User talk:Deb

Coming here to ask why I deleted your article? Read this page first...

If that doesn't help, read these FAQs.

1. Why did you delete my page when I hadn't finished writing it?

Answer: Don't create new articles unless you are sure they meet wikipedia's criteria, particularly notability and verifiability. If you want to practice, there is the sandbox facility and Wikipedia:Articles for creation where you can get a second opinion from a more experienced contributor. And if you really can't help yourself, use {{underconstruction}} so other people will know you are still working on it.

2. Why did you delete my page for advertising? I wasn't trying to advertise!

Answer: Read Wikipedia:NPOV for guidance on how to word an article so that it doesn't sound like an advertisement.

3. Why did you delete my page for advertising? It was about a non-profit organisation!

Answer: Non-profit organisations advertise all the time - it's still promotion and the rule applies to them just as it does to commercial bodies. See no 2 above.

4. Why did you delete my article without warning?

Answer: Because you are not entitled to a warning if you don't follow the guidelines. See no 1 above.

5. Why didn't you do a google search and find references for my article and put them in for me instead of just deleting it?

Answer: Because I don't have time to do the boring bits for you. I have enough boring bits of my own to work on, thank you.

6. You have a very interesting view of neutrality. The authors you give credence to have a definite point of view and you discount those that disagree.

Answer: There is of course no answer because this is not a question. It's a snide comment added by someone who doesn't understand the NPOV rule. Possibly a Ricardian revisionist.

And please SIGN YOUR POSTS, otherwise I don't know who is asking me the question!

Archives: 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22

1930, 1933, and 1935

Those versions are not good version's. Matt Campbell (talk) 18:23, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Also you had no reason to remove Bobby Bland from the 1930 page, he wasn't a minor musician, also I didn't claim any ownership over anything. Matt Campbell (talk) 18:34, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Also when you said "Last good version" I think it's not a good excuse for you to remove info like that. Matt Campbell (talk) 23:54, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Removing things and moving them to a more appropriate place are not the same thing. Deb (talk) 06:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes I'm aware, but what's your excuse for removing some of them? Matt Campbell (talk) 15:40, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

I don't need an excuse because I have just given you a reason - they have been moved to a more appropriate place where they were previously missing. Deb (talk) 15:46, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Well you made a mistake with some not all of them though. Matt Campbell (talk) 15:53, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Also I forgot to ask. Why does it matter anyway? Matt Campbell (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

You didn't forget, you did ask, and I answered. Deb (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

All I'm trying to say is that you made a mistake on a few individuals, but not telling you there names though. Matt Campbell (talk) 21:04, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Karan Vohra (actor)

Okay so I put up a csd for Karan Vohra (actor) which someone did remove saying it is not a duplicate when not a redirect, not sure if that was an admin or someone who does not understand the rules. Since you deleted the other one by the same creator you might want a look. Thanks. Wgolf (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Well the page creator moved it back as a article, you might want to check to see if it should just be deleted or not. Wgolf (talk) 02:30, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of List of fictional diaries for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional diaries 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/List of fictional diaries 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. JDDJS (talk to me • see what I've done) 04:44, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Pujashoponline

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Can you please help me understand Article A7?

im trying to improve a new Servicar article, however, i dont know what A7 is. can you give me an example of A7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Railpage (talk • contribs) 16:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Clarification

This edit summary is not referring to your edit, but rather to the prior edit, which was apparently an advertising-only editor concerned about "brand confusion." Didn't want you to think that was in reference to you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:12, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Minnesota, etc.

Hello. No problem, but thanks for the thanks. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Correcting day of the month list entry pending changes

Thank you for returning to fix the changes I made to pending changes you had made. Expanding the edit summaries as you did were a great help to me. I will remember to dive deeper the next time I work on pending changes. I see now that the birth date of neither the actor nor the astronomer were sourced in their respective (May 31) articles. — Neonorange (Phil) 02:49, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

It's really kind of you to come back and say that. I appreciate it, thanks. Deb (talk) 08:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Jeannie D

FYI on the recreation.--Cahk (talk) 08:49, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Ha - you beat me to it by seconds!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Reggiebauer&action=history Toddst1 (talk) 18:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Great minds think alike... Deb (talk) 18:02, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

ANI

I just wrote a long response explaining my choice of ANI was due to general inexperience with conflict resolution here. Unfortunately, mobile editing is cruel, and I accidentally refreshed the page by scrolling up too far in Chrome. 0 “you’re about to lose saved changes” warnings. How annoying.

tl;dr of my lost message: I don’t know any admins, TeaHouse feels like it’s for pure newbies, but maybe it would have been best. I really didn’t know where else to go. Thanks for your response.

