User talk:Onel5969

Onel5969's Talk
Phoenix ... It's a dry heat ...
Born	New York city
Nationality	American

Edit count

• edit count

Wiki mark-up link

Hi! You might find these handy:

• Simple guide to Wikipedia mark-up
  • Advanced guide to Wiki mark-up

Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Other useful links

• Special:New pages feed
• Stub Sort
• New Accounts
• Website Archive
• Cheatsheet
• Earwig's Copyvio tool

Links for new editors

If you're leaving a question regarding an article you're attempting to get onto Wikipedia, here are some links you might find helpful:

• General notability criteria
• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• How to structure and layout your article
• On how to properly format your citations

Request on 06:56:28, 2 June 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by MeggieFC

• MeggieFC (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Film Companion (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello, I needed some clarification regarding the article I edited.

Thank you very much for reviewing my article Film Companion! I've been waiting for quite some time! I wanted to clarify some doubts about editing the article with you. Could you elaborate what you mean by In-depth coverage? Also, seeing as the article may have notablity and reliability issues I was wondering if the sources I used are okay? The sources are from the main newspapers of the Country where Film Companion is situated. If I look for more relevant information and source them to these papers, would that be enough? Do I need something more? Also, I'll work Immediately on the paid editing issue. Thank you again!

MeggieFC (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi MeggieFC - First of all, thanks for declaring the paid COI issue on your user page. Now, regarding your questions. In-depth coverage is simply that, coverage which is in-depth about the subject. There is nothing with most of your sources, they simply don't go in-depth about the magazine. In most of them, they mention the magazine, but don't go in depth about it. Take the mid-day.com source. It's about the film which won the poll, and only mentions the magazine tangentially. Some of your sources, like the Huffpo one, are not reliable sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:34, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Your request for references for Jean-Claude Larrieu (footballer) on 4 June 2017

Thanks for reviewing the aforementioned article. I did not create the original article but only renamed it. There was a need for disambiguation after I created the article Jean-Claude Larrieu (cinematographer). I am not a football expert but was able to find and add two simple references to the article as per your kind request. Please feel free to edit the article to improve the writing since English is not my native language. Fernando (talk) 10:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your Review! Will Work on Article! MeggieFC (talk) 06:59, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

04:15:31, 8 June 2017 review of submission by Wisdomlightus

• Wisdomlightus (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Khenpo Tsultrim Lodrö (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Thank you for your review. Could you let me know why the sources are non-reliable? Thanks.Wisdomlightus (talk) 04:15, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Wisdomlightus - blogs, for one. Any source which has no editorial oversight, for two. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

17:38:35, 8 June 2017 review of submission by Wisdomlightus

• Wisdomlightus (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Khenpo Tsultrim Lodrö (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have added several sources. Could you take a look at them and let me know if they are reliable? Thanks.Wisdomlightus (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Alphabet guy

I asked for page protection - its hard for me to understand how invested some people become in the most obscure things.PRehse (talk) 18:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi PRehse - I saw that (when I tried to ask for pp ). BTW, thanks for all the work you do at NPP and with making sure the talk pages are properly done. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

My personal investment in the most obscure things (I do understand irony).PRehse (talk) 18:34, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Protection was declined.PRehse (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

The guy's a moron... the ip, not the admin. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:03, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Vandal?

Hey friend. Would you have a moment to look at 72.228.6.4 (talk · contribs)? I think their demographic edits are pure fiction, but I'm not positive. I reported it at AIV but it wasn't acted on. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:23, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree Magnolia677 - the guy is a complete and utter moron. Looks like there is no recourse except to open up another AIV thread.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:44, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

AIV declined it because there hadn't been enough warnings. I'll leave another, and do some cleanup. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 20:48, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

At Bernalillo County, New Mexico, the vandalism actually goes way back to this edit in April. I recall seeing a bunch of those flags appearing and I removed a lot of them. On some of the older edit--because there have been so many intervening edits--I have been cutting-and-pasting a clean (pre April copy) of the demographic data. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:59, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

There's a ton. And he doesn't only use that ip address, he's also been using 92.230.143.221. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

At Island County, Washington, cutting and pasting a previous copy of the demographic data is tricky because the population estimate was updated. What a mess. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:08, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

And here's another one: 66.87.80.218Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:10, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

What's the best way to clean it up? Magnolia677 (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

- simply have to slog through it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

- Okay Magnolia677, I cleaned up 66.87.80.218, and I started from the oldest vandalism on 72.228.6.4, and have finished through May. Will continue to work from the oldest forward, so if you want to go from the newest back, be my guest. Oh, I struck the other ip address above, that was from another vandal regarding something different. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I'll take a whack at it tomorrow. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:34, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

It looks like you got them all. Thanks for your help and hard work. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:39, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Kidz Bop Albums

Hi, I have noticed that the Kidz Bop albums got redirected. I am a fan of looking up songs so why did you do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.8.161 (talk) 21:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Because they don't meet notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:59, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Why are you flagging all my stuff? It's all referenced and you are just trying to bring down everything. I noticed some of your articles you created don't have accurate or notable references, why try to bring my stuff down?

PS. Here's a kitten for you.

Film Fanatical10069 (talk) 15:27, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Film Fanatical10069. Well, the article on the film's director clearly isn't notable, and was deleted as a result of an AfD discussion. Because of that it qualifies for speedy deletion. Second, the film does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. But I could be wrong. That's why there's a discussion. Take care.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. No worries. I am still trying to figure all this stuff out. I think the film is notable or I wouldn't have spent the time editing those articles. I started with the star and would like to add to it and link it up. I enjoy building stuff and find this fun. But I am still learning. I noticed you have a ton of films and love your work. Please feel free to give me any pointers if you can. Thank you for your help.Film Fanatical10069

Hi Film Fanatical10069 - The best way to figure this stuff out is to ask. There's a forum called WP:TEAHOUSE. Or you could leave a polite question on an editor's talk page, like you have here. But remember, most editors don't respond well to impoliteness or incivility. Regarding film notability, the standard is WP:NFILM. In a nutshell, if a film has had a broad theatrical release, it'll be notable. Films that are direct to DVD, or that are released directly to one of the online services have to show their notability through in-depth coverage in multiple released sources. When I originally tagged Wheels, it was because I did a cursory search and couldn't find enough (read that as any) of that type of coverage. But due to the commonality of the name, I didn't spend a lot of time on the search, and simply tagged it, hoping that an editor who had an interest in the article would develop it further. Removing tags without improving the article doesn't help. This morning, after you removed the tags again, I did more in-depth research, and still couldn't come up with enough sourcing. Hence my nomination at AfD. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:26, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Thank you for breaking it down for me and I apologize, as I was rude. I must admit, I got a little passionate about that flag. But that's why I enjoy this so much, it's a challenge. That film actually was in Theaters, I watched in LA a few years ago. I will do some online digging and find some better ref's for the article. Please let me know if you have any pointers for that as well. I am still having some trouble with the formating, but I guess that will come with time. I will check out the teahouse as well. Thanks again for the tips I appreciate it. Have a great Sunday.Film Fanatical10069

00:13:36, 12 June 2017 review of submission by Wisdomlightus

• Wisdomlightus (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Khenpo Tsultrim Lodrö (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Reviewer, We really appreciate your feedback about our submission regarding Khenpo Tsultrim Lodro. As we revise our entry, we have two questions about reliable external sources of information that we would like to get some clarifications from you. (1) About introduction to Khenpo, will such sources as listed below count? This is a third party website that we have totally no control over the content at all. http://www.samyeling.org/buddhism-and-meditation/teaching-archive-2/khenpo-tsultrim-lodro/ On this website, it says "Khenpo Tsultrim Lodro is one of the most prominent Tibetan Buddhist Scholars at Serthar Institute, known as Larung Gar Buddhist Academy, in Kham in East Tibet (Sichuan Province)." Will a direct quote of this sentence in our entry be acceptable? Of course we will cite the link in our entry. (2) About the various talks that we listed in our earlier submission. I am a professor at Cornell university. When we do annual performance evaluations, being invited to give talks at other universities is a MAJOR indicator of influence/impact on society. This is why we included "An Invited Talks" section in our earlier submission about Khenpo Tsultrim Lodro. In our vita, we typically just list the title and the date of the talk, and name of the hosting invitation. Because the hosting institution typically just send an internal email to inform people about the talk, seldom will there be any website links that we can cite as proofs for the talks. Given that this is the common practice at academia, we were wondering what other information will be acceptable by your review committee. Will pictures taken on the day of talk count? We have some pictures we can add, but other than that, we have trouble coming up with alternative proofs because in academia, few departments generate special website links for talks. Any advice from you would be highly appreciated. Connie Yuan https://communication.cals.cornell.edu/people/y-connie-yuan Wisdomlightus (talk) 00:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

