Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user is a WikiGnome.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nekivik (talk | contribs) at 08:39, 12 January 2023 (→‎Nomination of [[:Krakoa]] for deletion.: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Edit Count

Wiki mark-up link

Hi! You might find these handy:

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

Other useful links

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:

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010Talk 00:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! Same to you! Onel5969 TT me 15:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Recent edit

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

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

Arcinfo.ch

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

Hi. The issue is that you need several (usually 3) in-depth sources about the subject to show it passes notability. What I draftified didn't have any. One of them was a short blurb, and the other a simple map, showing it exists. Onel5969 TT me 15:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arcinfo.ch was present. Besides, what you consider a short blurb is actually a key reference for stations in Switzerland showing that it exists and it's active. It's likely the reason Template:SBB web exists. Also the "simple map" is the network plan showing it's active, the network it belongs to and adjacent stations. For me, it compares fairly well to other Swiss stations. Enhancing999 (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And still, neither is in-depth. WP:OSE is not a strong argument. If the station is notable, then there shouldn't be a problem with finding those 3 in-depth refs from independent, secondary, reliable sources.Onel5969 TT me 11:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any on the French Wikipedia article you consider suitable? Enhancing999 (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean. Onel5969 TT me 12:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is a interwiki link to French language Wikipedia on the article. Enhancing999 (talk) 13:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so? It is still not clear what you are asking. Onel5969 TT me 13:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any of the sources on the French Wikipedia article you consider suitable? Enhancing999 (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need assistance in biography for Film Director

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

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

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

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

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 ATP Finals

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

Hi. If what you say is correct, than that would mean sportsidioten is a mirror site. But I can't see anything on that site which says they took the information from WP, and it does have a copyright notice. Also, if true, then the article's page should include a notice in the history showing that they copied from the other WP page, to provide proper attribution. Did you see something on the source which says it comes from WP? Onel5969 TT me 22:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find anything that explicitly indicates on the site that they copied from WP, but the English part of their article is an exact copy of the Wiki article and even includes the same Wikilinks that the Wiki article does. Quite a coincidence if it isn't taken straight from the 2022 Wiki article. Adamtt9 (talk) 22:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not disagree with that assessment. Let's leave the tag on and see what one of the admins who specialize in copyvios think. Onel5969 TT me 22:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Reviewer of the Year - 2022

New Page Reviewer of the Year
For your over 28,000 article reviews, you've been chosen as Reviewer of the Year, for 2022! Your username has been permanently engraved on the cup (again) -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, much appreciated. Just trying to help out where I can. Onel5969 TT me 02:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Congrats - just saw this in the NPP newsletter. Don't know what we'd do without you! Happy new year, etc. Girth Summit (blether) 19:34, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My congrats as well O. Very well deserved! MarnetteD|Talk 20:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to both of you, MarnetteD and {{|Girth Summit}} ... And to answer your question, GS, somehow I think I am eminently replaceable. Onel5969 TT me 21:31, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we're all replaceable. Which is good, because we wear out, one way or another. I guess all I mean is that I'm glad you're on board. Girth Summit (blether) 22:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additional NPP Award for 2022

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

Recent edits to Sally Hernandez

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

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

Page review

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

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

Draft:Norbert Matsché

Hi, @Onel5969,

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

Hi. Two things, first, you use the term, "our", which would imply that somehow you are connected to the professor. What is that connection? Second, you state that he was head of your institute. What university was that? Perhaps I missed it. Onel5969 TT me 21:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Prof. Matsché is one of the former Professors of the Institute of Water Quality and Resource Management of TU Wien (https://www.tuwien.at/en/cee/iwr). He retired in 2007. I now work at this institute. I hope this is not a too close connection. And, as said, he was head of the institute for five years. Best regards and thanks for a short response! Hager Irene (talk) 17:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for getting back to me. So, okay, that is what is known as a conflict of interest. You should read WP:COI, and follow what is required there. Second, that institute would not qualify for the notability criteria. So you'll need to find some in-depth coverage of him from independent, reliable sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 18:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Lisa m Montgomery the murderer

