User talk:Onel5969

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

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

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

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)[reply]

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:

why deleted my page

why you dleted page here created by me https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%DD%A2&action=history i also provided reliable source — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rana Zubair Punjabi (talk • contribs) 14:58, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied at User_talk:Uanfala#why_deleted_my_page. – Uanfala (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know Uanfala. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BBC Radio 1's Live Lounge 2016

I'm wondering why you removed this article and cited "no indication of notability". To date there have been 12 releases in this series and a Google search for BBC Radio 1 Live Lounge cd returns over 3 million results. None of the other articles have been flagged and it's a useful reference to have online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosettaTape (talk • contribs) 21:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RosettaTape - As I said in the edit summary, please read WP:NALBUM as to what constitutes notability for an album. Google hits certainly isn't one of them. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:36, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then it meets #2: http://www.itunescharts.net/uk/artists/music/various-artists/albums/bbc-radio-1s-live-lounge-2016/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosettaTape (talk • contribs) 15:29, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A question

I just wanted to ask you something. Can a wikipeida page name get changed. I wanted to name the wikipedia page "Perica-Pero Pavlović" to "Stadium Perica-Pero Pavlović" and things like that. And also, how do I put up reliable images ok wikipeida pages, for example the wikipedia page "Amar Osim"? Thanks in advance. Bakir123 (talk) 12:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bakir123 - First, yes page's titles can get changed through a process called "moving", but you have to meet certain requirements to do that, see Wikipedia:Page mover. I did that move for you just now. Regarding uploading images, see Wikipedia:Uploading images. Any pictures uploaded have to have copyright permission for use. Here are some other links you might find useful:

Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing

Sorry if I'm annoying. I won't be able to update things on wikipedia for a few days, so if you could just put an image of Amar Osim on his page. I was trying to put it and I couldn't. Once I did, it got removed, so if you could somehow put an image only on that, I would be greatful, if it isn't the trouble. Thanks :) Bakir123 (talk) 14:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

d

	d
	it will be longer when the next billboard award ceremony happens Cadetrain (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you're referring to, Cadetrain. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:05, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

i'm referring to the top rap artist articles that you suggested — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cadetrain (talk • contribs) 15:07, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh... you should really leave a link to what you're discussing on an editor's talk page. I review quite a few articles. Regarding those, I understand they will grow, but even now the lead should have info regarding that 2018 was the first year for the award. It could also, if you have the info, include a discussion on why the new categories were created. Without that, folks might think that the list is incomplete (which it isn't). That's what I was thinking when I tagged them.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fetal resorption

Hi Onel. I'm contacting you because I dissagree on this page being redirected to Vanishing twin. It's a topic in itself and I think it would do best to be expanded on instead. Sorry if I'm missing something but it seems disadvantageous to just have it as a redirect.★Trekker (talk) 15:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi *Treker - I don't disagree on your rationale, simply that a Wikipedia article should be something more than simply a dictionary definition, see WP:DICDEF. And keep up your good work on the project.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:57, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot of coverage of the phenomenon in rodents 1 2 3 4, canines 1 2 and felines, horses and many other animals. I'm going to be expanding it soon. I just need to figure out how to make it any good.★Trekker (talk) 16:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Bagwis

Why did you revert the article Bagwis? I provided three independent reliable sources about the subject. Thus, it is notable. --Jojit (talk) 01:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cédric O

Greetings. Could you please take a look at the article and check if the sourcing and the inline citation are now adequate? Thanks. -The Gnome (talk) 11:30, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job, The Gnome - keep up the good work!Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting tag removal

Hi Onel5969,

This is regarding the page of Girish Jhunjhnuwala. I sincerely request you to please remove the tag - The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. (August 2017) - as I have provided new citations for verification. Citations such as Entrepreneur, Forbes, The Standard are significantly detailed stories about him. He meets the notability guidelines for living people. Looking forward to a positive response. Thank you.--At My Unicorn Party (talk) 17:26, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, At My Unicorn Party - definitely passes gng now, removed that tag. Could still use a couple of more sources where the cn tags are, after which the blp citation tag can be removed. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:51, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leila George

I see you CSD-G4'd that one. Actually the previous AfD was a pretty clear redirect, not delete - not sure why the closing admin did the latter. Redirect also seems to make more sense, as her name is connected with Mortal Engines (and only with that). Hence my redirect rather than speedying. YMMV. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:56, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, Elmidae - feel free to remove the CSD. I tend to be more literal in some circumstances, and even though I may feel that the redirect is warranted, since it was closed as delete, that was what I based my G4 on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:03, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Year in Radio

Hi, the links you keep reverting, like this one, are a Year in Radio link. Year, of course, being the actual year not the word year. There isn't a link to an actual year page, (ie: 1996 linking to the year 1996), this is to the 1996 in radio page which has been shortened to just show "1996". Now, if you would be so kind to revert your changes, I'd appreciate it. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:45 on April 6, 2019 (UTC)

Hi, and per WP:DATELINK, "... should not be linked unless the linked date or year has a significant connection to the subject of the linking article, beyond that of the date itself, so that the linking enhances the reader's understanding of the subject". Other than that is the year they were first aired, there is no significance. If you click on that link, you get no relevant info about that radio station, in fact, you get nothing to add to your knowledge of that radio station. The example you give is perfect, for if you click on it, the radio station isn't even mentioned on the link. Consensus has been that when it is simply just the year, film and radio articles should not be linked to the "xxxx in yyyy" articles. That's why in articles where there is an actual date, rather than just the simple year, they are not linked to that year. This is why when you use the WP tool (which I used in all of these changes), it automatically delinks those links. That in and of itself should show you that they should not be linked like that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:38, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's not the way we do things. Because a tool delinks things it should go away, isn't a good reason. Discussions on this (BURDEN on you to find them) has consensus in favor of Year in Radio links being left as is in radio station and television station pages. Radio and TV station pages operate in a special "realm" in many rules and consensus discussions (see BURDEN) for all their odds and ends. If you are just going to revert these 18, I'm gonna have to ask you to get consensus on the 30-or-so-thousand articles (probably more, I'm guessing). - Neutralhomer • Talk • 02:46 on April 6, 2019 (UTC)

And of course you didn't address the crux of the matter. As per WP:LINKING, "Appropriate links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that are likely to increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand." What does a link which doesn't even mention the subject of the article do to increase the readers' understanding of the topic. In other words, in the example you provided, how does linking to 1975 in radio increase the understanding of WVSP-FM, which isn't even mentioned in the link? And no, BURDEN isn't on me. I've quoted guidelines. Plus, if you've actually read BURDEN, that doesn't apply in this instance. BURDEN is about cited material, as the title of that section, "Responsibility for providing citations" clearly states. And just because there are a few articles (out of the millions) which do this incorrectly, doesn't make it correct. However, the guideline is pretty clear. As per WP:BRD, it is encumbent on you to show that your position is the correct one. The first thing I did was go to the Radio wikiproject, and there is nothing there to suggest this is an anomaly to WP guidelines. I am going to revert all of these, and if you wish to discuss it, might I suggest you either provide actual examples supporting your position, as I have, or take it to dispute resolution. And let me say, if you do have those examples, I'll be more than happy to self-revert. But, no harm intended, please realize I am not going to simply take your word for it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And might I suggest, that as per WP:BRD, until you provide examples which support your position which is contrary to guidelines, you leave the articles as is and stop your edit warring? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:30, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, first, you are on tittering on a WP:3RR violation (consider that your warning). Second, here's a link to an ANI discussion on this whole thing. I'm not dealing with a "it's in violation of this" "no, it's in violation of this" crap. So, I'm letting the admins handle it. Enjoy. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 04:04 on April 6, 2019 (UTC)

