This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
This page was last edited or modified by Edanjr (talk).
Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{You've got mail}} template to this page. I check my Wikipedia email account infrequently.
Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position. Basaliskinspect damage⁄berate 4 August 2013 Well said!Liz Read!Talk!
No matter how cute you are, expect no quarter in the cruel world of Wikipedia.
While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
That was just a little bit after midnight for me, Liz. I need to watch the late night comedy talk shows to unwind, while editing Wikipedia during the commercials and boring parts. Cullen328Let's discuss it00:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I totally understand although I'm an early bird, rather than a night owl. I edit while watching sitcoms that don't require rapt attention. My family has gotten use to watching me edit while the television is on. I couldn't do this if I was working on content creation but for evaluating spammy pages and tagging them, it's no problem. LizRead!Talk!00:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar
Hi Liz,
I appreciate your work on Wiki, and i need your help
Can you help me for editing ?
I dont think I made any personal attack. Martyr Tunom is a well known Saint who is closely related to the Holy Fire. Additionaly he is a person who gave a testimony of the existance of the Holy Fire, and paid this testimony with his life. You allow all other testimonies (mostly against Holy Fire), but you deny this one which was paid by a person's life. Some wikipedians dont want this perfectly legitimate and documented information to appear here. Not only they revert but also they delete the contribution fiercly. For this tottaly irrational attack what other reasonable explaination could you give, if not that they are possessed by deamons, the same deamons that caused Tunom's death? You will certainly be punished by God, for fighting against Truth. Tunom8 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tunom inserted three nails into the ground and said. In this way, the nails will be inserted into the eyes of those who do not believe. In this way the nails will be inserted in to your eyes too. Just pray that this to happen to you in this temproary life, and not in after life that never ends.Tunom9 (talk) 11:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Liz, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:1954 in volleyball, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Category is populated or is otherwise allowed to be empty. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. -- Amanda(aka DQ)09:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I know the criteria, DeltaQuad. Empty categories that have been tagged sit for 7 days in a separate category and often times get populated during this week. In those cases, we remove the CSD tag and they are removed from the category. It is only when they are empty for seven days and stay empty that they are deleted.
There are strict criteria for empty categories that are allowed to stay empty...tracking categories, category redirects, categories that are subjects of CfD discussions. Otherwise, empty categories are deleted. They can always be recreated if there later proves to be a need for them unless they were subject to a CfD deletion. If you ever see a CSD C1 tagged category that has pages that have been assigned to it, feel free to remove the tag from the category. LizRead!Talk!18:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz, sorry, I didn't know it was you that put up the notice, I know you are aware of the policy. I failed to actually look who put the notice as I just use a script that easily declines or deletes. I didn't notify for the two other ones. Had I known it was for you, I would have just declined without the automated notice. Apologies. -- Amanda(aka DQ)01:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was surprised by your message, DeltaQuad, but I don't mind your questions at all. I am disturbed by admins I think are acting on CSD notices without evaluating the page first. I declined one speedy delete the other day and then I found another admin had gone ahead and deleted the article. So, I restored it.
I'm not sure what to do but I am sure there are pages being deleted that if I had looked at them first, I would have removed the deletion tag. Probably not enough material to take someone to ArbCom but I think we have to rethink our mass delete approach. Especially when an article is in a sandbox or in draft space, we should allow pages to improve over time. I wish admins would spend more time educating new editors rather than obliterating their efforts. LizRead!Talk!01:35, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You moved your sandbox to M. Basheer Ahmed M.D. where another admin deleted the page because it was deemed to be a copyright violation, text taken from a press release (which you can see if you look at the deleted page). I deleted the sandbox page because it was a broken redirect to the deleted page.