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

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

Nomination of Crookton, Arizona for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crookton, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

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

Nomination of Casa Rosa, Arizona for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casa Rosa, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

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

Nomination of Bignotti, Arizona for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bignotti, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

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

Nomination of Fordville, Arizona for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fordville, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

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

Restore 2021-2022 Futsal Championship

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

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

Draft: Pilot Light

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

Hi. Wow, I'm not quite positive, but I think in all the articles I've approved at AfC, this is the first one that's ever been returned to draftspace. JBW is a very experienced and knowledgeable admin, so I would suggest you re-open discussions with them or with one of the two AfC reviewers who declined it afterwards. And I doubt anyone would ever accuse me of being soft on advert-like articles. In fact there's one admin who has declined well over a 100 of my CSD nominations for advertising (without approving a single one). Regarding notability, the https://inthesetimes.com/ piece and the Channel 7 ABC piece, along with the Medium piece pushes it over the edge to meet notability criteria. This was a while ago, but I think I also may have thought the WTTW piece (not the press release), also gave weight. But the biggest issue appears to be the promotional tone, so you should discuss it with those other editors. Hopefully, this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help. I've reached out to JBW again for any advice. Tjblmc20 (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings and page reviews

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

Still, I appreciate the support! : D

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

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

Deleted article Alankode Leelakrishnan

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

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

New Year's Wishes and question =

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

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

Sorry: forgot

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

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

Kanha Shanti Vanam

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

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

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

Hi. I would expand the section in the target article. Onel5969 TT me 13:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lawn Ki Masjid

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

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

Just a heads up about Tropical cyclones in 2023 article

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

Missed this. Thanks for the heads up. Onel5969 TT me 13:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Southtyroleans moved to draftspace

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

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


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

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

Batalha do Museu moved to draftspace

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

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

Hi. Well, what is your connection to subject? Onel5969 TT me 20:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I watched the rappers battle videos on the internet and found the topic interesting :) Meiaz (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't explain your obvious connection. Onel5969 TT me 13:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I don't understand. What should I do to better the article? Thanks :) Meiaz (talk) 17:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Address the COI/UPE concern is step one. Onel5969 TT me 18:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, okay, how do I that? Sorry for bad english :) Meiaz (talk) 11:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to disturb, Im sure you must be busyy. And tips for me Mr. Onel5969??? Thanks for help Meiaz (talk) 12:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not disturbing me. Just trying to overcome the language barrier. I understand. First, you have an obvious connection to the article's subject. The question then is, do you have a simple conflict of interest, or are you being paid to the write the article. If it is simply a conflict of interest, you should read WP:COI, and follow the directions there. If you are being paid, then you should read WP:UPE and follow the instructions there. Hope this makes sense to you. Onel5969 TT me 13:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thank you. Truthfully, I'm not being paid. I will read the WP:COI as you pointed out. Thanks again for your kindness and time :) Meiaz (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just wondering Mr. Onel5969, should I declare the connection on the article? Would that be the next step then? Meiaz (talk) 21:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, use one of the templates at COI, and place it on the talk page of the article. Ping me once you do that, and I'll review the article for notability, etc. Onel5969 TT me 21:43, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cramel (Hebrew book series) moved to draft

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

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

Notability of Kung Fu (Ranking)

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

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

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

Nomination of Lancaster, Arizona for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lancaster, Arizona until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

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

Not ready for mainspace

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

Actually, that's not a valid reason for draftification. In fact, if I think they won't pass AfD I should not draftify as a way to avoid a deletion discussion. But at the time it was draftified, it met all 4 criteria for draftification: It had potential merit; it did not meet the required standard (met neither GNG or VERIFY); had not been worked on for over an hour; and did not contain copyright violations. While in draft it was improved, and now you've moved it back to mainspace. So the process worked. Onel5969 TT me 22:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, btw, forgot to mention to thank you for the work you do on both NPP and AfC, it's always a delight to review something that you've already accepted at AfC.Onel5969 TT me 22:48, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request reviewing an article.