WP:WPRS definitely does not have any project-specific consensus that dates in radio station articles always have to link to "Year in radio". Some editors do have a tendency to do that, yes, but many others don't, and the radio stations project does not have any rule mandating that it's required. There was a project-specific policy to do that for a while ten years ago, but that's long since been deprecated because it's not necessarily a genuinely useful link (e.g. a radio station getting CRTC or FCC permission to change its transmitter power is not necessarily an important event within the overall concept of "Year in radio", so linking to "Year in radio" in that context doesn't serve a useful purpose.) There hasn't been any active project undertaken to comprehensively delink all the articles where that was added in the past, so some people might think it's standard practice if they're more familiar with the articles that still have such links than they are with the ones that don't, but it stopped being standard practice many years ago. So no, people really should not be editwarring you over this, because it's definitely not considered standard practice anymore. Bearcat (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your comprehensive answer. Although, part of me was hoping I was wrong so I could simply close the ANI and be done with it. Again, thanks. Sorry to bug you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reversal of article Acadêmicos do Cubango

Onel5969 please do not reverse this article, since it is already in the rules of the wiki. then there is no reason to redirect and reverse. Bianteco 05:40 on 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi. You need to provide in-depth references from independent, reliable sources, which currently this article has zero of. The one in-depth article, is from the club itself, and therefore worthless in terms of showing notability.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:15, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Hello! I have noticed you haven't nominated New Market Mall properly on AfD. It lists the previous AfD on logs, and the 2nd nomination has not been created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 April 8. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jovanmilic97 - yeah, noticed the same thing myself. Something went screw-if when I nominated it. I've asked an admin to format it correctly, since I didn't want to make the attempt and make things worse.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings (came here by following links from WP:BADAFD). Not an admin, but I've seen this before--the curation script doesn't properly handle second and subsequent AfD nominations. I think you're safe to simply revert yourself on the article, the closed discussion page, and on the daily log. If you have Twinkle, it handles the situation just fine, so once you've set everything back to status quo ante, I'd use that (or do it by hand). --Finngall ^talk 16:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful, Finngall - Thanks for the instruction. Worked like a charm. I think.

.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:44, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You My Girl

Hi, please understand that I am trying to make constructive edits to a formerly redirected article as you can see I have added more content and more sources on the article unlike the original creators so please give it a chance all I am trying to do is add improvements to articles related to music plus the article now has over 21 sources so you can see that the song is notable and does not deserve a redirect so if you want to redirect it again please hold a discussion on the talk page first. PantherCoulee (talk 17:46, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Onel5969! You created a thread called Linking to "Year in XXXX" articles when giving years at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to article

Hi One15969,

First off, please excuse my lack of Wikipedia knowledge... I'm new. I see that you've made edits to the INRIX article. I'm on the marketing team at INRIX and would like to remedy the issues that have been flagged/noted. Since you've made edits to the current version, I'm hoping you might have a few minutes to read the new article I'm proposing to replace the current one. If this isn't the right platform to inquire additional help, please forgive me. Thanks in advance for you guidance. Mburfeind (talk) 21:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mburfeind - And welcome. However, you should not be making any edits to the article. Since you work for the company, and in their marketing department, you are a paid editor. WP really doesn't like paid editing, since WP is not a marketing tool. You need to read WP:PAID EDITING and WP:COI, and take the necessary steps suggested there, which include disclosing your paid editing status. Then, if you would like changes on the page, you can make the suggestion on the article's talk page, and if there is an interested editor, they may or may not make the change, depending on whether or not they feel it is appropriate. But I respect your honesty, so even though I'm really not interested in the company, I will take a look at your draft and see what I can do.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Just a quick note to say thank you for your recent reviewing work on all the stubs I have been creating. Much appreciated!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:38, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, ThatMontrealIP - It's nice to see someone working on something other than association football players.

. I've created quiet a few stubs myself. Some will never be more than a stub, simply because although they meet notability criteria, there is not enough cited material out there to expand them. But some I hope to go back to and expand into decent articles. You obviously have a passion for artists, I hope you go back and expand them, that would be simply amazing. I see that at least one of them has been slightly expanded by another editor, and that's what makes this project so interesting. Regardless, thank you for your efforts, and don't hesitate to ask questions if you need to. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I am not interested in football players either. Regarding expansion, it's not my strength. I leave it to others... as in Loretta Hines Howard, which is only a couple days old. Thanks again. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:29, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Villini delle Fate section on Coppedè district

Little bit confused by copyright violation. Is Domitilla Dardi, Capitolo "Piccola guida al quartiere Coppedè", pp. 35-36 copyright violation? Just wanted to check if it wasn't mistake since French, Italian and Spanish article has that same information without a problem. If it wasn't mistake it should be removed from those articles as well.Sourcerery (talk) 10:00, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Sourcerery - that was it. And thanks for reminding me, I meant to alert an admin to take a look at it, since I wasn't sure it wasn't a mirror site. I don't do much work on other wikis, but if you do, you might want to alert an admin on those wikis to take a look. By the way, you should always provide a link to the page you're asking a question about, in this case Coppedè district. I'll ping a couple of admins who do yeomen's work on copyvio on this WP, as they might have better insight: Diannaa and Justlettersandnumbers. By the way, other than that potential copyvio, very good job on the article. 11:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RD 1 request related to PT&T

Your RD 1 request related to PT&T started at:

this edit

I started two edits later. Let me know if you think I missed something.S Philbrick (Talk) 15:32, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sphilbrick - long time no speak. Yes, I think that got it all. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:34, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reversal of pool

Is there a reason you added back the fifteen-ball pool section in Pool (cue sports)? That section refers to an insignificant variant of Rotation (pool) while the main article for fifteen-ball pool is a historically significant game played quite differently. That minor variant is only backed up by a website that doesn't cite its own sources.--Countakeshi (talk) 16:39, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Countakeshi - Two reasons. First, even if there is a standalone article (nice job on that by the way), there still should be a section in the main article, pointing to the main article. Second, since the variant in the main article is actually a different variant, mention of it should definitely remain, and point out the difference between it and the other, more historically game. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fifteen-ball pool is already mentioned in the history section that I created. Pool (cue sports) doesn't list every pool game nor does it need to as there are too many and the cue sports navbox does its job well. There's a problem with the minor variant, there are no reliable sources to prove that it exists. I think the website's author mistakenly gave the traditional Rotation (pool) game a new name.--Countakeshi (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's cool, and while it the main article doesn't necessarily need to list all variants, it definitely should list all those that have a separate article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That may require categorizing them (at least the major ones) into rotation games, call-shot games, etc. I or another member of the cue sports project group will hopefully do it.--Countakeshi (talk) 17:18, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Better Call Saul (season 5)

− Hey there! Is it okay if you review this draft for me. Thanks. The Optimistic One (talk) 17:20, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey The Optimistic One - Nice job. I've requested the redirect be deleted to make room for the article from AfC. Once deleted, I'll move it to mainspace. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:53, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Minor barnstar
	Hey man, just wanted to thank you for your edits on my articles. I also really liked how your User page was set up so I stole your style, hope you don't mind. Kisses Spaicol (talk) 22:42, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please check edits