Please remember that all content has to be original, written by you and not taken from any website, book or magazine. Please look over Wikipedia:Copyrights for more information. If you have any additional questions, I recommend visiting the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice. LizRead!Talk!20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Liz, I will re submit that article again after I fix these issues. I am new to wiki so I will take any help I can get! I think the descriptions of the organizations he founded may have been the problem but I'm waiting to hear back from the administrator that deleted the article. I wish he had given me a heads up about the problems and I would have fixed them right away. Anyway, hope your having a great day... and Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshorton11 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, can you offer some advice for me on this article? Can I get this article back in my sandbox as it was so I don't have to rebuild it? I know you are probably very busy but any help would be so appreciated. Also will I be able to resubmit this from my sandbox once I fix the issues? Wikipedia suggests using Special:Mypage to create a new article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshorton11 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have emailed you a draft. Please do not put it back into your sandbox without fixing the copyright issues or it will be deleted again. We can not have copyright violations on Wikipedia. If you want help with the article, I recommend vising Articles for Creation. And please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Good luck! LizRead!Talk!22:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done I have to investigate the editor, I just can't block a user because you say so. That said, you were right, they were spamming Wikipedia. Thank you for letting me know. I appreciate it. LizRead!Talk!23:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please undelete this page. I had added a few refs, but had not gotten the opportunity to fully source it yet. Thanks. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 10:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please restore Thonburi University F.C. because Thonburi University Football Club is a football club in Thailand, it competed in Thai League 4 since 2019 season. This is the club's data from Thai League official website. This article has deleted in 2018 since the club has not promoted to the professional league. at that time, they have not enough of sources. But now in 2019 season, They has promoted to Thai League 4 that is a professional league. We could found the club's info in the official website of Thai League that have a lot of data including fixture, result, standing, and all player's statistics. In addition, Thonburi University Football Club has competed in 2019 Thai League Cup and advanced to the round of 16 by beaten the club from the top division Samut Prakan City F.C.. This is the news from Thai League official website about drawing in the round of 32. And this is drawing in the round of 16 Thonburi University vs PT Prachuap, this is the match highlight. There are a lot of news about Thonburi University F.C. such as this showed that Thonburi University funded 5 millions Thai Baht to competed in the 2019 season of Thai League 4, and they will renaming to Thonburi United F.C. in 2020 season, now you can found this name on the club's official Facebook page that update every situations of the club. —Gunkiet (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm Ajack87. I wrote an article called the battle of parker's ferry. However, it got deleted for copyright infringement. Can I rewrite it again using legitimate sources? How can I fix it. What sources can I use that would be legal and legitimate for my article? And how do I site them properly? Ajack87 (talk) 00:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)Ajack87[reply]
Of course you can try again, Ajack87! Wikipedia:Copyright violations has information about copyright on Wikipedia but it is pretty dense. Basically, you can not reuse any material you find anywhere (websites, books, magazines, etc.) verbatim. The content of an article has to be written in your own words.
Thank you Liz. Thank you for the chance to fix my article and re-write it properly. Thank you for the Reference for beginners and the help introduction.
Sincerely Ajack87 (talk)
I feel supported by the message you left about the legal threat; I've had quite a few of them over the years from the same type of people (owners of small and dying television networks insisting they're not collapsing; one of them used their website to taunt me)...but this one got to me because of their tenacity; I'm glad I have support in these tasks. I thank you again. Nate•(chatter)08:16, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Encouragement is the least we can do for editors who face these threats. If it persists, please contact WMF Legal and let us know so we can block the new accounts. LizRead!Talk!00:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, Bogic. This is not uncommon. That's why we hold empty categories for 7 days after they are tagged in case they are later filled. We always check categories that are tagged to see that they are still empty before they are deleted. I removed the tag earlier today. LizRead!Talk!00:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your "This is a valid redirect" reasoning on this edit and this one. They were created today and created with an obvious capitalization issue ("gondola" not being proper noun) so sure, someone might type them in that way but we don't need redirects for that because Wikipedia automatically handles differently cased entries without the need for a redirect. That is, if either redirect did not exist, people could still type or link to either "Burnaby Gondola" or "Burnaby Mountain Gondola" and get to the right place. In fact, where you created the new redirect "Burnaby Gondola", you've actually added a redirect that wasn't needed, apparently because I asked for them to be deleted, so... could you reconsider? I don't see what we gain by keeping these that isn't already auto-handled internally by the wiki software. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Joeyconnick, I see your point. I think they were tagged incorrectly. Based on what you say, the correct CSD criteria is R3: Redirects as a result of an implausible typo or misnomers that were recently created. They fit that category. So, I've tagged and deleted them. Thank you for explaining your rationale for tagging them which was unclear to me. We have plenty of redirects with simple misspellings or other slight changes in title and it seemed at the time I reviewed them that these were valid redirects. LizRead!Talk!05:59, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response and explanation! I wouldn't have thought to tag these as "implausible" typos or misnomers because it's quite plausible (and indeed it happened here LOL) that someone might misname something using incorrect capitalization. I thought there was a category for recently created violations of WP:SENTENCECASE but maybe I'm imagining that. I picked G6 because it includes Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace and felt the creation was unambiguously in error (albeit a minor error). Anyway, no harm done, apparently. 🙂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 06:12, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I want to delete the page José de Gregorio since the correct name is José De Gregorio. That's why I redirected it and put the previous one out. Please delete to not have double page. --Cuidro (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the page is serving a useful purpose as a redirect page. This ensures that if a reader types in the incorrect name--José de Gregorio--they will be immediately directed to the correct name, José De Gregorio. Wikipedia has quite a few redirect pages because not everyone knows the correct spelling for names or terms or what the correct title of an article is. LizRead!Talk!19:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz reappointed full clerk
The Arbitration Committee is pleased to announce that Liz (talk·contribs) has been reappointed to the clerk team as a full clerk, effective immediately.
