User talk:Serrwinner
GONE
If you are here to accuse me of more UPE or sockpuppetry, save your energy I'm out.
Declined speedy deletion
I have declined your speedy deletion request for Valerius Gratus. Having only a single source is not a valid speedy deletion criterion. Please see crteria for speedy deletion for a list of valid criteria. -- Whpq (talk) 13:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- I should have opened a deletion discussion. In the future I might but due to the someone asking me not to tag these articles further I will refrain from doing so for now. Serrwinner (talk) 14:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Roman AfDs
Hi there, just a quick request. Please don't nominate any more ancient Romans at AfD until the community has had a chance to assess the ones you have nominated. They take a lot of time, and I think you may see that these are mor notable than you suppose. Thanks. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sure no problem. I have no doubt of their notability but they are yet to be demonstrated here per WP:GNG Serrwinner (talk) 13:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- If you have no doubt about their notability, then you should not be nominating them for deletion. You should address the sourcing issues by improving the references. If you cannot do that, then leave it for other editors to improve the sourcing. -- Whpq (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- No I meant notability in "the real world". A fella told me notability in the "real world" and on Wikipedia are two totally different things, if it holds with modern day entertainers why not carry the consistency to these Roman fellas? Serrwinner (talk) 14:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- These are not articles about Roman entertainers! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- I am fully aware of this. I read each individual article. I was merely trying to carry out consistency in Wikipedia as to what I have seen done to other people I might consider notable, cause these guys aren't untouchable, it's either they pass WP:GNG or not.
- Well we can leave it to the AfD process now to test that. Incidentally we do have some articles on Roman enetertainers. Also very notable IMHO. See Flamma. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- No problem, I will refrain from tagging further and let the afd process carry on. I'm aware of this, how Wikipedia editors are very strict with WP:GNG, I'm not a fan of it either. In the future I might start a dialogue to discuss issues like this to get a more widespread consensus. Serrwinner (talk) 14:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Just in case you are not fully aware of that yet, but WP:GNG is all about finding secondary sources. Which, I expect, may be much more difficult for some modern entertainers than ancient guys. So if you want to defend an article on a person you feel is notable against deletion, looking for such sources is the way to go. Best of luck in that regard. Daranios (talk) 16:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- I am fully aware of this. I read each individual article. I was merely trying to carry out consistency in Wikipedia as to what I have seen done to other people I might consider notable, cause these guys aren't untouchable, it's either they pass WP:GNG or not.
- These are not articles about Roman entertainers! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- No I meant notability in "the real world". A fella told me notability in the "real world" and on Wikipedia are two totally different things, if it holds with modern day entertainers why not carry the consistency to these Roman fellas? Serrwinner (talk) 14:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- If you have no doubt about their notability, then you should not be nominating them for deletion. You should address the sourcing issues by improving the references. If you cannot do that, then leave it for other editors to improve the sourcing. -- Whpq (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Your behavior here appears to violate the behavioral guideline Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. I suggest you withdraw all of these disruptive nominations.Jahaza (talk) 17:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)