16:29:00, 12 June 2017 review of submission by Wisdomlightus

• Wisdomlightus (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Khenpo Tsultrim Lodrö (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Reviewer, We have another question that we would like to ask regarding reliable external sources. One of Khenpo's major contributions to the growth of Tibetan Buddhism in contemporary China is the publication of his book, the Luminous Light series. The book project started from three volumes, first published in 2001. Now the fourth edition of the book published in 2016 has grown into 10 volumes. In the upcoming edition, it will grow into 11 volumes. Between these editions, hundreds of thousands of reprints have been sold. Unfortunately, all the books are in Chinese now. We are starting a submission of a Chinese wikipedia entry for Khenpo Tsumltrim Lodro because it seems that a lot of objective indicators of Khenpo's influence are in Chinese. We were just wondering to what extent Wikipedia Chinese and English reviewers will cross-check with one another about the reliability of external sources. Will Wikipedia Chinese team's confirmation of the reputation or notability of Khenpo contribution to society be acceptable in your decision making regarding the English entry? Also, Khenpo has been invited to give talks in the U.S. again this summer. Any guidelines about how we should document such events to prove to you Khenpo's notability will be highly appreciated. Of course we would hope that our entry will be approved before his visit so that the English speaking audience worldwide can gain a better understanding of Khenpo's background before they attend the talks. Many thanks in advance.Wisdomlightus (talk) 16:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• Wisdomlightus Hello, looking in I'll explain some of the concerns; one is the page is simply too promotional and this is in both information and sources, and especially then when multiple images are offered (which can only emphasize its promotionalism as a personal website, and rarely are they sprinkled throughout pages, only in specially relevant cases such as geography, education, history, etc.). Focus only with the actual independent coverage and not any announcements or notices and also, like with several subjects here, notability cannot be inherited. If you can show he's largely considered a major figure in his field, we can consider that but going into deep specifics about something he would personally advertise is unacceptable). SwisterTwister talk 03:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion: Colin S. Morris

Greetings Onel5969, Thank you very much for reviewing the page I made for Colin S. Morris, pointing out needed requirements for WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. I have added a news citation to the page that hopefully meets requirements, also commenting on the Articles for deletion page.

Best regards, Jim Hawksworth (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

About Wang Junkai's page

I've noticed that the page was again redirected to TFBOYS page for the issue of personal notability. The reason I raise this new edit is because there are more personal activities of Wang Junkai since this half year. The most recent activity is on June 17, Wang Junkai was invited by Dolce & Gabbana to its Spring 2018 menswear in Milan. I've offered two news about this activity above. Other activities include an invited trip to Nike design quarter in Portland. This website is from Nike official website of China and the translated title would be "A trip of NIKE AIR: Wang Junkai visits NIKE Design Quarter."

These two activities are well reported and you can find other news about these personal activities online. Wang Junkai really has his personal notability outside the group, please go through again these news, I hope this time you could allow his personal page exist. If you need any other reference please let me know. Again, thank you for checking on this page, I would try to improve this page. Happy editing! KARRYCRAB (talk) 16:10, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

References

It was not a copy infringing copyright

Hello, It was not a copy infringing copyright:

Speedy deletion nomination of Liliya Watson[modifier le wikicode] Hello LyvansB,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Liliya Watson for deletion, because it seems to be copied from another source, probably infringing copyright.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to rewrite it in your own words, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LyvansB (talk • contribs) 19:50, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes it was, and it is once again. Please stop adding copyrighted material or you might be blocked from editing.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I will write to wikipedia admin, maybe change the biography, or maybe better I will put on the http://saintandrewcharity.org/en/about-founder , this biography can be use on wikipedia for Liliya Watson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LyvansB (talk • contribs) 20:22, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Final Decision on "Italian Mare Nostrum"

Final decision: The final decision was to Keep

I have read in detail all the initial discussion to KEEP, and the following 2 discussion to merge and that had no result at all. How is it possible that just after one week that an article was allowed by discussion to be kept, suddenly are allowed to be done 2 additional requests to merge? So, why was done the first initial discussion that maintained the article? This looks like a tricky way to impose the wish of a NOTORIOUS group of yugoslavian users (from Director, to Zenanarth, to AlasdairGreen27, to Joy, etc..), who have received harsh critics from the same Jimbo Wales (I can add data about these critics, if you want)! They hate Italy and do whatever they can to erase all that shows some good italian results in WW2......But what strikes me more is that this group gets the merge without any approval at all! Let's remember that the ONLY approval votation was the first, when was clearly stated that the result was KEEP....and finally, what is wrong with the article? The same translated version is in the Spanish Wikipedia and it is accepted without problems: consequently I have reverted for the last time (anyway, do whatever you wish in future, but remember that this group is doing huge falsifications in Wikipedia as can be read in the June issue of "il mio weblog aromuno")........honestly, B.

Honestly, B... please learn to sign your posts. As I said, the AfD result was to keep, but even in that AfD discussion there was an undercurrent to merge. The TWO following discussions regarding merging both resulted in a merge decision. Accept consensus, move on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:25, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

At this point, your edits are becoming disruptive, as you are refusing to abide by consensus. As a result of this discussion, the consensus was clearly to merge. Which has been done. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

FYI (and @Oshwah:) all IPs/accounts involved were sockpuppets of long-term abuser Brunodam. --Vituzzu (talk) 17:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi

3rd place

Why would you try to delete it? I am getting a little ummmmm WHY??????????? at Wikipedia. I've gotten almost nothing but trouble from this site . I've gotten some people who write me thanking me for editing and other things . That has kept me going on Wikipedia. I thank you for letting me know though. I've but one question , it seems like there are so many people in charge who can delete and such , but , how? Why , because not all of them might see the good in pages . I'm just saying , I'm not upset just confused. lol I hope I figure it out soon. If you read this message me on my talk page and remind me of my message to you. And if you could take me step by step through this site, that would be great ! Thank You!!! SAM191 (talk) 20:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi SAM191 - When you leave a message, it's always a good thing to let the editor know what you are talking about. Can't begin to help unless I know what you're referring to. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

‪Proposed deletion of Sholem Aleichem College‬

Hi, I've edited the page and added some comments in the talk section. Sholem Aleichem College‬ is truly unique in that it represents one of the only secular Yiddish speaking schools in the world. It may be the only secular Yiddish primary only (junior) school. It's even more quirky that it's based in Australia which has such a small population to draw from for such a niche offering. Please don't remove it. Thanks for your consideration. 22:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmlipton (talk • contribs)

Hi Jmlipton - Do you have citations that you could use to validate the claims you make above? They have to be from secondary, reliable sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969 I have added a number of citations. I believe this should at least bring the entry into line with the other schools in the external link section. Jmlipton (talk) 02:04, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Regene Lim

The article Regene Lim has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

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

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

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

This PROD is related to the earlier deletion request that you were involved in, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damien Teo. I accidentally missed out the page in the AfD for Damien Teo. It would have been deleted together with the pages for all the other child actors. DerricktanJCW (talk) 06:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

John M. Ferren NPOV tag

Hello, I noticed you added NPOV and stub tags to the John M. Ferren page, which I created yesterday. In the absence of any explanation or discussion of a NPOV issue, I am tempted to remove the NPOV template, but I thought I'd check with you first: how do you think the article falls short of neutrality? The only bit I can imagine that might attract that criticism is the following sentence: "He acquired a reputation as a liberal judge and was respected even by government lawyers and prosecutors whom he often ruled against." But the linked Washington Post article supports that: it calls him a "liberal" several times and quotes him agreeing with that label, and it quotes John R. Fisher (at the time, a government lawyer and prosecutor) praising him in glowing terms and acknowledging that "He's ruled against the government often." I don't think reporting on a person's reputation, with substantiation, violates the NPOV rule. Please let me know if you think something about the article needs to be changed before the NPOV tag is removed. (I'm also not sure the three-paragraph article is a stub, but I'm less concerned about that.) Sfeldman (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Deleting my page

Hello, you deleted my page about an album by Malin Reitan, and I was wondering why because the other two albums from her on Wikipedia cite no sources either and have been stubs for years and these pages were never deleted. So I was wondering if it would be better to just merge all the album pages into the artist's page? Or is that not allowed either?

