google search I came to know that these people used to write 'Munshi' more frequently than 'Munsi'. That means, the original spelling was 'Munshi'. So, first I tried to create redirect pages with 'Manu Munshi' and 'Kumkum Munshi', respectively. But, I came to know that previously these pages were created by someone but deleted later. But, I have enough sources to make these pages notable based on which I created these pages with the surname spelling 'Munsi' which is actually wrong. The original spelling is 'Munshi'. I don't know who created the previous articles. I would like to know whether it is possible to change the title of the articles accordingly. If you kindly advise me in this regard, it will be beneficial.
Finesilpo (
talk) 16:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Request
Can you please undelete
19th Division (United States)(Prior to World War I) looks like that one had substantive history, and was also a bit of accidental
WP:WHEELing. I plan a running a script to find these and go through systemically to deal with a some point when I have the time. Probably in most cases they will be fixable by moving without leaving a redirect, but there will probably be some XFDs needed. Of course if an obvious title presents itself you can go ahead and move it there right now.
Separately, I have a nagging feeling I was supposed to assist you with something a few months back, and I can't remember if I got around to it. Probably not important, but if you want to give me a hard time I won't object.
2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A024:5E49:D03:3D9F (
talk) 16:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Said user may be a sockpuppet of
User:SteaminThomasTheTrain32 because of unofficial Thomas & Friends-related Auto-biography pages and said in the pages that his name is “David J. Murray Jr”, which is the user’s real name
Also he was infamous on FANDOM as an account named “Really Useful Hedgehog 2” for attention seeking and trying to steal another user named “Too Much Toby” IP address..
I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not a place to spread rumors. We only make claims when we know we have evidence. I ask that you stop disturbing Liz, as they can't do anything about this, and bring your concern to a checkuser by clicking
herethetechie@enwiki:
~/talk/$ 00:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
If you still feel that any of the above needs to be undeleted, then (I insist you even as an admin) please contact Explicit or Fastily, or please take any of them to
WP:DRV. Thank you.
George Ho (
talk) 02:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
File talk:JC Pressac - Auschwitz- Technique and operation of the gas chambers (1989).jpg
Hi Liz. I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of
File talk:JC Pressac - Auschwitz- Technique and operation of the gas chambers (1989).jpg and the of the article where it was being used, but of course you can deprod it. If you're planning to rename the article and make other changes so that it focuses on the book instead of on Pressac (as you suggested should be done in you're deprod reason), then perhaps the cover could be kept; however, the file is essentially a collage of images and I don't think a non-free image of the interior pages would meet
WP:NFCC#8, at least not based on the current version of the article; so, the image would probably need to be cropped to just show the cover if the article is to be changed to one about the book and not one about the author. If you still disagree with my assessment and feel the file is fine as is, I can nominate for discussion at FFD to see what others might think. --
Marchjuly (
talk) 06:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi, I noticed you closed
this PROD a while back. I would like to request undeletion. The concern was "Unused, obviously incorrect license tag (not PD-US), but unclear if this is eligible for Commons. Esoteric file format, dubious encyclopedic value".
"Unused" - Can just be transferred to Commons, clear educational value.
"obviously incorrect license tag" - image was made in 1960s, likely published somewhere without notice. Website also states "No known copyright restrictions", it is unlikely these photos went unpublished.
"esoteric file format" - tif is in no way esoteric
"dubious encyclopedic value" - Clear
c:COM:EDUSE as photos of a building from a collection