Responding here because continuing in side discussions seems counterintuitive after having requested closure. 1F6😎E 08:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Reviewer's Barnstar
		This is for your valuable efforts for reviewing articles under pending changes protection. Thank you PATH SLOPU 14:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Arij Kop

Can you please put back my text on Arij Kop, so that I can continue with it? GentleDjinn (talk) 12:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi Deb...

1. I am not affiliated with AIROAV.

2. User:Danielcohens (my page) here on Wikipedia has a link to my profile in the Google Hall Of Fame with my picture and a long history of security credentials and contribution. So my publication on AiroAV is not about PR, rather SECURITY.

Please note, I am a professional security consultant and am on Google, AT&T, Adobe, Apple, and Microsoft's official website's with my name and picture (Daniel Cohen, Speed-net.com) for knowledge in security and contribution. My name coincides with my own username here on Wikipedia. So that is my "affiliation" to security and purpose for creating the page. But to be clear, my company Speed-net.com is not affiliated to AiroAV or any of their businesses and you can do a simple Google search for "Daniel Cohen Speed-net.com" and find the necessary references and authority qualifications for my contribution to protecting online user activity.

Now to address AiroAV. It's an Anti Virus company. Everything I stated is clear fact and referenced. Wikipedia is a historical fact site. According to the Register.co.uk and another tier 1 media source FossBytes, earlier last month AiroAV identified a dangerous malware variant spread via the Adobe Flash Plugin that undermines the security of Mac users by re-writing Google and Bing search results and turning computers into a proxy that can be used for malicious activity. This is HISTORICAL FACT and in the future, reference on Wikipedia can prove invaluable for security researchers to follow up on.

Finally, I was in Prague at Hackathon last month hanging out with Brian (the head of Wikipedia Security). So please don't suspect me for exterior PR agendas, and in the name of community contribution, please do not support erasing the page or references that identify malware putting millions of MACOS users at risk. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielcohens (talk • contribs) 21:46, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, @Danielcohens:. I'm not sure why you chose to place your message in the middle of all the others, so I nearly missed it, but that's not an issue. I didn't delete your article because I was not convinced it was advertising and I wanted to ensure that you were aware of the COI policy and had the chance to declare any interest if you did have any. (In view of your work, it was possible you might have had.) However, I don't control other administrators' actions and apparently at least two others felt that it was promotionally worded. Deb (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Continental Express, Inc. Deletion

Deb,

I have noticed you deleted my article Draft:Continental Express Inc for promotion, and not writing in a neutral perspective. As I have noted before with DRM310 Undisclosed paid editing: Continental Express, Inc. and with official contested deletion 'I have read over my article Draft:Continental Express Inc numerous times to check for wording in which would make it seem 'Unambiguous advertising or promotion'. As I have noted in my discussion with DRM310 Undisclosed paid editing: Continental Express, Inc. on her talk page, I have never been paid, I am not being paid, nor will i ever be paid to produce, or make edits to the article Draft:Continental Express Inc. If you are saying that my article I have written is promotional, I could argue that any article on wikipedia is promotional as it is a public encyclopedia pertaining information for other people to read. The nature of my article is not in any which way promoting Continental Express, Inc. as an entity or for business sorts. I have only created the article as an informative page for people learn facts about the company and the founder itself in a non-promotional way. If you have any SPECIFIC examples of wording as to how my article Draft:Continental Express Inc is promoting the company itself or promoting anything in any which way, please cite the exact wording and I will do my best to comply with your discrepancies. Otherwise, please lift my speedy deletion on my article so it may be published.' Please explain SPECIFIC examples to me how my article is promoting or not neutral in any which way. If my article is promoting, then how isn't CR England, Werner Enterprises, and Knight-Swift. If you can cite SPECIFIC examples how my article is different then theirs then I will gladly comply to your requests. Otherwise please have my article reinstated.

thank you

Brad Gottemoeller (talk) 15:31, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The ship has sailed... Deb (talk) 21:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Deb, did you receive my emails? I am not sure if they made it through or not. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Request for Page Unprotection

Hi Deb, I come peacefully to seek your Unprotection from a page Bella Disu. I believe the original creator abused all Wikipedia policies and guidelines, but I'm different. I am experienced editor and currently create visibility for African women through the Women In Red Project. Bella Disu is very notable and deserves an article on Wikipedia. After the page creation, you can protect the page again to avoid vandalism. Thanks in anticipation for your cooperation.SuperSwift (talk) 11:50, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

July events from Women in Red!