Kaopoke (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kaopoke - First, no one on Wikipedia has a page, see WP:OWN, so I didn't delete "your page". Second, not sure which page you're talking about – when you leave a message on a talk page, please leave a link to the page which you have a question about. Third, you're correct that other uncited stubs could also be redirected. To show notability for an album, it has to either meet WP:GNG or at least WP:NALBUM (meeting only the second is no guarantee however). Finally, if an artist's albums are not notable enough for their own article, there is nothing wrong with expanding the information about them on the artist's page. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Guthire, Arizona

Hello, Please note that there's a discussion about whether District 8 Jakarta should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guthrie, Arizona . User talk:M R Karim Reza

AfD for Regene Lim

Good day! Thank you for giving your two cents with regards to the AfD that I have raised earlier for Damien Teo, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Damien Teo. I have also nominated multiple related pages in the AfD for deletion but I have accidentally missed out one individual who also failed WP:GNG. I have raised a new AfD for this individual, Regene Lim, and it would be appreciated if you would proceed to the AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regene Lim (2nd nomination) to voice your opinion with regards to this proposed deletion. It should be a non controversial one as Lim is also an non-notable child actress in Singapore, similar to the other child actors whose pages were deleted in the earlier AfD. Thank you. DerricktanJCW (talk) 04:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jiří Moskal

Hi, I've edited the page Jiří Moskal hopefully this is ok now and does not have to be deleted. If not let me try again, thanks.

Hi Hakulin - First, please remember to always sign your comments, using the four tildes (~~~~). Second, your adding the sources definitely eliminated the blp prod rationale, so I removed it. However, I am not sure he meets the notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

The Paradise Project

You reverted my entry on this organization due to notability - please let me know what you think of the additional sources listed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Paradise_Project&redirect=no — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.90.67.2 (talk) 21:07, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The coverage, in my opinion, does not rise to the level of in-depth coverage from independent, secondary and reliable sourcing needed to show notability. My advice is to create a draft article at AfC (articles for creation), it's time consuming, since there is a backlog, but you'll get help there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:41, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Charles Chidongo Chinula

Dear Onel5969,

I'm genuinely surprised at your rejection of my draft article on Charles Chidongo Chinula om the basis (you say):

1. It does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article;

2. It should be written from a neutral point of view (implying it wasn't);

3. It should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources (implying it didn't);

4. It should make sure to avoid peacock terms (implying it didn't)

To take the second two, more objective, issues first, Kalinga, Thompson and McCraken are highly qualified, leading historians on Nyasaland and Malawi, and the second two have particular expertise on its religious history. To imply that these are not independent, reliable, published sources merely demonstrates your lack of knowledge on the topic. The Dictionary of African Christian Biography may be slightly more questionable but contains information not readily available elsewhere. Having read the section on Peacock terms, I can't see any, and would ask you to identify any you can see.

Turning to the first two, it is of course easy for you to use broadly generic labels, with little substance. As to it's tone, I have written a good number of Nyasaland and Malawi related articles, none of which has been challenged on this issue and, (if you maintain this is so) would you please say in what way or what specific passages are not written in a formal tone? Similarly, if you still maintain it was not written from a neutral point of view would you elaborate and/or refer to specific passages or terminology which is non-neutral?

As far as I am concerned, I wrote a non-contentious entry about a moderately prominent colonial-era clergyman entirely in line with a range of credible sources and wait to hear the substance of your objections, if any.Sscoulsdon (talk) 07:05, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sscoulsdon - First, when leaving a comment, always make sure to leave a link to the article (or draft) you have a question about. Many editors won't bother responding if there's no link. Second, it's always better to leave simple questions, rather than making confrontational statements. Third, your issue is with the AfC template, which when an editor chooses "NPOV" as the rationale, automatically comes up. It includes a variety of secondary issues as well. Finally, the issue regarding your draft is that it is clearly written from perspective of a pro-Charles Chidongo Chinula writer. The entire lead is highly non-neutral, and the rest of the article always presents him in a positive light, without any attempt to show his interactions from the perspective of the other party. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:56, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Two Guns, Arizona

Hey friend. This ghost town stuff is going to make me crazy. I actually wrote the Two Guns article a while back and every source calls it a ghost town...except GNIS (they'd call it "historical" if it were, but they didn't). This is frustrating because GNIS is a great source, but on this issue it rarely gets it right. Have a look at W:Category:Mississippi populated places on the Mississippi River. I wrote most of the articles there and some of them are in the middle of a forest, yet GNIS still calls them populated places. Have a look on Google satellite at Trotter Landing, Mississippi, Shiloh, Mississippi, or Magna Vista, Mississippi. Also, what is a ghost town anyway? Does it need to be abandoned, or just have a dramatically reduced population? I'm not faulting you for making the correction at Two Guns, but GNIS hasn't updated the status of many places in ages. I started a discussion someplace about this a while ago but it didn't go anywhere. I may start another discussion and hopefully you and other frequently editors of settlements will join in so we can get some definitions and discussion about this GNIS shortcoming. Anyway, cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:35, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

I hear you Magnolia677 - you can actually contact GNIS and they will respond. I've gotten them to change 8 entries in the last year when I've found discrepancies. I think that the USGS names something a populated area if there are any folks living in the area. "Ghost town" is more a colloquial designation. But you're right, when USGS says it's "historical" I leave it as a ghost town. In the meantime, I think the USGS should be the arbiter of record in these cases. By the way, enjoyed reading the article. Nicely done. And referenced. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:59, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Deleting article

Hi User:Onel5969, how do you delete an article on your own?--Theo Mandela (talk) 00:35, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Theo Mandela - unless you're an admin, you don't. Your choices are requesting a speedy delete (see Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion), or proposing it for deletion (see Wikipedia:Proposed deletion, or sending it to Articles for Deletion (AfD - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion). Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:02, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok User:Onel5969, can you please delete the Maiorana article? I've weighed it up and believe it should be deleted, because there are virtually no notables with the name, it is far too detailed and big, when you look at Sinatra (disambiguation), the most famous Italian surname is just a disambiguation page, which isn't right, but it has a notable family of individuals and is well-known by people. Maiorana ,being the length it is, is confusing to people who already won't recognise it from anywhere. "Farrimond" and "Ascroft" have far more notables on Wikipedia, but don't have articles at all, I believe Maiorana should be deleted as an article (perhaps better to move it to Majorana article) or it should be formatted more like Walmsley or Ogden (name), but even these have articles related to them. Maiorana would be a pretty rubbish disambiguation page even, as there's no other articles with the name (people or places).--Theo Mandela (talk) 18:00, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Theo Mandela - I'm not an admin, so I can't delete anything. But even if I were, you would have to either "prod" the article, or take it to AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:41, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

How did you delete Mac (It's Always Sunny in Philiadelphia) article User:Onel5969?--Theo Mandela (talk) 23:27, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

I didn't. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi! why are you wanna delete my article? Please be polite Developer177 (talk) 14:09, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Deleting a living person biography without references

Hi User:Onel5969, on 15/06/2017 you proposed the article Vassilis Bratsiakos to be deleted because lacked references. This article is actually a translation of the Greek article Βασίλης Μπρατσιάκος enhanced with more details. Could I have put it like a reference? How can I bring back this article now? For sure there is a way. Please help me do it, I've spent a lot of time doing it! Thanks in advance Markoskol11 (talk) 04:56, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Markoskol11 - references to other wikis aren't valid, so while you could indicate there was an article on another wiki (using the "languages" tool toward the bottom of the left side menu), you can't use that article as a reference. To show notability you need to several in-depth sources. The Greek article has been tagged for no references for over a year. If you do come up with references, to have the article restored, the first step would be to contact the admin who deleted it, Dlohcierekim, or to request undeletion, instructions for which can be found at WP:REFUND. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:42, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Cleo Ice Queen Article