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

Nice job! Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 14:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and please have a peaceful 2023. Komitsuki (talk) 14:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Template Maggie Castle

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

Hello Onel5969! I forgot to mention in the above that Castle is also a Gemini Award winner, though I did include it in the article along with references from media sources for both the nomination & win. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 22:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While I haven't been ignoring you, I have not had the time to go through your lengthy comment above. Will get to it tomorrow. Apologies. Onel5969 TT me 23:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Onel5969! No worries, I can see you're busy. I'll check back tomorrow. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you, but I wanted to spend a bit of time on your article. She's definitely a working actress, but almost all of the articles, 30 of the 33, are simple mentions of her. One of the other 3 is an interview, and therefore a primary source, so it can't be used to establish notability. That leaves us with 2. The Sandbox piece is the one truly in-depth piece about her. But I have doubts of the reliability of the short-lived magazine, and can find nothing about their editorial policy. Which leaves us with the Free Press piece. While she is mentioned several times, and quoted twice, it's not really in-depth coverage of her. If you could find at least two other articles like the Sandbox one, that would show notability. I don't really see her passing NACTOR. Her one truly significant role was in Todd and the Book of Pure Evil, and maybe you could call her voice work in [[Arthur (TV series)|Arthur]. You've done a very nice job on the article, and what is there is well cited, it's just a notability issue with me, and right now, it's borderline. Even a single additional in-depth piece would push her over the edge, I think. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 22:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Onel5969! Thanks for getting back to me! Sorry, going to be a fat paragraph again as I respond. :) "I don't really see her passing NACTOR" Except she does easily, I quote "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions". Two season of Todd & the book of... plus the animated feature film, regular voice role on Arthur & most of her films & TV have Wikipedia articles, meaning they are deemed notable. She's got significant roles in Weirdsville, to point her part is mentioned in two highly notable movie magazines, she's got a lead role in The Mad the lead in her episode of Goosebumps with more decent size parts in Dead Mary, Hank and Mike & The Time Traveler's Wife. All of which have references to prove her roles in them. That all easily meets SNG for Actors/Entertainers, it's worth noting that you do not need to meet both GNG & SNG as it can be either/or (or of course both). SNG for actors is placing the importance on multiple roles rather than just having three articles. After all many character actors who have worked for decades will clock up many important roles with very few articles about them, hence SNG is in lieu of GNG. A decades long acting career should trump three articles no matter how significant & that's what SNG is for per their policy page. Additionally she also meets "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards" - "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times", the Gemini Award win. I'd still disagree that she does not meet GNG, "Significant coverage" is really open to interpretation of course, I'd argue that reviewers in notable movie magazines mentioning her by name as a standout is significant. The coverage for Todd and.. alone is definitely significant & covers two seasons/two years. I could pile on more references for those but hate to ref bomb, I felt my refs covered the topics they were next too without going overboard. Side note, while I understand why an interview is to be used carefully for a reference since it comes from the person it is about, I do find it odd that interviews don't count to notability since media is unlikely to interview someone who is not notable in some way. I must say when I look at other actor articles on Wiki I do not see many with better coverage except for A list actors. For instance I took a peak at a few listed on your User Page (please note I'm not taking a dig at you, I kept checking back here & ended up seeing you'd done some actor articles so wanted to see if there was a difference) & many don't have anywhere near the level of notability your asking for in this case. Examples: Adrienne D'Ambricourt, Agostino Borgato, Al Taylor (actor),. None of those meet the exacting standard that seems to be being applied here, almost no article coverage to support them. Though I think they all meet SNG Actors as does Castle. I've been around a lot of Wiki articles for non "A list" actors & all are at a similar level as those, I got a lot of practice with handling refs fixing up many I came across. They meet SNG but would fail what's being asked for here. Still, if you don't agree that's your right, I guess you'll add an AFD & I'll try & argue my case at that. "You've done a very nice job on the article, and what is there is well cited" Thank-you kindly! I'd hoped to write more articles but always seem to have a bad experience here that puts me off for a while. Finding it hard to feel like it's worth all the effort. Thanks for you time on this. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 00:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You know, you've convinced me. Onel5969 TT me 12:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Onel5969! Thank-you so much, especially thanks for taking the time hearing me out (sorry for the fat paragraphs when I can see you're very busy). I really appreciate you being reasonable, easy & friendly to deal with. Have a great day & hopefully one not as busy as you've had recently. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Ganjaman moved to draftspace