Hi there. I realize you do a lot, but I'm asking if you can double check your edits before you commit them. You made two edits to the article Helen Sophia O'Hara, both of which were incorrect (see here). She was born, lived and died before Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland ever existed, so using Northern Irish and Republic of Ireland was incorrect. I think you're using some automated tools here, so I would check those tools as they don't seem to be quite up to the task with the level of accuracy required. It's true this could be a one off, but it sets a bad precedence. Cheers. Canterbury Tail talk 12:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No Canterbury Tail, that edit has nothin to do with the tools, I simply blew it. Your correction is the right call. I'm usually pretty good on calls that involve different historical entities (like United Kingdom vs. Kingdom of Great Britain when dabbing Britain, or Mutasarrifate of Jerusalem vs. Mandatory Palestine when dabbing Palestine. That second one is tricky, since there isn't a hard line between the two, so I use Palestine (region) for the years 1918 and 1919. But I'm definitely not perfect, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we all make mistakes from time to time. I've done plenty worse myself truthfully. Anyway lets all carry on. Have a good one. Canterbury Tail talk 17:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move from Steve Huffman to Steve Huffman (businessman)

Hey, I think you should undo this move. Looking at the traffic reports, the reddit founder is the primary topic, and it's not close. Could you make a move request instead please? Safrolic (talk) 03:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Safrolic - Don't disagree, have requested the unprimary dab to be deleted to move page back, and have moved dab to page with (disambiguation). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:58, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review for Idah Nabayiga

Good day, I wrote this to say thanks for the review, plus I notice you suggested that I add categories. I will get to doing that - the only reason I did not do so is that I didn't know how to,that as well as adding an info box...but thanks alot AKibombo (talk) 03:17, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AKibombo - Don't worry about it. If you can add them, great, but that tag is for others who specialize in doing that. Thanks for adding to the project. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 04:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed

Hello sir, @Onel5969:

Sir I would like to raise a friendly request to you to do the assessment about this articles which I recently created Boss – Baap of Special Services,Firrkie,I M 24,Sab Kushal Mangal,Section 375,Sridevi Bungalow. I can assure that they fulfill the policy and WP:N. But then also check whether this article comply with WP:N, if they do not fulfill the criteria and they should be in the article space then please move this articles to draft space so that I work on it otherwise they would be deleted by any Wikipedia administrator. It would be a great help sir if you accept my request and kindly do the assessment of the articles. It would build the confidence booster for new editor. AR.Dmg (talk) 13:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong redirect

There are many other meanings of Interior solution "interior+solution"&source=bl&ots=8SRKQNlUOX&sig=ACfU3U0SMAz73xIfYPKJB_IoYMF12aMLmw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjylaeY8tXhAhXXyYsBHZdSAWg4ChDoATABegQIBBAB#v=onepage&q="interior solution"&f=false Local Effects in the Analysis of Structures

"interior+solution"&source=bl&ots=e1NecUqQuW&sig=ACfU3U16-4qo1VtloLQZpkZkUO1sgYh_XQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjylaeY8tXhAhXXyYsBHZdSAWg4ChDoATAAegQIBRAB#v=onepage&q="interior solution"&f=false Ocean Hydrodynamics of the Japan and East China Seas — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:2D8:E30F:EE5D:0:0:BA88:C600 (talk) 00:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding articles to WikiProject Sports Car Racing

Hello, I noticed you recently added a WikiProject Sports Car Racing template the talk pages of several articles on Grand Prix races I've recently created... why?! They aren't Sports car races! A7V2 (talk) 12:37, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then why are there terms like this in the article: "Prizes were awarded for outright position, as well as three classes based on engine capacity: Class E for cars …" (added emphasis mine)? If you think it's incorrect, fix it.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:40, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Serious question: how was I being uncivil? I'm quite new to Wikipedia so I'm not familiar with how these things work, but it's been my impression that you should always assume good faith, and I know if I've done something wrong in whatever way, I'd want someone to tell me (like what I did wrong now), and I assumed others would feel the same way. Thanks. A7V2 (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Snark and accusatory comments are usually deemed uncivil. As you point out in your above comment, AGF is a good basic WP concept. There was nothing wrong with your first question. However, when I answered it, and pointed out that the articles appear to be about cars, your next comment was to attack and accuse me. I simply have long ago stopped putting up with stuff like that. Your articles are very well structured, and I hope you continue to create them. If you feel that the project I added is incorrect, rather than arguing about it, fix it to the project you feel more appropriate, perhaps Motorsports? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to respond, and sorry about that. I'll definitely take this on board.A7V2 (talk) 22:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bun Penny

Hello ! Why did you unmake my new article ? I am planning to write a full length article. Please see my previous articles such as Lombard coinage or Visigothic coinage. Thank you ! Almapple

Dexdexter

If no one ever calls Dex Dexter "Dexdexter" then how can that be the correct redirect? Especially when there is something else on another article that IS called Dexdexter all one word? 79.177.13.148 (talk) 19:48, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Port Moresby United / Star Mountain FC

Hi there. Thanks for the reviews of Port Moresby United and Star Mountain FC. However, I believe you have blanked the pages and redirected them in error. The clubs are currently playing at national level, and according to WP:FOOTYN, "Teams that have played in the national cup (or the national level of the league structure in countries where no cup exists) generally meet WP:GNG criteria." As stated, both clubs are currently playing at the top level of football in the country. Please see other pages of clubs that entered the competition this season, for example Aporo Mai F.C., Greengold Liners and Tusbab Stallions to name just a few that I've created in the past couple months. I have reinstated the pages for now as I believe they pass notability criteria, but please let me know your thoughts. Thanks. MrMarkBGregory (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, that wasn't clear in the article, so thanks for the correction. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Direct links or redirects?

Just a query... you made some changes on 2009 in British music charts which I mostly agree with: they were generally formatting issues. But you changed the direct links for the songs "Hallelujah" and "Barry Islands in the Stream" to the redirects instead – would that be the preferred option? I know they both link to the same thing, so nothing is broken, but I would have thought the preference would be to keep the direct link. Richard3120 (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Richard3120 - not sure what happened there. After I fix a dab problem, sometimes I'll use a dash fixer or date fixer semi-auto program, but that wasn't the case here. In this case I simply fixed the dab to Tik Tok (the Kesha song). Before I clicked save, the only change was to alter the target of the dab page. This is a bit disturbing to find that all these other changes were also incurred. And to answer your question, no, the preference is NEVER to dab pages over direct links. I'm going to play around on the page and see if I can't fix it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I thought... it seemed odd to remove the direct links. No objection at all to converting the text centering to the "style=text-align" format and other changes... but as you say, it's bizarre and a little worrying that all those changes should have been made just by trying to disambiguate one song title. Richard3120 (talk) 00:59, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Richard3120 - I finally figured it out. I usually use Dabfix to fix dabs, but lately it's been down, so I've been using dabsolver. Dabsolver has a box that you check or leave unchecked, which says to also do common fixes. However, on the screen, it doesn't show you all your edits, only brings up the dab fixes. So when I clicked "save", it created all those changes. I've learned over the past couple of months, that the automated corrections aren't always, well, correct. For instance, when dealing with temperatures, the - is correct and should not be changed to an –. Also, it will sometimes make changes in file names. But file names are what the creator called it, and they can be incorrect. Another one is linking a year, 1996, to a year in film 1996 in film, which according to WP:DATELINK and WP:LINKING shouldn't be done unless accessing that link leads to increased understanding of the reader of the current article. So almost always, that link should be removed, and that's what the semi-auto tool does. However, sometimes it should remain. For instance there was an article which had a list of those articles for nav purposes, all those links were quite valid. Regardless, I'm glad you brought this to my attention, and in the future I'll uncheck the "common fixes" box so I don't run into this issue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, glad you got to the bottom of it - it just seemed odd to me to change a direct link to a redirect, so I just wanted to check if I was the one who was in the wrong.