Hi User:Onel5969 first of all thanks for reviewing my work on Cleo. Now my question is on the Page Curation the encyclopedic tone I work on that now the other orphan tag I request that you De-orphan the article because I have provided links linking to the disambiguation pages unless you tell me the rules changed. and if they did what's the correct way to De-orphan the page. Icem4k (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Icem4k - linking to a dab page is not the way to un-orphan an article. It has to be linked to other articles. There's a tool in the box which can help you do that. I used it and found that she is mentioned on the article Katongo, so linked her there. Now she is no longer an orphan. Anyone can remove the orphan tag, once the issue has been corrected, which now it has. I'll remove it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Onel5969 So you saying since she is mentioned some where it's an orphan. What if let's say Cleo Ice Queen (Writer) is mentioned some where but thats the Cleo Ice Queen(Football player) being spoken about what do you do then. Icem4k (talk) 21:00, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Couple of things. First, on a person's talk page, there's no reason to "ping" them. We are automatically notified, and since pinging is a way of notifying someone, it's redundant. Second, please remember that if you leave a message on a talk page, to "sign" it, by using 4 tildes (~~~~). Now, about your question, if there are two people with the exact same name, both with pages on Wikipedia, they will have a disambiguation after their name – like what you did in your question (writer) vs. (football player), so you would simply link to the correct one. If there is a football player with the same name, don't link to the musician's page, just leave it alone. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:07, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay I think so thanks for the help. Icem4k (talk) 21:23, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

INTDABLINK

Hi. Just want to let you know you've been inadvertently adding an extra "(disambiguation)" to some links that already have "(disambiguation)" as part of their title. I noticed it at Like Crazy and ALDE. I've fixed those two, but don't know if there might be any others. Station1 (talk) 00:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Station1 - I'm not seeing that come up when I use the dablink tool. Perhaps I'm missing something. I'll keep a closer eye out the next time I use it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Merging National Union of Popular Forces and Tanzim (Morocco)

Hello, I saw that you have merged the articles National Union of Popular Forces and Tanzim (Morocco) without discussing with me or even notifying me. I believe that this is not right. Tanzim was only a section of UNFP and it is not even mentioned in the article that you have merged. Can you tell me what is the reason of your action? Now because of you, nobody knows what is Tanzim because you have removed the article. I don't believe that this is Wikipedia spirit. Isn't it? Thank you for your answer, and please either explain to me the reasons of your change or undo it. Anass — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anass Sedrati (talk • contribs) 12:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anass Sedrati - First, please remember to sign any comments left on a talk page, using 4 tildes (~~~~). Please read the guidelines on notability. They deserve a mention on the UNFP page, but no indication of their independent notability. If you add the info to the UNFP article, folks will still learn about them, because the link will take them there. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel - Sorry I completely forgot to sign. Well the problem is that when you have merged the pages the information that was in the Tanzim page was lost? If you can tell me where I can find it (some sort of archive) then I can try to add it to the UNFP page. Otherwise, I have to write from the beginning again, and this is why it feels like if my initial work was useless. Anass Sedrati (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anass Sedrati - All you have to do is go to the history of the page, and click on the prior version, then "edit" the page. That way you can copy the material and put it in the target article. I just did it, so that your info wasn't lost. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:13, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Phoenix nodes/roads

Did you really mean to revert my revert. "Roads" doesn't make sense. It seems to mean that the urban villages of Phoenix makes it a city of "nodes". Although I don't agree with the rest of it where it says the nodes are connected by freeways - some are and some aren't. The whole sentence could use a rewrite. MB 03:23, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

What? My apologies, MB - I meant to click the "thank" button. And looking at the revision history, it does show that I "thanked" you for that edit. Not sure what happened. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Jhoven Sulla (talk) 08:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)Thanks for revert. Good job

AfD for Amos Lim and Zong Zijie

Hi Onel5969! Thank you for so sporting in providing your input for the two AfDs (Damien Teo & Regene Lim) that I have created previously. I have created another AfD for another two non-notable child/teen actors in Singapore, Amos Lim and Zong Zijie. Please kindly proceed to the AfD to voice out your input on whether Lim and Zong's page should be deleted. Thanks! DerricktanJCW (talk) 02:44, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi DerricktanJCW. Please be aware that per WP:CANVASS, I will now have to refrain from participating in the AfD discussion. Canvassing is pretty frowned upon and can actually be used as a means of invalidating your arguments. I don't know how active you are in AfD, but canvassing is not a good idea. That said, I agree with your nominations, but you may not be aware that you didn't even have to take them to AfD. You could simply have requested that they be deleted as per WP:G4. If they were deleted in a prior AfD discussion. I see that is the case with Lim, but I am not seeing that for Zijie. Also, I think your combo nomination is malformed, as it is not clear that both are being nominated. Anyway, good luck. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:23, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Sunuwar people

Sorry, I messed that move up. The article is back at Sunwar people, awaiting a proper technical move. I've listed a request for it. My apologies. Yintan  13:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

No worries Yintan - actually, I missed that you cut and paste the move as well, which is why I marked the article as reviewed. But thanks for self-correcting your mistake. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:17, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

academic stubs

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roy MacLeod it was decided to try to rescue as many as possible, not delete them--and to delete those not notable via afd, not speedy. DGG ( talk ) 15:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi DGG - Thanks for the heads up. I've reviewed quite a few of that editor's articles recently. I've hit a time frame on NPP where he was active apparently. I didn't read Winged Blades of Godric's closing comment as a direction to take them to AfD, but simply review the merits of each one on their own. Which is what I did. I had requested direction from another admin on a tangential matter, and apparently I misunderstood their direction. I've marked quite a few as reviewed if they meet either gng or nscholar, and then if they didn't appear to meet those, I tagged them with G5, rather than clog up AfD. But in the future I'll AfD them. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:15, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Regretably, I dare say none of the articles are suitable for WP:CSD#G5.He created the article in an area where there is high systemic bias and where we tend to be fairly inclusive.So, yeah WP:AFD will be the way to go!Anyway, DGG got my closure absolutely right!Winged Blades ^Godric 17:20, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Can you patrol these articles?

Hi, I saw that you were the second most common patroller this year. I hope this is not too much bother to ask you. Would it be possible for you to patrol these articles that I've recently created and which still haven't been patrolled (a week later)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Zak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neta_Alchimister

Thanks! Avaya1 (talk) 16:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm PRehse. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, On the Day Productions, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Did that because your change was reverted and the article was recreated. I think the Redirect is correct but it might have to go to AfD.PRehse (talk) 17:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

PRehse (talk) 16:54, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi PRehse - Yeah, I kinda figured that's what happened. Also agree with your assessment... have an edit warrior who really wants to keep the article. If it's still unreviewed later, I'll send it to AfD. But thanks for the personal comment, appreciate that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

山椒

Hi, Onel5969! I'd like to know the reason you have reverted my edit on 山椒. (Please also see User talk:Mean as custard#山椒.) --Talitiainen (talk) 07:53, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Talitiainen - for exactly the same reason as Mean as custard. This is English Wikipedia. And your argument there is called other stuff exists, which is not applicable in this case.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:58, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

She%20Wore%20a%20Yellow%20Ribbon

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk%3AOnel5969&action=edit&preview=yes&vanarticle=She%20Wore%20a%20Yellow%20Ribbon&vanarticlerevid=789001399&vanarticlegoodrevid=788991133&type=vand&count=1
• this section describes that jpeg, thus the reference

Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 19:18, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Xb2u7Zjzc32 - picture files are not valid references. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:30, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Rear Window

Just FYI, I asked for this article to be semi-protected, and an admin did so, for two weeks. Our "neighbour" from India" won't be able to violate WP:ENGVAR for a while. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:27, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Beyond My Ken - Thanks for the heads up. I had asked for it to be protected last week as well. Hopefully the ip will tire of it and move on. We'll see. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:52, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong to pro-democracy camp (Hong Kong)

There was a move from "pro-democracy camp" to "pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong" even though Hong Kong's pro-democracy camp is the only one to bear its name. Furthermore, even if there should be a disambiguation label it should be "pro-democracy camp (Hong Kong)". However before we even fixed the error, you already edit few dozens articles and added "pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong" and that makes me concern. Since the correct title should be "pro-democracy camp (Hong Kong)", the articles which were edited by you to ""pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong" should be changed into the correct "pro-democracy camp (Hong Kong)". Secondly, I noticed you also change "pan-democracy camp"/"pan-democrats" to "pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong" but pan-democracy camp, different from pro-democracy camp, is the only unique term in Hong Kong therefore it should be further disambiguation. Lmmnhn (talk) 06:40, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

My concern that the page was moved, with total disregard to the number of links it left hanging. I had no view on the name change, other than to check out that two pages were warranted. It probably could be merged into a single article, and the (dab) removed entirely, since the two are so inter-related. Hopefully, after you moved the page, you fixed what links to it, as is proper procedure. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

The consensus has already reached to change the title from "pro-democracy camp in Hong Kong". Lmmnhn (talk) 23:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, than change it to the correct title, not back to the dab. Why make work for other editors? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Revised Harold Baquet page per your recommendation

Added additional citations, removed broken links and reformatted footnotes. Please review when you're able- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Harold_Baquet Dmj82 (talk) 16:49, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

A kitten just to say bye to you!

