User talk:JBW

This account was previously known as JamesBWatson, but was renamed to JBW on 19 September 2019. Neither James nor Watson is my real name.

Please post new sections at the bottom of the page. If you don't, there is a risk that your message may never be noticed, if other edits follow it before I get here.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84

This page has archives. Sections older than 8 days may be automatically archived by .

Gabriel Vicéns

Hi there JBW,

My apologies but I cannot understand what you mean by No valid speedy deletion criterion has been provided? The article is about a "pseudo musician" with crosswiki spam history who has done nothing and whose relevance is zero. There was speed delete request here vandalized here due to removal of template, a vote here that did not reach consensus due to nullity as you may consult and several complaints from nl.wiki, es.wiki and others. How am I supposed (as an es:wiki sysop) to come to warn u about that? Saloca (talk) 22:15, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Saloca, and thank you for expressing your concerns. I will try to clarify the various issues involved, in the hope that doing so will be helpful to you.

English Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion are listed at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. They include, for example, an article having no meaningful content, or being unambiguously promotional, or infringing copyright, and so on. Your speedy deletion nomination did not mention any of those criteria: that is what I meant by saying that no valid speedy deletion criterion had been provided. I have no idea how you deal with deletion nominations on Spanish Wikipedia, but the policy on English Wikipedia is that if a page does not satisfy any of the speedy deletion criteria then it isn't speedily deleted.

In fact, although the failure to mention any of the speedy deletion criteria was sufficient grounds for declining the nomination, before doing so I investigated to see whether there was any other basis for deletion in what you said. The reason you gave for deletion was "It was passed on en:wiki by consultation and was maintained when no consensus was reached. They've dedicated to replicating it in several Wikis with different users and the same text." Quite apart from the fact that there is certainly no mention there of any of the speedy deletion criteria, it it so incoherent that I was not absolutely sure what it was intended to mean. What does "was passed on en:wiki by consultation" mean? Judging from the mention immediately after that of "no consensus", my guess was that you probably meant that it was subjected to a deletion discussion. Your second sentence must, I thought, be intended to mean that a group of different accounts, presumably connected, have tried to post the same article to several different wikis. Assuming those interpretations are correct, the fact that a deletion discussion failed to reach consensus to delete a page, far from being a reason for deletion (speedy or otherwise) is a reason not to delete. What happens on other wikis is totally irrelevant: in many cases other Wikipedias have significantly different policies from English Wikipedia. Consequently, although I gave the failure to provide one of the speedy deletion criteria as reason for declining the nomination, in fact no valid reason at all had been given for deletion, whether compliant with the speedy deletion policy or not.

A further point worth mentioning is that a page which has survived a deletion discussion is then not able to be speedily deleted. Therefore even if you had cited one of the speedy deletion criteria, it is unlikely that the article could have been deleted. (There are a few exceptions, such as copyright infringements, but none of them applies in this case; or at least you have given no indication that any of them applies, and I can't see any that does.)

That is how things stood when I declined the speedy deletion request. Your message above appears to confirm my understanding of what you wrote in that request, and you have also introduced another point. What you refer to as a "speed delete request" which was "vandalized" was a proposed deletion, commonly abbreviated to "PROD". Policy is that a PROD is only for a deletion which is totally uncontroversial, with no objection from anyone. If anyone does object, for whatever reason, then they are perfectly free to remove the proposal, and doing so is therefore not vandalism.

If you think there are good reasons why the article should be deleted then you may like to take it to a second discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. However, to stand any chance of success you will need to give a much better reason for deletion than you have.

If you find the range of different deletion mechanisms on English Wikipedia, and the variety of different policies for them, confusing, then the best I can say is that you are not alone: so did I when I was new to English Wikipedia, and so do many new editors. JBW (talk) 10:34, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

National Logistics Corporation, Pakistan

Dear,

Trust this message finds you doing well. I am Usama Naeem, SEO Officer official representative of NLC digital profiles.

I am writing to appeal for the change of the name of Wikipedia page of NLC from "National Logistics Cell" to "National Logistics Corporation".

Senate of Pakistan has passed the National Logistics Corporation Bill, on August 8 2023, which will establish the National Logistics Corporation as a statutory body. This is a major milestone in the development of the logistics sector in Pakistan, and it is important that our Digital profiles page reflects this new reality. Below is the references of official document by Govt of Pakistan.

References:

1. Senate passes National Logistics Corporation Bill, 2023

a. https://www.brecorder.com/news/40256369

2. By THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLYI –

a. https://na.gov.pk/uploads/documents/64cbc6fce4c55_419.pdf

3. Senate of Pakistan – establishment of National Logistics Corporation

a. https://senate.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1691475834_270.pdf

4. President approves National Logistic Corporation Bill

a. https://dunyanews.tv/en/Pakistan/745482-President-approves-National-Logistic-Corporation-Bill

5. NLC Website

a. https://www.nlc.com.pk/about-us/index.php

Regards,

Usama Naeem, SEO Officer, HQ NLC Usamanaeem31 (talk) 07:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Usamanaeem31:

Done JBW (talk) 10:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Usamanaeem31 (talk) 05:51, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ygm

Hello, JBW. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Yamla (talk) 11:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undid your reversion of Antenna tuner

I've restored the phonetic spelling "axēs" in the Antenna tuner article: It distinguishes axes = more often encountered plural of ax, from axes = more unusual plural of axis, without requiring the reader to take a moment's thought to work out the context.
107.122.85.9 (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]