I'm never sure about linking the dates - you'll see in this particular article (and in most other articles which are titled "xxxx in music") the dates for births, deaths and events are linked. I'm not bothered about it either way, but if anyone tries unlinking them the administrator Deb seems to be the person most keen on making sure that they remain linked. I have no idea if she is correct, and like I said, it's not a great concern to me, but I'm not sure what the interpretation of WP:DATELINK is here. Richard3120 (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hello there - thank you for reverting my cut-paste edit on Kotra tehsil and informing me about the correct way to do it. I appreciate it!Deccantrap (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Deccantrap. If you can't move it because it's blocked by the current redirect, ask for the redirect to be speedy deleted, under G6. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:03, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Atlantic306. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Night Leaf, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Atlantic306 (talk) 15:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atlantic306 - Any particular reason? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:33, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the creator has been indeff blocked as a UPE and all of their articles apart from those with significant edits by other editors are going to be moved to draft as per admin decision, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Atlantic306 - Thanks for the info. That's going to be a bear. That editor's been pretty busy the last few months. 19:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	I know ya are a little burned out with NPP at the moment and I've been meaning to stop by here for a while and leave this. Just wanted to thank you for all your hard work as a NPR. Very much respect and appreciation for your work . Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 15:08, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Alucard 16. Really appreciate it. Keep up your good work as well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:06, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alias Mrs. Jessop for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alias Mrs. Jessop 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/Alias Mrs. Jessop 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. Grapesoda22 (✉) 19:59, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Adopted Son (1917 film) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Adopted Son (1917 film) 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/The Adopted Son (1917 film) 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. Grapesoda22 (✉) 20:26, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page Review

So I created this page and noticed that it has been indexed yet unlike a page a created prior. It doesn't appear in Google search at all. I hope you can help with this. Maybe you can review it and stuff. Thank you. [1].

Hi Maxen Embry - First, please remember to sign your posts with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Second, yeah, after your article passed through AfD, it should automatically have been "reviewed", which an article has to be in order to get indexed so it can appear in internet searches. I've reviewed it, so there should be no further issue. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moylist Construction

Hello, This page is not a copyvio. BAILII is the link to the decision of the Supreme Court. The article offers a NPOV summary of this notable case--there's no copy/paste. The use of BAILII is the Irish equivalent of a "neutral citation" used to discuss cases in Ireland, the U.S., and elsewhere. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 19:19, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: I've reviewed the Copvio Detector for the page and I can see where the mistake is--as a Supreme Court Case, the article must use similar names, particularly the judges, the plaintiff, and legal terminology. In addition, some--but not all--of the similarity report is based on appropriately used and referenced direct quotations. Again, very common and necessary when discussing a Supreme Court case. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AugusteBlanqui - the issue is the copyvio comes from this webpage. The copyright policy of that website can be found here, which seems to indicate this could be a copyright violation. And while not word for word verbatim, there is enough WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE (of terms other than the simple stuff that would need to be used, like you point out), that if it is indeed a violation, it would probably be best to simply start over. I'll ping a couple of admins who have experience with copyvios to take a look. Pinging Justlettersandnumbers and Diannaa - could one of you take a look at this, please? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:16, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Onel5969:, as I mentioned, BAILII, the site to which you link, is the published decision of the court. I also don't see WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE either. There's only one way to say 'bound to fail' or 'dismissal of proceedings' as legal terms. The direct quotes are well-chosen, necessary, and appropriately referenced. This article is a well-written summary of an Irish Supreme Court case. AugusteBlanqui (talk) 20:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: Can we seek input from Wikiproject Law as well? AugusteBlanqui (talk) 20:29, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Wikiproject law has nothing to do with copyright violations. You very well could be correct, that's why I pinged the 2 (imho) admins with the best knowledge of copyvios to take a look. If I'm wrong, and I'm very willing to admit that could be the case here, they'll remove the CSD, and then the article will be accepted. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:33, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

According to commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ireland#Government copyright, government works in Ireland enjoy copyright protection for 50 years from the date of creation. So a 2016 court case is still copyright, and we can't include it verbatim. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, Diannaa, it looks like another admin, however, Hut 8.5 - as deemed it admissible under US copyright law. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:41, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: foreign court decisions are public domain in the US though. I know Commons insists that content has to be freely licensed in the country of origin as well but I don't think we do. It might be worth sending this to WP:CP for further review, I certainly don't think this is a G12 candidate. Hut 8.5 06:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Direct quotes of copyrighted material are certainly allowed in Wikipedia articles--for example with the book Night and many others. What is verbatim in this article is properly cited. The rest is not WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE but a well-written summary of a court decision. 08:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC) AugusteBlanqui (talk) 09:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input, Hut 8.5, learn something new everyday.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:21, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Princes Arcade

As you probably know, I've written bucketloads about London streets and properties on here, including getting Piccadilly to good article status, and the Princes Arcade does exist and you can walk down it and buy a suit or a pair of trousers, if it takes your fancy. I've added some history from the Survey of London, so hopefully that should be that. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:55, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I didn't know that Ritchie333, but my issue wasn't that the place did not exist (I know it does, I've been there, several times), but that the stub article as written didn't establish notability. In addition, there was the copyvio/paraphrase issue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:52, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Of course the article doesn't establish notability – no article can ever do this. Notability is always external. It's also (and always) independent of current article state. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:39, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's a pretty inaccurate statement, and shows a pretty poor grasp of WP notability criteria. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:10, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In what way? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:19, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eyphrosine Kastamonitissa listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Eyphrosine Kastamonitissa. Since you had some involvement with the Eyphrosine Kastamonitissa redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NorthPark1417

Hi, thanks for helping out. If anyone questions you about it the movement to draft was advised by Doc James (talk · contribs). The investigation is still ongoing so no final decision has been made but i've been moving the album articles but leaving the bands in mainspace but with a upe tag because many of them have history with different labels and have different editors involved, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 23:03, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update, will spend some time on them. If you find out anything further, please let me know. And thanks for all you do. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:37, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969. I've already metioned this to Atlantic306 (see User talk:Atlantic306/Archive15 (counter)d#Drafitying articles albums), but please remove the infobox image (only if the file is licensed as non-free content) and also disable the categories of any more album articles created by NorthPark1417 that you move to the draftspace. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:23, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, Marchjuly - will do.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mandi

Hi, whats the unsourced thing that I added?--SharabSalam (talk) 17:24, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In those edits, everything, since you added material without a single source.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added Palestine per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_dishes#West_Bank I have also seen Palestinians cooking mandi. I dont want to put sources in the infobox but ok I will add a source.--SharabSalam (talk) 18:53, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually SharabSalam, that's not what that is for in the infobox, it's about where the food was developed, not all the places it is currently eaten. I've corrected the infobox.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:14, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks I thought that is where it is eaten--SharabSalam (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Gerda Arendt, and for all the work you do here on the project. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:42, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sadun Mankaberdeli

Asking for eyes from Diannaa and Justlettersandnumbers on this article. Created by an editor who has since been indeffed blocked for copyright violations. The sourcing on this article is offline, so an earwig report won't show anything. I know we're supposed to AGF, however, what would the two of you suggest in this instance? The subject passes GNG, but I am concerned regarding potential copyvio, especially in light of the way the prose of the article reads. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:26, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I can help much here, Onel5969, as I don't recall any interaction with this editor. I hope that either Diannaa or Sphilbrick might be able to advise whether a CCI might be necessary (rough rule of thumb is five verified copyvios). Badrosian's thesis is available here. A second concern arising from a quick glance at the editor's talk-page is veracity – there seems to be more than one suggestion of hoaxing; so it's not reassuring that Badrosian's incomprehensible thesis doesn't seem to support the text cited to it (but at least our text wasn't copied from there). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:03, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Justlettersandnumbers - We'll wait to hear from Diannaa and Sphilbrick. Curiouser and curiouser. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:55, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dablinks: anchors

Hi. When disambiguating links to dab pages like here, would you mind preserving the anchors if there are any? Thanks! – Uanfala (talk) 14:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Uanfala - Hi. I thought I had. I usually attempt to copy/paste the # tags. Must have missed that one.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:56, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Onel5969,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Why you keep removing my edits please stop doing that its my school project at least tell me why you removed it ? Abdelghani25 (talk) 10:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Abdelghani25 - I did tell you why. Please do not add any info to the article without a valid citation from an independent source.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:59, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

OK Abdelghani25 (talk) 11:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Geely Xingyue, Onel5969.