I am talking about what the trouble I've gotten is. I'm sorry , but is there a way to delete an account? I can't be dealing with this site. Thanks though

SAM191 (talk) 22:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Not broken

WP:NOTBROKEN is pretty clear that It is generally not good practice to pipe links simply to avoid redirects. The number of links to a redirect page can be a useful gauge of when it would be helpful to spin off a subtopic of an article into its own page. You seem to have created undesirable piped links in hundreds of articles by replacing the simple redirect Volunteer with a piped link to its target, [[Volunteering|volunteer]]. Perhaps your automated script is not working properly. Would you be kind enough to revert your actions, please? --RexxS (talk) 02:10, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Since the redirect was to a different version of the same concept (volunteer vs. volunteerism), the argument of regarding spinning off to its own page appears to be irrelevant. Piped links, which bypass a redirect page, as per MOS:DABPIPE, seems to be the most effective means. Especially since about 5-10% of the links linked to the wrong target. Not sure why, in this particular instance, leaving a link to a redirect which then moves the reader to the target is a good thing. While I was unaware of the guidance you cite, looking at it, 4 of the 6 points cited have no applicability in this instance (1, 4, 5, & 6). #2 is a bit nebulous, not even sure what it means. Which leaves #3. That could be a fundamental lack of understanding on my part on how redirects work. I've been actively editing for about 3 years... in all that time I can't tell you how many times editors (and many admins) have done exactly what I did, piping directly to the page. So, no. I won't revert, unless a much better explanation of why this is deemed detrimental is given. In the future, however, I will abide by the notbroken rule. That being said, if you can explain to me why it's better to leave a link to a redirect which takes the reader to a page, rather than making that link take the reader directly to the page, I'll be more than happy to go back and take care of it. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:23, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

The same reason why we ask editors not avoid making whitespace or minor aesthetic changes—it uses time and resources. In this case, it makes the link longer for editors to parse. Alone is it a big deal? No, but death by a thousand cuts... Whether it's worth the energy of a mass revert is a separate issue.  czar 06:33, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation Czar, although how making an edit go to a redirect page to go to the intended target makes parsing longer I don't get. But I'm sure there's data to back that up. As I said, about 5-10% of the redirects were to the wrong target (they simply went to volunteer rather than military volunteer), which is why I started on the whole piping thing, based on what other editors and admins had told me about being as specific with the wikilink as possible. I had been pointed to H:L, and had used the section on piped link, including H:L#Using a redirect as alternative as the standard operating procedure. Again, as I said, now that I've been alerted to the guideline regarding notbroken, I'll keep that in mind during future edits. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:02, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

I meant parsing by the editor reading the wikicode (reading "volunteering|volunteer" instead of just "volunteer"), not machine-parsing—sorry, poor choice of words. It's fine to fix the instances that are wrong, but I think the point is to refrain whenever there isn't material good to the content of the article. czar 14:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

No worries, Czar - just to reiterate, moving forward, now that I'm aware of the nobroken guideline, I will use that in making any corrections to redirects. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:14, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Blue stain fungus ≠ Grosmannia clavigera

Blue stain fungus ≠ Grosmannia clavigera that's why i'm creating a separate page Blue stain fungi for the general Blu stain fungi (many species, not just Grosmannia clavigera) while trying to clean the article about Grosmannia clavigera in order to contain ONLY info about that partiucular species which is NOT called THE "Blue stain fungus" it's just one of many Blue stain fungi... --Exonie 14:41, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Exonie - Okay, but I think you need to make that clear, using cited reliable sources, in the lead. And add a "not to be confused" tag, as well as tying into the existing article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:50, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

I've cited sources that mention 150-200 blue stain fungi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exonie (talk • contribs) 14:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Airport Road (Ontario) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Airport Road (Ontario) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Airport Road (Ontario) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

An explanation to this rollback

I had rollbacked the Lugburz page to a version when it was still a page itself, but you restored the redirect. I admit it, I'm mainly active in it.wiki, so I don't know if en.wiki has different rules regarding these articles. Since I don't know very well the rules here about it, can you explain to me the full reason of your rollback? Two more questions: if I've understood correctly, if Lugburz doesn't match the album criteria and it's considered as a collection of demos, it means that it should be put in the Demos section; second, if this page is considered a redirect, will Upon the Viking Stallion make the same end?
Since this is the first time I write to an English-speaking user, so forgive my English. Good editing. :)--Gybo 95 (talk) 19:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Gybo 95 - First of all, bravo on your English. Now, about the article. If you take a look at WP:GNG and WP:NALBUM, this particular article fulfills neither. Regarding the other article, yes, it is possible that it will also end up as a redirect. On English wiki, we require better sourcing than on some of the other wikis. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

DN tags and disambiguation

Hi, I saw this edit and I though I'd just leave you a note that dablinks that are followed by the {{disambiguation needed}} tag are usually difficult to fix. The tag's presence means that somebody has already expended some effort at disambiguating them and has found out that they can't know for sure which is the intended target. It's not very likely you'll be able to properly fix these links unless you have knowledge in the relevant subject domain, or you're willing to put in the time to track down and check the sources. – Uanfala 21:02, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Which is what I did. The only logical target of the links on the dab page would be the mythological creatures. AGF the editor who made the original wl, I targeted the only possible target. If you disagree with that, then the wl should simply be removed. Linking a term to a dab page, where a link to the subject of the original term is useless, and wastes editor's time when they follow the link. Take care.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:11, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Reverting

Stop! reverting Normani Kordei as you can see I was in the middle of editing her article and you rudely reverted without having me finish it. I was going to come up with reliable sources and finish editing the article but you wouldn't let me finish and reverted it anyway. She is just if not more notable than the other members of the group who have stand alone articles. Talk to me first before you do something stupid like that without consulting a user! Welcometothenewmillennium 22:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Welcometothenewmillenium - Please stop your disruptive editing. The article was redirected as a result of an AfD discussion. Please stop trying to circumvent consensus. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:06, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, after your last uncivil and disruptive edit, you are no longer welcome to post on my talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:04, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

You wanted to talk this out let's talk this out then. Please, inform me you said if I wanted to make a safe or test edit do so in the sandbox. I would love to debate the topic of creating an article of a conscious AfD decision. Was the discussion finale and solid and her article may never ever be re created ever again? Why not talk this out like you asked and mentioned before? Why not have it be created and see if it will get nominated for AfD all over again. Her article is bound to be made at some point in time. Aside and other than the AfD closed decsion what other reason may there be for the article to be reverted. I've been giving you valid reasons on why that article needs to stay in tact. You won't even listen to me and talk you just re post and repeat what you mention all over again and that's not resolving anything. Furthermore you want to ban me from your page? Wow ... just wow how grown up ... is that how grown ups handle situations by banning people? What did I ever do to you? I was never rude or disrespectful to you. Welcometothenewmillennium 05:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

It was deleted less than a year ago (in fact, I believe it was deleted less than a month ago. Because the result was redirect, that's where it will get reverted to, else it would qualify for a speedy deletion, but redirect makes more sense. If the article were sent to AfD again, it would most likely be closed as a speedy delete, and then most likely "salted", meaning it could never be recreated again, unless an appeal was made to an admin, who then approved it. In a year or so, if she's shown significant improvement to their notability, then an article might be attempted. But this is way too soon. And banning you is because of your uncivil rudeness, and seemingly lack of ability to understand. Having said that, there is no need for you to respond. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:14, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Zotezo

Hi @Onel5969! Your review on Zotezo is much appreciated. I am thankful to you for taking time. I would like to inform that Zotezo is a prominent eCommerce company in India, like Amazon, FlipKart, Nykaa, Paytm etc.It is in business since 2014 and has 1500+ brands & 100,000+ products listed with it along with 100s of Small & Medium Business, directly or indirectly promoting it. A couple of independent links/business listing sources are listed below for reference: CashKaro, TrickyTime.in, Keyursavaliya, FileShope, CouponRaja, CouponDunia, BeautyAndHealth etc.