The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by e-mail to clerks-llists.wikimedia.org.
Hello Liz, my article has been deleted today. How can I do to prove that I'm the owner of the copyright of the page http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com/en/article-87.php . I created already a Creative Commons Licence CC-BY-SA 3.0 on this page (only this page) of my website to avoid copyright concern . But it seems it's not enough. Therefore I decided to delete the page http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com/en/article-87.ph from my website.
Please could you verify that it doesn't exist any article-87 on my website. I hope this will be enough to prove that I was the writter of this aricle , and that I am the owner of the website http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com. Consequently I hope you will allow me to re-submit again for review.
Thank you.
Hello. I seem to have accidentally reverted you at Category:The Dog and Its Reflection as you didn't remove the CSD tag. I read the deletion rationale, checked for incoming links, and read and rejected the note on the talk page. It was only after deletion that I saw you'd already deleted and restored. Sorry about that. Was it the message on the talk page that changed your mind, and do you want to undelete again? (Feel free to revert me). --kingboyk (talk) 03:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I thought when I restored the category, it would reset the category deletion date to August 7th, kingboyk. Yes, the editor who left a note on the talk page seemed a bit confused by the process so I gave him another week to find an article to place in the category. No problem with deletion, I'll just restore it. Sorry for the confusion. LizRead!Talk!04:10, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation on my talk page, Liz, and for extending the deadline. I didn't know that there had to be documentary proof for a pictorial category. Anyway, there were plenty of articles to mention in the new objection I have made on the discussion page. The trouble with fables dating back 2,500 years (as this does), is that they change title over time. An alternative title is "The Dog and its/his Shadow", which is traditional but confusing since the primary meaning of the word 'shadow' is no longer 'reflection' - although Webster's dictionary gives that as a secondary meaning. Sorry to be so technical! Sweetpool50 (talk) 08:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I saw you just handled the SPLC username issue, so just wanted to make sure we don't overlap with our editing. I'm looking at the page right now and I'll be dealing with some of the NPOV issues that their edits introduced. - Sdkb (talk) 18:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, Sdkb. I haven't looked at their edits, I was just looking at a list of newly created accounts to see if there are any group/company/organization-named accounts. LizRead!Talk!18:59, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
I have made a mistake in my wording in my edit summary. I was meant to say that I was fixing the description of what Cultural Marxism is, because the previous description was wrong. Next time, I will say "fixed inaccurate information", rather than "fixed typo". Thank you 122.108.183.105 (talk) 04:46, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to work on Zane Gardner article I am a once Martial artist turned painter from Dekalb Junction, New York I do have some pictures of myself as a martial artist and a painter ZanerG30 (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Zane Gardner
Is this to short now (born March 16th, 1990) once a martial artist under Tae Kwon Do and Combat Hapkido now turned a painter he paints with watercolors and acrylics he trained in Tae Kwon Do and Combat Hapkido trained until he got his 2nd dan black belt and brown third tip until his latest surgery happened. He was also known for his long range shooting ability in basketball and for the love of the game earned him the Don Petty sportsmanship award. He went to school Hermon-Dekalb Central School in Dekalb Junction, New YorK ZanerG30 (talk) 17:25, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz. I'm the editor who tagged Zane Gardner as an A7. If it wasn't already obvious, this guy is just trying to create his autobiography. I think a block would be in order if he keeps spamming. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Liz,
Hope you would be fine and doing well.
I am Harshanandtheking007 and yesterday i created a page named St. Joseph's Academy.
You have deleted my page citing the source http://www.formzero.in/school/St-Joseph-s-Academy and it seems you thought that i copied from there and created the page. No, that's not the case. That website has copied from the original source that is https://www.stjosephsacademy.in . I am a student of this St. Joseph's Academy School whose page you deleted. I was just appointed by my school to create a page of it.
So, I request you to undelete my page and I am thanking you in advance for the same from the deepest point of my heart.