July 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 127, 128 Check out what's happening in July at Women in Red... Virtual events: New topics: Sports / Education Geofocus: Microstates Continuing initiatives: Suffrage / #1day1woman Initiatives we support: Atari Women University of Edinburgh 1000 Women in Religion Editor feedback: Check out the conversations regarding Sports, Sports, Sports! Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Monday.com is now Monday (software)

Please allow the page creation. Uziel302 (talk) 09:41, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Removed

I tried to flag your attention here but it's since been removed. I'm not sure how the {{yo}} template works once it's removed, but I thought I'd memorialize it here. It looks like you're away for a while. Enjoy your time off. Toddst1 (talk) 04:48, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

2018

I've proposed removing some entries at 2018's page. The Optimistic One (talk) 14:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey! Sorry to bother ya, I've just seen the talk page for 2019, and I noticed that there's alot of old discussions from the start of the year, and I was wondering if you would maybe move half of them on to an archive page? Thanks. The Optimistic One (talk) 00:24, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I think it's a bit early for that. I'll look again in a couple of weeks. Deb (talk) 06:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Are you sure? There's like 60 discussions in it all together, we could do with getting half of it archived. The Optimistic One (talk) 21:48, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Remove talk page access

Hey, I wanted to let you know that user you just blocked indefinitely posting promotional content again. this post which I made you a request to remove talk page access, Thank you. Sheldybett (talk) 06:32, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

June 1; Deaths

Hello! I am here just to inform you that I have got references (inline citations) for Ani Yudhoyono's death and added it to the deaths section in June 1. Thank you. Samuelsp15 (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Adverbial clauses

Hi. I'm not quite sure why you have objected to my edit. You have also said that an adverbial clause of purpose is not a clause. Would you like to discuss? It is what's known as an essential clause, as it's the purpose of the verb. Specifically, it's an essential adverbial clause of purpose and is therefore not preceded by a comma. Could I ask why you think what you do? NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:28, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You should have discussed after being reverted and I explained my reasoning. It's a pretty simple one, this. https://www.btb.termiumplus.gc.ca/tpv2guides/guides/wrtps/index-eng.html?lang=eng&lettr=indx_catlog_c&page=9NAz60BVJKd8.html#tphp NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:36, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

The example you've given doesn't cover the situation under discussion. "For the second Test" isn't an adverbial clause. Deb (talk) 18:39, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes it is. If you'd like me to simplify it for you, you could rephrase it as 'in order to play in the second test', which in this instance is what 'for the second test' means. Do you have any actual reason why you're saying what you are? Simply stating something demonstrably incorrect isn't the best argument.NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I've already explained to you what parenthetical commas are for. But even if "in order to play in the second test" is understood, the word "Leeds" is not part of that clause and therefore should continue to be separated from it by a comma. Deb (talk) 18:46, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I have explained it to you. Leeds.NEDOCHAN (talk) 18:51, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

In what way do you imagine that "Leeds" is part of the "clause"? Deb (talk) 18:52, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Leeds is part of the main clause. The non essential information in the main clause is Headingley. They went to Leeds to play cricket. They went to Leeds to watch a film. Not they went to Leeds, to watch a film. NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:10, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

If that were true, the sentence would need to read "They went to, Headingley, Leeds to play cricket." I think you should be able to see what's wrong with that. Deb (talk) 19:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

What's wrong with that is the comma after to. The rest is correct.NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:13, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

No, it's not, because "Leeds" is parenthetical; it's not part of "to play cricket". Do you understand? Deb (talk) 19:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I have provided a very clear link to explain this. Leeds is part of the main clause. The main clause is not separated from the adverbial clause as the adverbial clause is essential in order to understand the purpose of the main clause. Headingley is separated from Leeds by a comma as it's not essential in order to understand going to Leeds. Leeds is not 'parenthetical', Headingley is. They went to Leeds for the second test. If you would like to provide a source, as I have, that supports your case, I'd be happy to read it. I have been teaching EFL for 11 years. You haven't been able to identify an adverbial clause. I'll need some pretty compelling evidence.NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:22, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