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

Hi. No, that was moved to draft a couple of months ago simply because it wasn't in good enough shape for mainspace. There wasn't enough in-depth coverage to show they meet GNG, and there wasn't a solid reference showing that they had won the Latin Grammy. Onel5969 TT me 20:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I understand ;) Thankss Meiaz (talk) 11:35, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

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

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Thomas Kastanaras. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --Hannelsen (talk) 21:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Throw around the term vandalism like that could get you blocked. You're article has been tagged for notability concerns for weeks without improvement, then you simply reverted without improving it. NSOCCER, which has already been explained to you, has been deprecated, now you must show notability by providing in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable secondary sources which are not routine sports coverage. Which your article has zero of. Onel5969 TT me 21:51, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article has 3 sources but I guess Wikipedia belongs to people who don't like the real football now. So it would be a waste of time to spend any more time for it. --Hannelsen (talk) 21:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read my comment above. Not that people don't want "the real football", whatever that means, it is simply that people want quality articles which pass notability criteria, rather than poor stubs. Onel5969 TT me 22:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kung Fu Ranking

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

One is fine. The second is from a non-reliable source. Onel5969 TT me 23:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
El Español is Australia's oldest Spanish newspaper and it is a National print edition. Australianblackbelt (talk) 23:17, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. So? Onel5969 TT me 03:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So why the notability template on the article if the source is fine? Australianblackbelt (talk) 03:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the notability criteria. You need at least 3 like that. Onel5969 TT me 03:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Query AfD mentioned in move log

Hi,

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

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

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

Hi. Yes. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paras Kalnawat, resulting in it being draftified, with the instruction, "Please do not move to main space until it has received AFC approval." The only difference between the version I returned to draft and the AfD'd version is a 10th place finish in a reality TV show. Onel5969 TT me 11:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I don’t know why I didn’t find that AfD. I am also confused as to why the current page, now in mainspace, only begins at 13:52, 26 May 2022‎. Where are the versions that User:Liz said she’d Draftify at 07:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)? SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SmokeyJoe: I had been a prime contributor to actor Paras Kalnawat because of him being a main part of tv series Anupamaa(as I'm a prime contributor there also) till 2022 after I joined this platform in June 2021. After the previous article was draftified(which was I think was actually created in late 2018 or early 2019 whrn I scrolled down the editing history) I submitted it again after making changes. But it was declined as it was "puffery and advertising ". Thereafter I nominated it for deletion to rewrite it again after a break of few months with better language and sources. However a draft was already recreated by the user Jha09 who's currently blocked from editing. I continued to edit the present version of article after I submitted it for AfC in it's draft form but Jha09 did a mistake of directly moving it to main space without going through AfC approval procedure as the actor clearly passed Wikipedian guidelines. But administrators pointed out this mistake and they moved it back to draft space and Jha09 then submitted it for AfC approval procedure and again I continued to edit it. That's why the creation script is available of May 2022 instead of late 2018 or early 2019. Pri2000 (talk) 18:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:RoryMallinson.jpg