And hundreds of more 3rd party sites are available on which Zotezo has no control. Zotezo is well known and trusted brand in India especially for beauty, personal care, and wellness segment. It has also launched a beauty box for Indian female audience, called Zobag. You can search on Goolge to know about it. Hence, you are requested to reconsider your tag for speedy deletion. Iwikihero (talk) 08:40, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Iwikihero - Several things first. One, when leaving a message on a talk page (either of an article or a user), always "sign" it using four tildes (~~~~); two, always leave a link to the article you are talking about, even if it's been deleted. Now to your question, as Fuhghettaboutit has already responded to you on their talk page, there's nothing I can add to what they said. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969,

Thank you for your reply. Sorry for not providing the link. I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and I have to learn a lot from valuable contributors like you. The page I am talking about is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zotezo%7CZotezo I have replied to Fuhghettaboutit and waiting for a revert back. I would request your guidance in this regard.

Iwikihero (talk) 12:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Jacqueline Assaël

I noticed that you have proposed Jacqueline Assaël for deletion. Thank you for taking the time to review this article and suggest improvements. Could you please clarify for me the comments you wrote on the page? ("Thinly referenced currently, searches did not turn up enough to show they pass GNG, and with a high cite count of 30, and the credentials mentioned in the article, does not pass NSCHOLAR.") I'm not familiar with the terms "GNG," "high cite count," and "NSCHOLAR," and want to make sure I'm addressing the causes for concern in my edits/revisions. Any other clarification or elaboration is welcome, too. Thanks, --Think Fast (talk) 16:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Think Fast Since I'm familiar with these subjects, I'll note that none of the listed information showed she's considered a significant figure which would've best convinced WP:PROF, the applied notability standards. For any, it's always best to start articles on only the best significant people in the field. SwisterTwister talk 05:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

SwisterTwister Thanks for your message, but unfortunately, you actually didn't address any one of the terms I asked about. I'm also not sure what you mean by "would've best convinced WP:PROF" or by "For any" ("any" what?). It would be helpful if instead of using jargon you explained things in clear terms. That would help me in revising the article. --Think Fast (talk) 15:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Think Fast - GNG refers to WP:GNG, or general notability guidelines; NSCHOLAR refers to WP:NSCHOLAR, guidelines for academics or scholars which are supplemental to GNG; high citation count is exactly what that sounds like, the number of times her works have been cited. Usually, depending on the field, citation counts should be somewhere between 250 on the very low side, into the thousands. And the 250 would depend on how many works were cited. This individual's citation count is extremely low. Regarding GNG, what you would want would be at least 3 in-depth articles from non-niche publications about Assael. This is very rare for scholars, which is why the more specific parameters of NSCHOLAR were added. Take a look at NSCHOLAR and see if any of the several parameters apply. But remember, just because someone meets one or more of those parameters only means they may be notable. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:10, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Simon Shen

I kindly ask for your reconsideration of the page. Many of Shen's articles are pioneering and have high impact factors. I have already selected the more influential ones. These works are not "non-notable". Lelepat (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Lelepat

Hi Lelepat - his citation count is incredibly low, so they do not have high impact. Regardless, none of the articles have shown any notability by Wikipedia standards. Sorry. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:22, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt response. Do you mind telling me your sources? And what criteria are you based on? Lelepat (talk) 14:24, 16 July 2017 (UTC)Lelepat

Simply do a Google Scholar search. His high citation count is in the 50s, I believe. Articles, particularly in such a large field as Shen's, would have citation counts in the high hundreds to show notability. Or at least above 200. He doesn't come close. Onel5``969 ^{TT me} 14:29, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

this is political science, not clinical medicine. Articles with citation in the 50s are pretty good. Even in biomedicine, one article with 100 citations has usually been good enough. Check some recent AfDs. DGG ( talk ) 00:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Edit War warning

You appear to have been around long enough to know about edit warring but it is exactly what you're doing on Simon Shen. Toddst1 (talk) 14:26, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

And you appear to have been around long enough to understand what edit warring is, which this isn't. I've engaged the editor in discussion, and reverted him twice. Hardly the qualities of an edit war. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Communication is not a personal attack

Look, you've removed a number of comments here where I've politely pointed out that I believe your edits are not conforming to what the community expects or you're violating policy (edit warring) saying they're uncivil. They're not. Calling someone's actions "idiocy" as you've done - is uncivil. If you can't engage in communication with folks here, then you have no place editing.

I'm not trying to hassle you for the heck of it, but you're editing significantly outside the parameters of what is expected of a constructive editor. Toddst1 (talk) 15:00, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Your first comment was uncivil. Your second comment was uncivil (in addition to being incorrect), although you were correct in your third edit that calling your actions idiocy was less than civil, however I disagreed that it was a personal attack. Calling someone's editing style "aggressive" is definitely uncivil. I know exactly what edit-warring is, and the 3RR policy. For you to come back and make your comment about blocking was very uncivil. And your comment above is uncivil. And the fact that you consider your incivility as "politely pointed out", is a bit disconcerting. And if you can't engage civilly, you might be the one who should consider not interacting with other editors. I have no issue having communication with editors who behave civilly, as is widely evidenced in my talk page discussions. But I have no tolerance for incivility. It's completely unnecessary. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

But I'm willing to let bygones be bygones, so take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:53, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

WP:PROF

h value and similar measures are totally invalid in the humanities or any field where publication is primarily by books--notability of the work is shown other ways, including who publishes the books and the reviews they get. DGG ( talk ) 00:37, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Film Companion

Alright, I admit it is not in good enough shape to be moved to the mainspace. But can it still be submitted for copy-editing? --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Incorrectly placed redirects

You have been redirecting the page for the 2017-18 season of the Dutch Hoofdklasse football league to the general page for the Hoofdklasse. You did the same for all teams participating in this league. This based on WP:NSEASONS.

However, did you read WP:FOOTYN?

Let me quote part of it:

"Club notability

All teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) are assumed to meet WP:N criteria. Teams that are not eligible for national cups must be shown to meet broader WP:N criteria.

League notability

• All leagues whose members are eligible for national cups are assumed notable."

All teams in the Dutch Hoofdklasse are eligible to participate in KNVB Cup, which is a national cup. The winner of the KNVB Cup is even allowed to participate in the UEFA Cup Winners' Cup, an international cup.

The odds of a team from the Hoofdklasse ever winning the KNVB Cup are very small. However this is irrelevant.

The only thing which is relevant, is the fact that the Hoofdklasse is a league whose members are eligible for a national cup and thus meet the WP:FOOTYN and therefore the WP:NSEASONS criteria.

Conclusion: You incorrectly placed a lot of redirects.

I hope you take your responsibility and undo the damage you caused.

And what bothers me most is that someone from a country where they don't even know the proper name of the game, acts without any kind of prior communication.

Cobbler, stick to thy last.

--Sb008 (talk) 08:07, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sb008 - You prove my point: NFOOTY says, regarding clubs "All teams that have played in the national cup..." (emphasis added). You claim that "All teams in the Dutch Hoofdklasse are eligible to participate...". Those are two different concepts. If any of the teams in the amateur league have played in the KNVB Cup, then yes, they would qualify. However, not a single one of the articles I redirected showed any indication that was the case. Please, by all means, if you have a reliable citation showing that any of those teams have played in the KNVB cup, add the cite and revert the redirect. And thanks for the civility. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:06, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969 - This is how you operate? When provided with proof you're wrong, you just remove it as "uncivil discourse"?