Barkeep49 has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:

Unreviewed given G12 tag now on the article.

Please contact Barkeep49 for any further query. Thanks.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wagyu (comedy duo) marked for speedy deletion

Hello, this is in regards to the deletion of the page Wagyu (comedy duo). It was marked for speedy deletion because it was potentially advertisement and promotional. If I have written in a way that seems so, I apologize. If possible, can you please revert the deletion so I can make appropriate changes or at least be given a chance to contest the speedy deletion? Thanks

FreshUdon (talk) 12:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Four of Diamonds (band)

Hi, this was redirected after an AfD that you initiated, perhaps you'd like to have a look at it to see whether it indeed meets MUSIC as claimed in the edit summaries. --Randykitty (talk) 14:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you were doing some disambiguation. How do you decide whether to disambiguate Pesik. to Pesikta Rabbati or Pesikta deRav Kahana? Ar2332 (talk) 19:56, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Dude you are really something. I never got this many notifications before. Thanks for reviewing the redirects. Masum Reza^📞 09:15, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My 5 new pages gone

Are you the administrator or not and what have you done to my 5 new pages that I created is that something wrong? Oon835 (talk) 08:10, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Onel5969: This user here is new and not best-familiar with our guidelines yet. It appears that you redirect five of the pages they wrote on notability concerns, and the user is seeking clarity. Could you help them out? Regards, Lordtobi (✉) 09:32, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding two draft articles

Good evening. Last night you moved 5 stub articles that I've created in the past few days to Draft space.

Of those, I believe that Draft:Nils Gustaf Lagerheim and Draft:Pyrenomonadaceae have been sufficiently expanded and sourced for publication in Article space (the later especially so). I have published the former as Gustaf Lagerheim, though I am not fully sure whether this is the appropriate course of action on my part, as I moved it from Draftspace to Articlespace without review from another editor. Can you confirm whether or not this is an appropriate course of action and/or review the later draft?

Thereppy (talk) 01:54, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thereppy - perfectly appropriate. The only issue with the articles was that they were totally unsourced, so I moved them to draft so you could work on them. You don't have the autopatrolled right yet, so even if you move them back to the mainspace, like you did with Lagerheim, another editor will need to review them (which I did for that article). But you could also wait for the draft to be reviewed, like you did with the Pyrenomonadeceae article, which I approved and moved to mainspace. The only thing you should have done was move Draft:Nils Gustaf Lagerheim into mainspace, and then do a further move to Gustaf Lagerheim. That would not have left the draft of the earlier title hanging out in draftspace. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:15, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Principal Medical Officer

Disambiguation pages dont have references. Rathfelder (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't create a dab page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:53, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a bit of time. I think this probably merits an article. Rathfelder (talk) 13:11, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rathfelder - Please read WP:DAB to understand when to and how to create a dab page. Dabs must point to viable targets. Rather than simply pointing to the pages of the services where you claim it is used, you have to target specific usages within those pages. The current redirect is a prime example of how to target. Are there similar targets on the other three pages? If so, the dab would look something like this:

Primcipal Medical Officer may refer to:

A rank in the Royal Army Medical Corps

A rank in the Royal Canadian Navy

And then the other two. Turning it into an article is most likely the way you probably should go, but then that requires references. You might want to work on it in Draft Space, or put an "under construction" banner on it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:16, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt if there are in the other services equivalent pages. But at present as a redirect I think its misleading.Rathfelder (talk) 13:19, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone for Everyone

Anyone for Everyone

Good morning,

How has it been collaboratively contributing to Wikipedia and its sister projects?

I would really appreciate your views on the Anyone for Everyone program.

Anyone for Everyone is a campaign to encourage and guide internet users to contribute more to Wikimedia projects. The campaign aims to encourage 19 actions/activities that anyone could do on Wikimedia projects (Commons, Wikidata, Wikibooks etc.) for the benefit of everyone. Can you help expand the list by adding bullet points?

Thanks for weaving the lines and letters that make information neutrally open to the world.

Danidamiobi (talk) 23:34, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of One Night (2009 film) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article One Night (2009 film) 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/One Night (2009 film) 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. Viztor (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added this notice to your talk page as you have edited the article in the past and may want to contribute to the discussion. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cause and Effect Tour deletion

So, is there a reason for the deletion of this article? You just deleted an article that took me a whole morning to create, is that easy for you, I believe it took you less than a minute, that's easy. --Marcetw (talk) 04:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The reason was given in the edit summary. Please familiarize yourself with WP:NTOUR. A single primary source is hardly enough to show that the tour is notable. You might also check out WP:CIVIL as well. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:38, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Government Railway Police nominated for deletion?

@Onel5969: This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... I went to the IR website, referred to laws, added my own IB and lead, put my own sections and bulletins. It took me time to write this article. If there is a mild resemblance to a page I never visited, it isn't my problem. The burden of proof is on you to prove that I allegedly copied from that page. I can add additional sources and change wording.✘ anonymousвهii 15:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "mild resemblance", it's a direct cut and paste job from an outside source. Such editing will get you blocked from editing on Wikipedia. You should have put it into your own words in the first place. Now, the page will have to be purged so that the copyvio doesn't even remain in history. On the CSD tag, there's a link you can click to show you how much of a copyvio it is.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marceliano Coquillat

Re. your notability hatnote on Marceliano Coquillat - the article has been in existence for 7 minutes. Do you want to cut me some slack here? I am working on adding content. Cnbrb (talk) 12:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cnbrb - Then perhaps you should develop in draftspace first, or at least put an {{under construction}} template on it. When we review, we don't know if that is all the editor is going to do, or it is still being worked on. And you might also want to check out WP:CIVIL.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh come off it, that's not uncivil! It's a light-hearted comment on your rather over-eager application of hatnotes. You can look at the page history, and see that it has only just been created, and make a rational judgement that it's very new content. Quality control is great, discretion is greater. Cnbrb (talk) 14:16, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm really sorry to interrupt, and also sorry for undoing Onel5969's edit. But I really want to make the point that what Onel5969 does is really helpful.

Yes, nobody likes horrible hatnotes on an article you're working on, of course.

But that is nothing compared to the damage to Wikipedia if people like Onel5969 didn't do such amazing work. Do you really think a little hatnote, which can be easily removed, is not a small price to pay for the reassurance of having people like Onel5969 picking up on articles that should be deleted? I think Onel5969 is doing excellent work, and he definitely didn't mean to offend you. He's just tagging the article just in case it's problematic. False negatives are far more dangerous than false positives. And your article is probably just a false positive, so no problem.

Seriously, please don't be offended by a hatnote - think of what would happen if nobody was doing this massive amount of reviewing.