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

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

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

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

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

Article to be rewritten

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

I do not disagree with your assessment (as well as having to be renamed to fix the spelling of Tyre in the title). My rule of thumb is to tag it for improvement, and then give the editor a week to make the necessary improvements. I tagged it on 2 January, so if it remains unimproved on the 7th, I'd normally draftify it then, however, with your added concerns on the editor's talk page, I do not see the benefit of leaving it in mainspace. Thanks for pointing it out to me. BTW, have you ever considered doing any work over at NPP? We could definitely use more help in your area of expertise, especially if you speak Arabic. Onel5969 TT me 12:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am available and I’d be happy to help you. I speak Arabic and French in addition to English and i often use, and verify sources in those languages. I was a bit frustrated to see some inadmissible articles falling through the cracks and had recently AfD-ed a couple of them. I can keep an eye on articles within the scope of my expertise, and those about Arab world topics. I can also help you out with more general subjects, but I tend to steer away from getting involved in sensitive geopolitical conflict articles. How do I proceed? Shall I apply for NPP reviewer rights? el.ziade (talkallam) 16:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you could apply for the reviewer right, or go through NPP school (although that's a lengthy process). Onel5969 TT me 11:08, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grodno County (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Grodno County (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either

  • disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
  • disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
  • is an orphaned redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Pelandaba–Mpopoma improvements

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

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

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

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

Hi. First, not a big thing, but it is polite to leave a link to the page you have a question about. Now, about your question, you can look at WP:CIT to see what information is needed to make a reference validly pass WP:VERIFY. For example one of your refs simply states, "Wishaw Press - Friday 29 October 1920". What is that? Is that a newspaper? A publishing house? Where in the publication can I find the reference? It's similar to simply referencing, Encyclopedia Britannica. Hope this helps. But aside from that, I am still not sure this person passes notability. All the refs seem to reflect that her notability was through her husband, and per WP:NOTINHERITED, I am not sure she qualifies. Is there any way to link to online ways to look at those sources? If so, please include them. Onel5969 TT me 11:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, apologies for not linking, I will address these issues, yes, Wishaw Press is (was) a newspaper company, but she was a famous huntress, that's what makes her notable (which is mentioned in the article), she was famous for this as famale hunters were very rare at the time. regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 14:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Feel free to ping me if you want me to take another look. Onel5969 TT me 14:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Onel5969: thanks, Done [1] Hogyncymru (talk) 15:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To add, thank you for your work, it's very much appreciated, regards. Hogyncymru (talk) 15:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

University COI issue

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

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

Draftification

Hello, Onel5969,

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

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

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

Request to review article following cleanup of seemingly promotional language

Hi Onel5959,

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

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

RJ The DJ

Hello Onel5969 hope you're fine!!

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

Hi. Refbombing (see WP:CITEKILL) doesn't help establish notability. In fact, it makes reviewing the article more difficult. Kindly select 1 or 2 of the best citations, everywhere you have more than 2, and remove them. Once that's done, I'll take another look. The best citations are the ones which go most in-depth about the subject, and are from reliable, independent, secondary sources. And please remember that interviews are primary sources. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 23:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I removed accumulated citations, Interviews and tidied up the article. Thanks for reminding me about Interviews to be primary sources, I didn't know about that, hope that hint's gonna help me on future articles. ANUwrites 13:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard discussion