No, Headingley is not parenthetical. It's fairly obvious that you don't understand the concept of parentheses. They went to Headingley for the second Test. The word "Leeds" is only there to ensure that people understand where Headingley is. There are a few ways you could re-phrase it, for example:

1. After this incident Atherton and England headed to Headingley for the second Test.
2. After this incident Atherton and England headed to Leeds for the second Test.
3. After this incident Atherton and England headed to Headingley, in Leeds, for the second Test.
4. After this incident Atherton and England headed to Headingley, Leeds, for the second Test.

The one version that is definitely not correct is: "After this incident Atherton and England headed to Headingley, Leeds for the second Test", because that makes the word "Leeds" into part of the second phrase/clause, which it clearly isn't. Read the rules on adverbial clauses again; there is absolutely nothing to suggest that your version of the sentence is correct. Deb (talk) 19:31, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Remove Headingley. Remove the comma after it. Ignore it. That's what you're missing.

This is from the link.

When placed at the end of the independent clause, an adverb clause may or may not require a comma, depending on whether it is essential to the meaning of the sentence.

Essential clauses provide essential information and are not set off with commas.

The package came after you had left. [identifies the time of delivery] The police will press charges if the witness’s statement is true. [stipulates the condition governing the action in the main clause] Note that clauses introduced by until and the conjunctions of comparison than and as … as are normally essential:

They took shelter in the cave until the storm ended. Jorge is taller than Greg (is). No one can play that sonata as well as Marsha (does). Non-essential clauses provide additional, non-essential information and need commas:

The package came at 8:30, after you had left. [The phrase at 8:30 identifies the time of delivery; the clause is just additional information.] The passenger apparently arrived late, if the witness’s statement is true. [The adverb clause if the witness’s statement is true has no bearing on the passenger’s arrival time; it is just an added comment that is not essential.] Note that clauses beginning with although, even though, though and whereas are normally non-essential:

Lisa won the prize, even though (although, though) the competition was stiff. Cara wanted to paint the room blue, whereas Paul preferred green.NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:33, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

You're completely off the point on this one. If you want to remove the word "Headingley" and then either leave out the commas or just put one after Headingley, that would be grammatical, but it would be missing out important information, i.e. the ground where they are going to be playing in Leeds. But if you keep in the words "Headingley" and "Leeds", you have to enclose "Leeds" between commas, because it's parenthetical - it's not essential to the sentence. "An adverb clause may or may not require a comma", out of context, doesn't help. None of the examples you've copied out above cover parenthetical commas, nor do any of them explain why you think there shouldn't be a comma after the word "Leeds". Parroting sentences you've read in a book isn't, unfortunately, a guarantee that you have understood their meaning. (See what I did there...) Deb (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

The example explicitly refers to commas. I have changed the text to a version with which we will both be happy.NEDOCHAN (talk) 19:43, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

If you really need an example, look at this, particularly the second, third and fourth paragraphs: https://archives.cjr.org/language_corner/where_have_all_the_commas_gone.php Deb (talk) 19:47, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

In-line citations on October 12

I just tried to add back in some birthdays from October 12, only for you to revert the edit, telling me "the guidelines say there must be in-line citations and there aren't". Which guidelines do you mean? Also, do you mean on the page October 12? Because almost none of the people there have citations on that page, and as I said, all the ones I added back have citations on their own pages for their birthdays. And why remove just those specific ones? Why not, say, Iris Apatow, whose page contains no source for her birthday? JorWat (talk) 22:11, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Also, most of those people were added (by me, actually...) to the page last year. Why are they now being affected by the new rules about citations? And why was James Graham fine? JorWat (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Definitely worthy of deletion

Hi Deb,

I have to admit that I didn't read the guidelines and can completely understand why the page I created was deleted. However, I'm wondering if I might be able to get a copy of the text I posted. I understand if that's not possible/allowed but thought I'd ask.

Thanks EdmondsBrown — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdmondsBrown (talk • contribs) 20:16, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't understand why you want it.Deb (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

I never intended to make it public but I somehow stumbled through creating the page and bumbled my way into submitting it for review. I mainly wanted to get a screen shot of the page as a gag to be used for someone's upcoming surprise party. But I understand the need to avoid publishing false information, especially when it paints someone in a bad light.