Dr. Vogel (talk) 14:32, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks, Dr. Vogel for your kind words. I try to be patient with other editor, but I simply cannot abide incivility. Despite the other editor's incivility, I tried to answer politely, explaining why their request wasn't looking at all sides of reviewing, and even offering alternatives for them to do (drafts or under construction template) in the future. What I received was more incivility. Regardless, I appreciate all you do for WP, and again, thanks for the kind words. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all - you and I have worked together quite a few times, and it's always been a positive experience, so I felt that the least I could do was point out how hard you work on our common project. I'm glad it's all sorted :) Dr. Vogel (talk) 17:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For review good pages and redirects!!! You are good editor not for this I was wathing your contributions ჯეოMan (talk) 13:29, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ჯეო - keep up the good work. WP needs more editors with a clue working on articles from eastern Europe.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John McHugh Sr.

Received your deletion proposal. I started the article a few hours ago. It seems rather quick to tag for deletion. Was hoping that WP:IMPERFECT would apply. And other editors could help improve the article. User:Lightburst 13:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Lightburst - the problem isn't that the article is imperfect, in fact it's quite well written. The issue is the notability of the subject. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:24, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern. Will get on the work. I removed the tag with an edit summary. My best User:Lightburst 14:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oninaki

Hello! So through Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article alerts, I have noticed Oninaki was PRODed. While I absolutely agree the article (nor notability) is not there yet, I think there were 2 things that could have been done before that. The first is drafting the article, as the game is supposed to release in 2 months, and is very likely it will be notable upon the release being published by Square Enix and developed from people who made a notable game I Am Setsuna. And the second would be per WP:ATD to redirect to List of Square Enix video games where it is mentioned. It could fail WP:RFD#DELETE criteria 10 whereas "target article contains virtually no information on the subject", but it would be an useful search term until the game comes out. Just my two cents on all this. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jovanmilic97 - first, thanks for all you do on WP. Second, you're right, it could be either draftified or redirected to the company. When I reviewed it (about an hour after the article's creation, neither the fact of its upcoming release, nor the company name were mentioned in the body of the article. I did however miss both of those facts in the infobox. Feel free to remove the prod, and take either of those other approaches.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing the great work on WP as well! Just saw it was redirected, which I find the best way of this to go. If this gets restored again with the same thing, I will WP:BOLDly move it to draft. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sony Imagesoft

Hey, can I ask you a question; can you fix up the games list on the Sony Imagesoft article, please? Because some of the info on certain games are missing for what system their on (examples include 3 Ninjas Kick Back being not just on the SNES but also on the Sega Genesis and Sega CD, Bram Stoker's Dracula being not just on the SNES but also the NES, Sega Genesis and Sega CD, Cliffhanger being not just on the SNES but also the NES, Game Boy, Sega Genesis, Game Gear and Sega CD, Mary Shelly's Frankenstein being not just on the SNES and Sega CD but also on the Sega Genesis and Mickey Mania being not just on the SNES but also the Sega Genesis and Sega CD.) ArthurRead1976 (talk) 00:23, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pink BH

Hello. Why are you constantly redicting Pink BH to Pink Media BH when that name is not in use. — HoneymoonAve27 (talk) 00:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because, as you've been told on numerous occasions, what you are doing is called a WP:CUTPASTE move, and is not allowed, since historical attribution is lost. Please stop your disruptive editing. If you think the title needs to be changed, please leave a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:52, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Gangaram Nirvan

How did you deduce this was a copyright violation? I checked the Earwig tool and it only reports 3.8% - do you have further evidence I can look at? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ritchie333 - The same thing happened to me as well. However, when I was checking the references, I opened up the one footnote, which was the URL I referenced in my speedy nom, and the verbiage was virtually verbatim (obviously, I had to use a translate program), including even breaking it down into sections. If you look at that link, and check it versus what's on the now deleted page, you'll see what I'm talking about. Carbon dating put the creation of the source page back in November 2017, so it doesn't appear to be a mirror. Hope that helps.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - you might want to take a look at this one. The page has been moved to Gangaram Nirvan, still gets 3% on earwig, not sure why, my only guess is due to the translation issue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:52, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The version at the time of the speedy deletion nomination is almost identical in most sections to a Google translation of the source web page. A lot has been changed, but there's still sections that need more work.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Diannaa and Ritchie333. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:32, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joseph Rooney (priest)

He passes, that's not the problem--if the article had been written any better, you probably wouldn't have redirected it. It makes me wonder what the editor's other contributions are like. Notable but poorly written/verified are sometimes the hardest ones to deal with. Fortunately this one was somewhat interesting, to me at least. Drmies (talk) 03:22, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Drmies - No worries, I think I reviewed a couple of other articles by them yesterday. Both of those were in about the same shape, but met notability requirements, so marked them "reviewed". When I'm reviewing articles, I use the flowchart. The issue I had with this is the 3 citations which existed, as they existed, did not show that there was significant coverage. Since they are simply to works, with no page numbers, I did a cursory inspection, but could not find a pertinent section dealing with Rooney. If there had been no sources, as per the flowchart, I would have A7'd it, since it did not appear to include a claim of significance/notability. Since it did have sources, poor as they were, I redirected to a viable target instead. My view is that when you simply list a lengthy document as a source, without page numbers, it's simply not a valid footnote. Regardless, always respect your opinion, and thanks for all you do on WP. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey--I don't know what the flowchart is but I agree generally with what you say here. Yes, sloppy article writing. I looked at one or two other contributions and they aren't great. This guy wouldn't have been notable either, IMO, if it hadn't been for those schools. (Plus I take an interest in 19th century missionaries.) And the redirect was fine, though a purist would argue that the dude wasn't mentioned in the article; that's also something I was working on. I added him to a few other articles, but they were also in poor shape. I might get enough to put this up on the front page though. Thanks for the explanation, Drmies (talk) 15:07, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, no worries, Drmies. Just fyi, the flow chart can be found at Wikipedia:New pages patrol. You have to download it to be able to read it, but several editors over at NPP put a lot of work into it (I wasn't one of them), and while it looks complicated, when you follow it through, it's really just common sense. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:49, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Međimurje Horse Stud, Žabnik

Hello, Onel5969! Could you please explain me why did you do it? I've written a lot of articles so far, but none of them was moved to draftspace. The article is written like many ones concerning stud farms all over the world, and what's the difference? The article has now four sources, but if it is not enough, I can put some more. Why do you think they are not reliable? Unfortunately, the Stud itself is a new one (as you can see from the text and sources) and there are very few sources in English. I would be glad if you help to improve this article to be more acceptable. Thanks in advance. --Silverije 15:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Silverije - I think it's a matter of semantics. Technically, right now your article has zero references, and zero footnotes. What it does have is 4 external links. External links serve a different purpose than references. However, your "external links" are really references. So I've reorganized it a bit and moved it back. Can't make the gallery work, however. I don't do much with galleries, so you'll have to figure out how to format it correctly, the table format you were using wasn't working. Take care.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Elipongo/SmileyAward

In the interest of promoting good cheer and bonhomie, you are hereby granted the coveted:
Random Smiley Award
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

WildChild300^Talk 03:33, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Changi Airport

If Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 3 and Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 4 have Wikipedia articles, why Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 1 and Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 2 don’t have it? BamZ412 (talk) 11:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BamZ412 - see WP:OSE. Just because an article exists on Wikipedia does not mean it is necessarily a good model to base a new article on. Wikipedia is monitored by volunteers, so it's not unusual for an inappropriate article to slip through the cracks.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:10, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 3

Please don’t redirect Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 3 because it was there before and Onel5969, it is notable. BamZ412 (talk) 12:55, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please familiarize yourself with notability criteria. Just because something exists does not make it notable. Read WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Changi Airport

Sorry for being like this. I’ve only realised this when 1.02 editor redirected Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 3 and Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 4. I thanked him for doing this. Please forgive me. BamZ412 (talk) 13:11, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BamZ412, my story

I only joined on 7 June 2019. Before that, I was an anonymous user with different IP addresses and earlier today I accidentally logged out and edited as an anonymous user until my mom which she asked my dad on FaceTime before helping me to log in again. I joined Wikimedia Commons 13 days ago in Singapore time. BamZ412 (talk) 13:22, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar For You!