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

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

Fabiano Ferreira

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

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

George Barasa

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

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

Laith Wallschleger

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

Sorry, no. There are clear, indisputable, indications of COI with this subject. How do you know them? Onel5969 TT me 10:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but no - you may not make blanket assertions of "clear, indisputable indications of COI" without ever bothering to identify them. You need to explain the specific nature of your claim. So please identify what specific text in the article is either unsupported and/or fails either V, SOURCES or RS and I'll be glad to respond and address any legitimate issues. But the specious and nebulous AGF accusations need to stop. X4n6 (talk) 11:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, no I do not. We do not give out hints at how we spot UPE/COI so that these types of editors can learn how to circumvent them. I would simply request you explain your connection to the subject. I am surprised since you are a long-term editor, but there are indisputable clues that you have a COI with the article's subject. Onel5969 TT me 11:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging some other experienced reviewers to take a look, if they have the time, Rosguill, Barkeep49 and Kudpung.Onel5969 TT me 11:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your answer suggests you believe you're free to make claims which assume guilt, with no presumption of innocence? That's not only deeply troublesome, but violates AGF to its core. However, you are correct that I am a long time editor - actually, longer than you - just not as prolifically. And there is nothing in that long edit history to suggest COI. To the contrary, I've called out others for it. But I always explained my reasons. So kindly provide the policy/guidelines which will inform me that I've done it wrong by being transparent.
Beyond that, so as to not belabor this even more, I do not know the subject. I met the subject and others at an event where I met and cellphone photographed several notable actors/sports figures. I even contributed some of those photos with the subject to Commons and added two to the article. Because I had Googled the subject and discovered that despite lots of coverage, including mentions in several other WP articles, there was no subject article. So I chose to contribute one - and tried to write a good one from all the RS sources I found. That's it! No COI. No arrangement. No nothing! Just an editor trying to contribute to this project - just like you. But apparently, no good deed goes unpunished. Because there's always someone ready to make accusations. But thanks for pinging other editors. Hopefully, they'll see there's no there there. X4n6 (talk) 12:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So you do have a relationship with the subject, however tangentially. As per WP:COI, "Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest." It also states, "Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to change an affected article's content." And btw, AGF goes both ways. But finally, your last answer clears up your connection. Onel5969 TT me 12:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but a brief encounter is hardly a relationship by any metric. I've had more of a "relationship" with you here than I had with the subject! But thanks for removing the tag. 13:02, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
It seems like this particular concern has been addressed, so while I want to acknowledge the ping I've not looked into this beyond seeing it has been moved back to mainspace and there is currently no COI tag on it. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:11, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sudhir S. Mehta

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

Great. Onel5969 TT me 11:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete the pages that i have created

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

Hi. Not sure what happened on that one, feel free to remove the tag... Onel5969 TT me 18:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Minaro123 - I have to really apologize for that. Again, not sure what happened, but I reverted those tags.Onel5969 TT me 22:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Healthcare payment

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

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

Hi. Yeah, I was not specific enough in my note to the editor, my apologies. This is really a FORK of Medical billing, which has a section on payment. This should really be added in there. Onel5969 TT me 18:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Medical billing is a US-specific topic. Draft:Healthcare payment is broader global topic pertaining to the economics of healthcare. It seems to be a useful piece that would stitch together Bundled payment, Capitation (healthcare), Medical billing and other topics. I don't see any argument for lack of notability so I have removed the tag. If you have nothing else, please restore this to mainspace per WP:DRAFTOBJECT ~Kvng (talk) 20:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done. Onel5969 TT me 22:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the good fight

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

Big Mouth seasons

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

You're welcome. In the future, if you wish to split out pages, the first thing I'd do is read WP:SPLIT, then, rather creating numerous uncited stubs and not working on them, I'd create a single draft article and develop it, then move it into mainspace once it passes WP:VERIFY and WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 05:46, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't have to pass that if its well over 50 episodes and I develop the season articles well enough. The good news is I can just rip the logged version and work on it again. At the time it was 4am and I didn't have the energy to continue at the time.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 00:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Lives of Winston Churchill and Alfred Milner

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

Deletion page info is shown below:

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

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

Speedy deletion declined: Eduardus Aditya

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

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

Ichiko Ima

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

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

Think Solutions Engineering

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

Nomination of Krakoa for deletion.

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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Krakoa (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Nekivik (talk) 08:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969&oldid=1133109503"