There was/is no ill will toward the subject of this page but I also understand more clearly now that Wikipedia is not the right platform for this type of nonsense. Regardless, have a great weekend and sorry to create unnecessary churn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdmondsBrown (talk • contribs) 01:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Semifinal

No hyphen. Did you bother to look at how semifinal is spelled in all other instances in the article, or any of the previous years' articles, in prose or tables? Or any of the tennis tournaments, for that matter? Clearly not. And did you bother to look at all the previous years' articles for Wimbledon to see the lead layout? Clearly not. 173.91.60.85 (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Read the guidelines on lead paragraphs and stop spouting nonsense. You are very obviously a sock, and logging out doesn't mean that no one will notice. Deb (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

I'll take that as a no; that you didn't bother to look at the correct spelling of the word. Nor did you even look at prior year articles for the tournament. Ah, a sock or sockpuppet... someone who uses more than one account to edit. So now we're in attack and accusation mode, in addition to your prior threatening mode. Is that what you do, attack people from all angles when they simply disagree with your edits. I suggest if you have proof that I'm doing something improper that you report it to whatever authorities can look into that matter. Otherwise, you can probably get into trouble for making such a serious allegation without any proof to back it up. I mean, "very obviously" is the strongest conviction one can have. Are you always this defensive and angry over someone changing an edit of yours? 173.91.60.85 (talk) 18:44, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

"correct spelling" - as in the US, you mean? Check out how Wimbledon spells the word: [1]. Deb (talk) 12:17, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

"correct spelling" - as in all tennis tournament articles on Wikipedia, I mean. But you never even looked to find out the Wikipedia protocol on the spelling of this particular word, which has alternate spellings. It would've taken seconds to find out. And common sense would tell any editor that the spelling of a word with alternate spellings should be consistent throughout an article. You failed to check that, also, in this particular article. 173.91.60.85 (talk) 15:09, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Bored...bored...bored...

Days of the year

Sorry for accepting some bad pending edits on days of the year articles. To be honest, I wasn't aware of WP:DOYCITE and I naively assumed that it was okay to accept unreferenced additions since many of the existing entries were unreferenced. I've now read the relevant policies and will follow them. Thanks for reverting my edits. SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 21:20, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy declined for Midlife Cowboy

Hi, can I ask why you chose to decline the speedy and draftify that article? I would have thought it was unambiguously promotional, including as it did details of opening and location, as well as being created by an account with a COI. It's also of dubious notability, so I'm not sure it will ever be "ready for mainspace". Triptothecottage (talk) 23:10, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:DealerRater

Hi Deb, Thank you for taking the time to review my article "DealerRater." It seems it was deleted due to advertising-like material. I believe the page was written in an unbiased and objective point of view. As a newspaper writer and journalist, I was trained to write about subjects without taking sides. Be that as it may, I would be happy to edit down the article however you see fit and remove any "advertising" language. Sadly, I am unsure what parts of the article you were referring to. This was my first article, but before I publish anything else, I'd like to ensure I am doing all correct. I read the rules and regs and really thought I followed all. Thank you and I look forward in hearing from you soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurwith2 (talk • contribs) 14:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Shark suit

Hi! Thanks for deleting the advertisements I tagged of Shrkba8One, but I think you might have gone too far on this article. It looked like it was a good article previously, but this editor inserted a promotional copyvio. I requested a revdel, and you seem to have deleted the whole page. Would you mind undeleting the good revisions? KSFT ^(t|c) 08:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@KSFT:The further back I went, the more bad edits I found. It looked to me like it was an advert right from the beginning. It seemed to me better to start from scratch. Deb (talk) 09:06, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

User talk:Mindcypress6ty

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 10:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019 at Women in Red

August 2019, Volume 5, Issue 7, Numbers 107, 108, 126, 129, 130, 131 Check out what's happening in August at Women in Red... Virtual events: New: Film+Stage / Indigenous women / Millennial countries Continuing: Sports (through August 31st) / Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: August's Indigenous Women event and the REDress Project Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Subscription options: Opt-in/Opt-out

--Rosiestep (talk) 06:43, 29 July 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

you have deleted page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganesh_gargote ganesh gargote is the biggest PR in marathi language film industry he has worked for more than 400 movies drama and serials you can find his name in 52 articles in wikipedia