--Sb008 (talk) 15:29, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

- No, when the discourse is uncivil it is removed as uncivil discourse. I didn't remove your first uncivil comments, even though they contained a personal attack, simply because I felt that your underlying question deserved an answer. However, when an editor continues to continue in uncivil discourse, any other comments will be removed. Also, when an editor doesn't want to put the work into an article to ensure it passes notability standards, as you evidenced by your quote, "I got better things to do than providing you with details for each and every team," than I certainly am not going to put any time into those articles. If a team meets notability standards, than those verifiable facts need to be included in the article, with citations. I could care less about some amateur team getting an article or not. Those articles which contained even a hint of passing notability were left alone. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

And since you seem incapable of holding a civil discussion, your comments are no longer welcome on my talk page. Any further comments will be deleted summarily without reading. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:51, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I am going to chime in here. If there is nothing to support these teams have played for a national cup, then they don't deserve stand-alone articles per notability criteria, without reliable sources discussing the teams. Also, NSEASONS states "Team season articles should consist mainly of well-sourced prose, not just statistics and lists of players. Wikipedia is not a stats directory. It is strongly recommended that those articles be redirected to the team page if no sourced prose can be created." ---These team-season articles don't seem to make the cut. Sorry --- Steve Quinn (talk) 22:46, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Steve Quinn. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:43, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Rassilon

Hello User:Onel5969, can you help by adding an image map of good quality images of all actors portraying Rassilon for the article's infobox please? Like the ones on The Master (Doctor Who) and Davros.--Theo Mandela (talk) 22:33, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Theo Mandela - I'll see if I can get to it over the weekend. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:28, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate it.--Theo Mandela (talk) 21:01, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Onel5969, are you still up for doing this?--Theo Mandela (talk) 19:53, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Lost in South Carolina

Hey friend, I tend to come to you when I reach a brick wall. I've been trying to figure out the edits of IP 208.104.229.197, and it has me dizzy. In doing that, I came across Indian Land, South Carolina. To the best of my research, the place doesn't exist. There's no GNIS listing, and much of what has been written about it involves the desire of various groups to bring the place to life. Your opinion is always welcome. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Wow, Magnolia677 - will take a look at it. Looks like it might be a neighborhood, but not sure of what locale. Will let you know what I find. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:54, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm leaving messages at User talk:208.104.229.197. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:59, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Okay, it looks like it is an unincorporated area in Lancaster County, South Carolina, just east of Fort Mill, South Carolina. It's mentioned in Mick Mulvaney's bio on Politico, and this and this show it does exist. However, most of the stuff in the current article isn't cited (e.g. largest employers). I think it passes notability, but is very poorly sourced. It is interesting that GNIS doesn't have them listed as a populated place. Will contact them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Here GNIS lists Indian Land's fire department, schools and church in Lancaster County. But here Indian Land is listed as a variant name of Old Point Station, which on ACME Maps is Ebenezer, South Carolina. This is coincidentally one of the articles the IP editor was working on. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

I have a feeling that Indian Land is a generic name dating back to South Carolina's settlement days. Or it could have referred to the entire area at one point. The current Indian Land article is clearly about the portion of Lancaster County (as opposed to Ebenezer in York County), which is currently attempting to incorporate. I shot off an email to the USGS, it usually take 2-3 days for them to respond. I'll ping you when they do. In the meantime, I've reverted a couple of the ip's uncited edits.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Great. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, GNIS somehow missed Indian Land, South Carolina. It's here on Google Maps, here on a proposed map, and here on a map from 1790 (north of the confluence of the Catawba River and Sugar Creek). Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:21, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Noticeboard

You may be interested in commenting here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Biographies of members of the Universal House of Justice. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 08:02, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Moving articles

I would have done it if that was an option. Sk8erPrince (talk) 16:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Most likely you're blocked from moving it because a redirect already exists there. You'll need to request the target page (current redirect) be deleted, after which you can move it. Use the G6 criteria (housekeeping), and ask for it to be deleted to make way for page move. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Forgot to "ping" you - Sk8erPrince. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:23, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Northamerica1000#Kaletez

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Northamerica1000#Kaletez. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:37, 29 July 2017 (UTC)Template:Z48

Going backwards

Hello. I sent a number of the season-team articles to AfC-Draft space. Some of these were 2008–09 Hoofdklasse, 2006–07 Hoofdklasse, 2007–08 Hoofdklasse and so on. User:Gidonb has created redirects from the Draft articles to the mains space articles. Here are a few [1], [2], and [3]. You can see in his or her User contributions how many of these he or she created redirects from the draft space to the main space [4].

He or she also made a number of inaccurate statements at this discussion [5], and he or she is using this as a basis for recreating these articles and creating redirects from the Draft space. You can also see that User:Sb008 initiated the discussion, but I think that was a different matter. It had nothing to do with undeleting all these season articles which do not qualify per WP:SEASONS, WP:ORG, and WP:GNG.

So, it seems User:Gidonb is using an inapplicable rationale for creating, what might be considered a mess. Anyway, I am here so we can discuss this matter and maybe a solution can be found. Also, User:Gidonb seems to tout the "policy" WP:FOOTY as a rationale. But, WP:FOOTY is not a policy, it is a Wikipedia project. Do you have any ideas on what is the best way of dealing with this situation?

The reason for placing these in the Draft space is to give them a chance to demonstrate notability before being released into the main space. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. There's a couple of things. First, these season articles are for a league, not a team, so WP:NSEASONS doesn't apply. When I initially redirected them I incorrectly used SEASONS as a rationale, rather than just stating GNG. If any of the amateur teams has a season article, than SEASONS would apply to that. Many of the team articles clearly don't pass either GNG or NFOOTY, and several editors are misapplying the guideline at WP:FOOTYN, which while a project, has a section on notability, which is usually followed. They are claiming that if a team plays in a league eligible to play in the national cup, that makes the team notable, even though the guideline clearly states that the team has to have actually played for the cup. These soccer folks are rabid, and rarely care about Wikipedia policies. So my advice is to just let it go, and let the substandard, non-encyclopedic articles about subjects which don't meet notability standards go. You'll come across special interest groups like this from time to time. Focus on other things. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:46, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:Northamerica1000#Kaletez

You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Northamerica1000#Kaletez. Update there. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)Template:Z48

12:15:57, 1 August 2017 review of submission by Gillianmc898

• Gillianmc898 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:ESpatial Solutions (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I'm trying to figure out, how to get a baseline entry added. For example, Vizzuality, have only one reference and their page exists. Should we remove a lot of the content on the eSpatial proposed draft and only discuss the company?

Overlinking

Hi, thanks for your work on US settlement articles. Please note that "married couples" should not be linked, by our guideline (unless there's some special reason to do so). Latitutde/longitude needs a proper minus sign (click the appropriate button below the edit box). And please avoid linking other common terms. Tony (talk) 13:23, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

15:04:15, 1 August 2017 review of submission by Navaneethmadhusoodanan

• Navaneethmadhusoodanan (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:CPC Cine Awards (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Onel5969. The article that i have submitted about an accepted and acclaimed Film Awards Function was declined with note - "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified." The award function that was mentioned in the article is in its budding stage due to which i could find only few references from acclaimed and trust worthy news houses in India like the Indian Express, Malayala Manorama etc. I have shared up to 6 reference links detailing the Award function. In the coming years this referred Award Function is surely supposed to have more coverage and references and authenticity to my belief. There is also no intention to promote any business or brand nor spam Wikipedia as this is a crowd funded event, which will also happen in the years that follow.