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		For your intense work recently.★Trekker (talk) 00:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DABnames

Per WP:DABNAME, "The title of a disambiguation page is the ambiguous term itself, provided there is no primary topic for that term". Kara Kara is a disambiguation page, while Kara Kara (disambiguation) is a redirect to Kara Kara. If you think that one of the topics listed on Kara Kara is the primary topic, and the rest of the topics listed there belong on Kara Kara (disambiguation), then you need to propose that at Talk:Kara Kara. - Donald Albury 01:16, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Donald Albury - not really sure what you're talking about. I made no assertion regarding a primary topic. What I did do was, as per WP:INTDAB, replace Caracara with Caracara (disambiguation). Those are the only changes I made to either of the pages you reference above. I think I also made changes on 2 or 3 other pages, replacing Kara Kara with Kara Kara (disambiguation), again as per WP:INTDAB. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I find some of the language in Wikipedia:Disambiguation less than clear. Sorry to have bothered you. - Donald Albury 12:07, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries Donald Albury - I find some of that language, and the guidelines themselves, problematic myself.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:12, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Maniram Rajora, Onel5969.

Winged Blades of Godric has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:

Fails NPOL.

Please contact Winged Blades of Godric for any further query. Thanks.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

∯WBG^converse 18:29, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Julian W. Lucas Deletion

Hello, the article created featuring Julian W. Lucas was deleted. If you could explain please why this was and how it can be rewritten so it does not get deleted that would be very helpful. I'm also curious if the original page can be recovered at least so it can be reworked rather then completely rewritten. Julian W. Lucas is clearly a legitimate professional, well known model and actor who has worked with massive companies and is very influential within the disabled community. He is one of the only disabled professional models in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zenwexler (talk • contribs) 15:52, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Someone can be a "legitimate professional", "well-known" in certain circles, and still not be notable. I can't look at it, but I believe in this instance it was simply a piece of promotional fluff for the person, which also isn't allowed on WP. You can contact the admin who deleted the article, and they can restore it for you in draft, so that you can work on it. If they do, please take a look at WP:PEACOCK and WP:POV. Articles must be written in a neutral tone, with no promotional bent. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QRG Health City

Hi Thanks for reviewing QRG Health City. QRG is a major hospital in Faridabad with a capacity of more than 450 beds and has all superspecialities with all the big name of doctors in the city. Gradually, more information about it need sto be updated. There are lot of controversies about this hospital which needs to be updated so it should remain in wikipedia for information of general public. The hospital was ready in 2013 but could not be started until late 2016 due to various issues related to minorities and environmental issues. Hope you will delete the speedy removal tag — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jainvaibhav1307 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great Work and Thanks for reviewing pages :) Feroze Ahmad 2 (talk) 06:06, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Feroze Ahmad 2 - Keep up the good work yourself! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page Maniram Rajora

hi,

recently you have reviewed page Maniram Rajora but you did not removed deletion tag, please remove it, important pages should not be deleted, otherwise wiki will not be useful for people. Sunilbutolia (talk) 04:53, 26 June 2019 (UTC)sunilbutolia[reply]

Hi Sunilbutolia - You can't just remove an AfD tag. There is a discussion going on regarding the article. I left my opinion there, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maniram Rajora. It's not looking good for the article however. You should look at those comments, and if you can fix their concerns, you should. But don't let this discourage you. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:15, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Bayes

I declined the WP:G4 nomination as the current iteration of the article cites a source published after the previous AfD closed. I won't object to a second AfD. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, Ritchie333. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:37, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page creation : Gobinda Chandra Khatik Road

Hi Dear friend Onel5969

I want to create a page named Gobinda Chandra Khatik Road which is also mentioned in three pages of wikipedia. Is it worth notable? please suggest me. Sunilbutolia (talk) 18:56, 28 June 2019 (UTC)sunilbutolia[reply]

Hi Sunilbutolia - That's difficult to say without knowing much about the road. The SR (Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset) is WP:GEOROAD. But that SR is vague at best. There are a lot of roads/streets in New York City which meet the requirements, Broadway (Manhattan), Sixth Avenue, Dyckman Street, 116th Street (Manhattan); while there are others like 117th Street (Manhattan), 114th Street, which are not. You have to ask yourself, what makes this street stand out? Was it the first of anything? The best way to proceed is perhaps to create a draft article, and then ask a couple of other experienced editors if it'll fly. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:02, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moving my netflix film articles to drafts

Thanks for the input about my netflix film articles needing additional references/citations. I was hoping the starting the articles would encourage others to fill in additional information, which can't be done by others than me when you moved them to drafts. I also noticed among your own articles that you had done the same thing yourself, starting film articles with about the same amount of content as mine. Don't you think you should move your own film articles to drafts too then?Thornstrom (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. That's all well and good, except your articles did not show that the films met either WP:GNG or WP:NFILM. And regarding my articles, it's not about the amount of content, but whether they meet either of those two criteria. The citations in my articles show that the films meet WP:NFILM (since the AFI citation shows that they received at least 2 reviews and were in wide distribution). On your articles, which were very nicely structured, those which did show notability, were marked reviewed. I don't create stubs with the intent of leaving it up to other editors to flesh them out (although if that happens, I am completely happy). But I have to say, of all the stubs on films I've created, only 3 have been greatly expanded upon. I create stubs to get rid of redlinks. And I fully intend to go back and flesh them out. At least get them to C class (if I can, older films can be difficult to get info on).Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shiv Khoiwal

Dear Friend Onel5969, Kindly review Shiv Khoiwal page. ☆★Sunil Butolia (✉✉) 11:00, 3 July 2019 (UTC)sunilbutolia[reply]

Speedy deletion of Free Now

If you feel Free Now should be deleted maybe consider deleting Hailo also as this was the old name for the company and the page is similar in terms of layout etc.

List of Radiant Episodes article

I moved the original Radiant (series) article to a new name called Radiant (manfra), and after I did that, the List of Radiant episodes article no longer directs to itself, instead it redirects to Radiant (manfra) whenever I click the link. Was wondering why it is doing this. Since I saw afterwards that you reviewed the List of Radiant episodes page, I thought that maybe you would be a good person to ask.MemeTrooper (talk) 18:55, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MemeTrooper - Because the "series" article no longer exists, it should point to the "manfra" article. That's called a double redirect, and a bot will fix it if it is not taken care of manually. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:25, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Onel5969 So the List of Radiant episodes article should direct to again soon? It currently links to the "manfra" article rather than itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Radiant_episodes&redirect=no

Onel5969 Okay, never mind. I saw your edit saying that there is no need for a separate article. Why is that? I usually see that the article for the anime of the work and the comic/manga of the work are usually separated. Is this based on how popular the show is?

Hi MemeTrooper. Popularity is part of it, but only in a tangential way. It's really the length of the article. WP:SPLIT and WP:EPISODE are great tools for showing when a standalone article is needed for episode listings. Hope this helps. Oh, and by the way, there is no need to "ping" me on my own talk page, users are automatically notified when someone posts on their talk page. Take care. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:58, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More help

I know I just sent something, but I was told to go to you for help with Draft:MediBang. I am asking if you can clarify specific promotional points. The article speaks about the pluses and successes of the company. I want to know if I gave too much positive points about the company or not. I currently can't find any sources about negative points. And what else might I meed to add or remove before submitting it for review? Can I add the logo back?MemeTrooper (talk) 13:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MemeTrooper - no worries about asking questions. Most editors are more than willing to help others out. Nosebagbear was absolutely correct, in it's current form the article is heavily weighted to the positives about the company. In addition, the inclusion of products, some which expound on the benefits of the product. Doesn't get much more promotional than that. It's okay to say they make smartphones and art graphic programs, but to basically provide a product list is something you should only find in a promotional brochure. Nosebagbear is correct that there is also a notability issue with the draft as well. Regarding the logo, what was said on AfC's help page is the best advice. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:54, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

onel5969 - Should I remove the products section in that case? I attempted at finding some sources about the negatives of the company, but I assune there aren't any yet. And about notability, what do you guys base it off of? Number of searches on Google? I tried looking up a wiki page of the company awhile ago and saw that it didn't have one, and that's what had me decide to make the article. Does notibiluty have to be proven in some way? Should I just keep editing the draft until I find sources about the negatives btw?

Yes, I would definitely remove the product list. Two of the best guides regarding notability are WP:GNG and, since this is a company, WP:CORPDEPTH.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:59, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does having a product page have to do with notibility as well? For example, this company article has a section for its products, but the company is more well known https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_Corporation MemeTrooper (talk) 19:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kunal Agarwal

I write a lot on Indian songwriters; do not see the issue on this one. Contributions are within guidelines set - Billboard, and others. Ngagethesoul (talk) 02:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Creating Tejas Badgujar

Dear Onel5969, can I create page for Tejas Badgujar? Kindly go through 27th National Geographic Bee for details.. the subject is available in various news portals. ☆★Sunil Butolia (✉✉)

Hi Sunilbutolia - You must remember, I am simply another editor, not an authority. Another editor might see it differently. WP:GNG would be the applicable guideline in play. There are no specific guidelines for spelling bee participants. I will say that if I were reviewing an article on this individual, I most likely would recommend redirecting to the Spelling Bee page. The only reason this person is newsworthy is the spelling bee, and as such WP:BIO1E would apply. And they are not even the winner of the bee. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jayant Rajora

Dear Onel5969, Kindly review page Jayant Rajora sports person. ☆★Sunil Butolia (✉✉) 04:55, 12 July 2019 (UTC)sunilbutolia[reply]

Proposed deletion of Luing Andrews

Hello, @Onel5969:

I think the article should be kept. Because he is a notable supporting actor in various films and tele serious.

And I doubt he's a 'Hollywood Walk of Fame' winning actor. Becouse i found that in his IMDb photos and his twitter tweet. Please check the following links.

1, IMDb photo 2, Luing Andrews's twitter tweet

If you find enough reference in this regard, please add this to the article.

Superstars8547 (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry, he's simply not notable. His biggest role was in 8ish, which has dubious notability. Other than that, not a single other significant role. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:09, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

What kind of sources do you need for this article, 2011–12 Liga IV? This is the official page for this competion : https://frfotbal.ro/index.php?competition_id=2&season=130, is mentioned in the article.. :) Florin 1977 —Preceding undated comment added 15:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Florin1977 - Everything in the article needs to be sourced. The only current source in the article deals with the teams promoted to Liga III. The external link to the official page is a good resource, but until there are more independent sources, the article should remain a redirect.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:19, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Onel5969, check again, please! Florin 1977.

Nice job Florin1977! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank & Question Regarding Your Edits on Article

Hi, Onel5969, this is Nimitz Zhang. I recently wrote an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_cm_M.K._303_Flak), which you edited. Please accept my gratitude. I do have a few questions and am quite confused by your edits (this is my first time receiving an edit).

Is there a way I can see your edits? I cannot find any changes to my article and I am concerned that you edited my references.

Is there anything wrong with my article that requires editing? What did you edit?

Furthermore, I cannot find the article I wrote through Google when usually other Wikipedia articles pop up first. Is there any explanation for this (will some committee review my article first and approve it for public circulation)?

Thanks and best regards!--Nimitz Zhang (talk) 03:52, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nimitz Zhang. First, rather than using a weblink to the page, its much easier to simply put the name of the article in brackets, [[page name]], like 3 cm M.K. 303 Flak. Second, yes, you can see edits simply by clicking on the history tab near the top of the article. Once there you can click on the last edit you made, then on the edit I made and click on "compare selected versions". And yes, I did edit your references. What you did is called adding a raw link or a bare URL, and is frowned at on WP, since it can lead to link rot. You can go to WP:CIT and WP:CITE to learn how to properly format references and footnotes, and what should be included in them. Third, now that it has been reviewed, you should begin to see it in Google or Bing searches. Indeed, I just searched and it turned up first on both engines. Finally, there is the question of improving the article. Right now there are only two main issues which I see. First, only the first usage of the article term should be in bold. Other instances in the article should simply be in regular type. Second, there was an issue regarding the website name in one of the refs, but since I created that issue when I used "refill" to fix the bare url's, I've corrected it. Hope this helps, and keep up the good work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:36, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Much thanks! Nimitz Zhang (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Will work on the content. Pankaj verma 23 (talk) 17:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Count

Wiki mark-up link

Other useful links

Links for new editors

why deleted my page

BBC Radio 1's Live Lounge 2016

A question

One more thing

d

Fetal resorption

Reverting Bagwis

Requesting tag removal

Year in Radio

Reversal of article Acadêmicos do Cubango

Notice

Your thread has been archived

Edits to article

Thank you

Villini delle Fate section on Coppedè district

RD 1 request related to PT&T

Reversal of pool

A barnstar for you!

Please check edits

Move from Steve Huffman to Steve Huffman (businessman)

Review for Idah Nabayiga

Help needed

Wrong redirect

Adding articles to WikiProject Sports Car Racing

Bun Penny

Dexdexter

Port Moresby United / Star Mountain FC

Direct links or redirects?

Thank you!

I have unreviewed a page you curated

A barnstar for you!

Nomination of Alias Mrs. Jessop for deletion

Nomination of The Adopted Son (1917 film) for deletion

Page Review

Moylist Construction

Princes Arcade

Eyphrosine Kastamonitissa listed at Redirects for discussion

NorthPark1417

Mandi

Precious anniversary

Dablinks: anchors

NPR Newsletter No.18

Question

Thank you

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Wagyu (comedy duo) marked for speedy deletion

A barnstar for you!

My 5 new pages gone

Regarding two draft articles

Anyone for Everyone

Nomination of One Night (2009 film) for deletion

Cause and Effect Tour deletion

Government Railway Police nominated for deletion?

Marceliano Coquillat

A barnstar for you!

Oninaki

Sony Imagesoft

Pink BH

Smiley Award

Singapore Changi Airport

Singapore Changi Airport Terminal 3

Singapore Changi Airport

BamZ412, my story

A Barnstar For You!

DABnames

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Julian W. Lucas Deletion

QRG Health City

A barnstar for you!

Page Maniram Rajora

Page creation : Gobinda Chandra Khatik Road

Moving my netflix film articles to drafts

Shiv Khoiwal

Speedy deletion of Free Now

List of Radiant Episodes article

More help