I humbly request you to make a re review on this regard. Still if the given references do not serve the purpose, please guide me to publish the content abiding the norms of Wikipedia

Hi Navaneethmadhusoodanan - The issues you express above are basically the reason it doesn't currently pass notability criteria. That fact that at some point in the future the awards "may" be notable isn't something that is taken into consideration on WP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:30, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hot Octopuss

Good morning One 15969. Did an edit to change the tone to neutral, took out ™ where they were previously, and changed PULSE to Pulse (stylised as PULSE) to create an encylopedic format. That should eliminate the promotional feel of Hot Octopuss' Wikipedia page. That should do it. Can you remove the speedy deletion template now? EllenZoe (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi EllenZoe - I see that it's been moved to a userpage to allow you to work on it. Took a look in its current draft form and it still is mostly a promotional brochure. Don't add commentary, don't make judgement claims, don't give product descriptions and comparisons. Simply state facts. And especially don't talk about marketing campaigns. Although, in the instance of this particular article, the campaign was unique enough to most likely warrant a mention. Right now, I'd still target it for an ad. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:28, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much Onel5969 . I found it. I will work on it again. Just another question...once I rewrite it can I just create the page again — Preceding unsigned comment added by EllenZoe (talk • contribs) 19:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi again Onel5969. I rewrote the Hot Octopuss page in my sandbox. Can you please review User:EllenZoe/sandbox/Hot_Octopuss before I reload up on Wikipedia? Thank you.EllenZoe (talk) 15:58, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

13:35:13, 3 August 2017 review of submission by Ireneyuj

• Ireneyuj (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Fabrice Bartolomei (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear reviewer Onel5969, I am writing to you with regards to the article I wrote and which you decline due to the fact that the submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. I therefore checked the definition of reliable sources (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources) and would like to argue that academic and peer-reviewed publications, scholarly monographs, and textbooks which are the references that are included in my article are defined by Wikipedia as usually the most reliable sources. I have also included also news articles and links to show notability of the subject not written by the subject. Could you please accept my article now? Thanks, Irene Ireneyuj (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ireneyuj - since you've already resubmitted, I'll let another editor take a whack at it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:55, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969, it would be awesome if you could have a look at the edits I made and references I added and could approve the article. It may only take you a few minutes! Thanks a lot for your understanding, Irene Ireneyuj (talk) 09:08, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Why?

Why are you doing edits like this, removing information?? A second or two's consideration would have led you to Duke de Gramont, and a few more to Antoine Charles IV de Gramont. Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Johnbod - The better question is why, since you're a contributing editor to the article hadn't you corrected it prior to this? Instead of leaving an incorrect link to a dab page. And the question is rhetorical, in light of your incivility, your comments are no longer welcome on my talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:57, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Glenford Eckleton Mitchell

Regarding the redirect, I thought that would be normal. If it's not just let me know. I regard redirects as a helpful way to get people to where they're trying to go. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 13:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Cuñado - I feel the same about redirects, and usually try to redirect an article, rather than deleting it. However, in this instance, the consensus wasn't to redirect, but to delete. I think part of the reason for that is the history of the article attempting to be redirected, only to be continually returned to article status. The creation of a redirect, in this case and imho, will only serve to encourage the article to be recreated, so editors will have to monitor it. Just my thoughts, and I was curious as to why you had created it. Thanks for responding. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

I understand and I'll refrain from redirecting after deletion. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 14:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Karry Wang

There was an link on Come Sing with Me article, why no notability? No idea. SA 13 Bro (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Move review for Damn (Kendrick Lamar album)

An editor has asked for a Move review of Damn (Kendrick Lamar album). Because you were involved in the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. — TheMagnificentist 12:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Walter Q. Jackson

Hi User:Onel5969 first of all thanks for noticing me my article is nominated for deletion. I'm not a native speaker of English. To tell the truth, I don't know what to do next. Poorly sourced? They are what I found about him on the net. He is great musician and actor in Japan. I want to keep his information on Wikipedia.--Set02mar (talk) 13:34, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Set02mar - To show notability you need sourcing from independent reliable sources. And those references should be in-depth coverage of the subject, not mere listings. Sources like blogs, YouTube and Facebook are not reliable sources. Sources which have a relationship with the subject, like brock brothers and momofunk are not independent. Right now, that's all the sourcing in the article. His resume does not suggest greatness, but rather a journeyman actor/musician, who works, but isn't really notable. I tried to search for better references, but couldn't find any. Sorry. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Makati Sky Plaza

Hi User:Onel5969 first of all thanks for noticing me my article is nominated for deletion. I am a new user in Wikipedia. I have added new informations about my page Makati Sky Plaza including its coordinates. I want to keep that page on Wikipedia.--UnitedPhilippines (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi. The building articles you've recently created, including 45 San Miguel Avenue, GV Tower Hotel, and Wack Wack Twin Towers, simply don't meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. It's not enough that a building simply exists, else we could have an article on every building in every town in the world. A building has to have notability. These simply don't. Please see WP:GNG and WP:GEOFEAT to see what constitutes notability for buildings. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:29, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Talking about the 2017 Universiade sports section ceremonies.

Hey, I'm GlashaLeo. I come from Taiwan, I feel so proud that my country can hold a world-class sports game in August. Therefore, I create all the games that will be hold in the Summer Universiade. The game will begin in less than 2 weeks, there is no "too soon". So, please DO NOT redirect all the sport result pages to the 2017 Summer Universiade!! I use all my heart to creates all these pages, your move really hurts me!!!

Hi GlashaLeo. In their current condition, with such limited (and in some cases non-existent) sourcing, they are too soon. As more information becomes available, add it. Creating poor, virtually empty articles like this does not help the encyclopedia, rather it creates more work for other editors. Please don't move them back until, on an individual basis, they can be fleshed out and be real articles. Right now they are nothing more than templates and shouldn't be in mainspace. And please remember to "sign" your comments. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:33, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Notability tag

Hi there, I've removed the notability tag on Carlos Cuevas. I'm letting you know per point 3 on WP:WTRMT. There are sufficient reliable sources already referenced in the article, so it passes the general notability guideline. He also had significant roles in multiple notable TV series, Merlí and Ventdelplà. If you have other concerns, please let me know. Thanks. --Hameltion (talk, contribs) 15:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Feels (song)

Hi User:Onel5969, can you please help by creating a collage image of the "Feels" video for the article's music video section please? If so, my idea was one of these [6], [7], because you couldn't show just one of them, and they're never seen together, but if the shots could be like these [8], [9], so it shows the psychedelic effects used if possible.--Theo Mandela (talk) 02:36, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Telstra People's Choice Award winners

please create new article for ballet dance, dont spoil this article, I am expanding it with lot of effort both interms of internet cost and physical strain. it is not stub. Bumbravathi (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Bumbravathi - There's no reason for a separate article. Simply combine the two awards and expand the existing article. You can put the effort into the existing article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:32, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

sir, both awards are completely different one is for Indian film, and the other is for Australian Ballet, how can we combine it. I will create an article for ballet dance if you wish to, and this will avoid ambiguity. Bumbravathi (talk) 12:34, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

WCWC Legacy Championship

Don't redirect the article. Leave it as is. I don't like using WP:OSE as it's not the best argument, but there lots of titles that might not be considered notable yet those articles still exist. I'm not going to get into a revert war. Neither should you. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 14:11, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

You're right, no reason to get into an edit war. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:17, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Pacify Her

Hello i just wanted to that why has Pacify Her been deleted? And yes i have read WP:SONG but theres not anything on there that said that i couldn't make the page. Why has Mrs. Potato Head been stayed put because that song isn't even a single? Littlemixfan1 (talk) Use {{re|Littlemixfan!}}
to reply to me 7:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

If you read WP:SONG you would understand that it meets none of the criteria to show its notability. There is no in-depth coverage, and its charting history does not qualify either. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

It actually does the chart history is on the third source please click on it because it was actually on the charts. Please tell me why Mrs. Potato Head is still there when it wasn't a single? Littlemixfan1 (talk) Use {{re|Littlemixfan!}}
to reply to me 11:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

It actually doesn't. That chart isn't a major chart. And please stop with the WP:OSE arguments. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:03, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Wow, You don't have to be rude i was just asking a question as a new editor should be doing. I was just asking. You obviously don't want to answer my question so? ~ Kind Regards Littlemixfan1 (talk) Use {{re|Littlemixfan!}}
to reply to me 17:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Jericho Creek (various)

Thank you for reviewing the Jericho Creek articles I've created. As you can see, I'm pretty much a rank amateur, hope to improve with time, especially with help from reviewers. Thanks for the title in the reference in J.C. (Jordan Creek), makes sense so the reader can see who the owner of GNIS is, I'll go back and add it to others. Just one question, the help articles aren't always easy to comprehend to us newbies, what effect does "" have within the article. I know what linkrot is, but, not what the tag does. Thanks, again, all you reviewers have been a great help. Also, in the infobox template I've been using has a tag as the first line "". There are no dates in any of the infobox fields, so, I'm not sure why it's there. In articles, I've been conforming to the standard date format as ddmmmyyyy, which is my personal preference anyway.Are1718 (talk) 02:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Are1718 - That is called a "tag". In this particular case it means that references (either one or more) are simply a weblink between the <ref> weblink </ref> templates. Take a look at WP:CIT on how to properly format citations. Doing it your way makes it easier for citations to get lost. Hope this helps. And keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:45, 14 August 2017 (UTC)