Regards,
--Harshanandtheking007 (talk) 10:12, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Harsh Anand[reply]
Harshanandtheking007, it doesn't matter that it is copied from a different website, it is still copyright infringement. The article has to be in your original words, not copied from any source. It can not be undeleted if it is a copyright violation. LizRead!Talk!17:08, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You made the right decision, kingboyk. I've seen a lot of these autobiographies this summer. I think it's rare that someone who is 20 years old would be notable enough for a Wikipedia article unless they are a stand-out athlete or a nationally known activist. Someone with a YouTube channel with 80,000 subscribers? I don't think that would even make YouTube's Top 100,000 channels. LizRead!Talk!02:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz,
I am creating a page on PDBe-KB - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A2-25/PDBe-KB. It would be great if you can provide your feedback on the page so I can finalise it before making it into an official article. The previous page I created was deleted and I am not that experienced in creating new pages although I have edited pages before hence any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks A2-25 (talk) 09:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ilsetraut Hadot, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
I don't know that it should be deleted. I just know that it is empty. After 7 days, if it is still empty, it will be deleted. If you can find some stubs that could be placed in the category, please use it. We want categories that are being used! LizRead!Talk!19:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, CLCStudent. I've blocked them both for a month and rev'deleted their rude edit summaries. I'm editing right now before sleeping but I'm in the midst of overseas travel so if they return, either you or Hell in a Bucket please contact a more active administrator. Thanks again for catching these accounts before they do too much damage. Your vigilance is appreciated! LizRead!Talk!20:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi LiZ, You tagged Category:Climate change articles by importance for deletion. WP:WikiProject Climate change is a new project and we're doing a lot to get it off the ground. Please do not delete just yet. I left a more detailed message at the catgegory talk page. Please understand I'm going offline for several days, but havec been working steadily on categories, templates, and most recently finished a new 2.0 barnstar. Thanks for your patience. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realize that they were part of a WikiProject, NewsAndEventsGuy. I will remove the tags. WikiProject categories are typically exempt from CSD C1 tagging. I will try to make sure they are not retagged. But even if they ahyre, empty categories that are tagged fall into Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion and are not deleted unless they are still empty 7 days later which should be fine for your schedule. And if they are deleted, let me know and you or I can recreate them. No worries! LizRead!Talk!06:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for understanding and such a fast response, and even more.... I saw from your contribs that you are out with a large push broom.... thanks for doing a lot of usually thankless house cleaning! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
I am still traveling until tomorrow. So, there might be a delay in my response. But I do reply, you will probably hear back from me on Friday. Thanks! LizRead!Talk!07:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
article deletion
Hello,
I provided ample explanation of why the Michael Brunstroem article had previously been deleted in error on the talk page for that article, referring to Wikipedia's guidelines.
The guidelines state that an entertainer may be notable if their work is innovative, and I provided many sources of evidence that that was the case (he won an award for originality for crying out loud). I find it really perverse that you guys keep targetting the article. I understand why TheVintageFeminist is doing it, but the administrators?? What's gotten into you?
What is your justification for deleting it, apart from that it had been deleted before?
My justification is that the article had just been through a deletion discussion this year and the consensus was to delete the article. You can appeal that decision if you think it was closed in error at Wikipedia:Deletion review. I looked at the article as it had been recreated and it still didn't meet notability standards. If you had sources on the article talk page, you should have worked at incorporating them into the article. But the deletion discussion went into great depth, reviewing the existing sources and found them to be insufficient to establish notability. LizRead!Talk!19:23, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: For the record, Brunström first came to my attention in these two diffs: diff 1 and diff 2. I had never heard of him and decided to look at his bio which showed him to be non-notable. This was the response from Regularuk when I began an AfD Seems pretty vindictive of you to attack Brunström's page. I do not represent him.diff, and when I gave a warning about making personal attacks The way to convince me that you don’t have a vendetta is definitely to make a comment like this on my page. Very ironic.diff. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 17:13, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Heads up
Hey L, wanted to let you know I would be puling the maintenance tags off of:
Of course, GeoffreyT2000. Can you point me to a discussion of the undeletion of this article? I'm just curious as to whether there was any conversation about recreating a long-time article after it was deleted. Thank you. LizRead!Talk!07:53, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I could not find any discussion regarding the undeletion of the Super Why! article, which has been recreated by KStrain2000. For now, I have draftified the recreated article. Please re-delete the redirect SUPER WHY! and its talk page. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:34, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done, GeoffreyT2000. My apologies for the delay. I was off-line for much of the weekend. Having a link to the deleted redirects saved me from combing through my deletion log. Thanks very much! LizRead!Talk!14:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz. I was going to leave the following (or something like it, this is a first draft) on the talk page of the above 'template' (I believe there is a sister template too, which is very similar - ah yes, Wikipedia:TWA/Invite):
Subject: This doesn't seem to me to the best way to welcome a user to Wikipedia
I've just seen this template placed (alone) onto some new users' talk pages in order to welcome them. I think this approach - and the template itself - is highly dubious.
Please don't misunderstand me - I support this project. I recently welcomed an off-wiki friend to Wikipedia and left her a standard welcome template, and she took part in the Adventure and found it quite useful.
However, the Adventure and the invitation to "Play" won't be for everyone. I for one am not interested in "Playing" anything. What, then, would I learn from my being welcomed by this template? Well, absolutely nothing, as this template doesn't offer any other information or alternatives should I not wish to "Play".The standard welcome template is far superior as it offers various links to read and promotes the Adventure.
I paused for thought as the talk activity around the WikiProject appears to be very low. I then considered proposing it for deletion but, well, I'm not sure.
I thought it might be worth asking you what your thoughts are with regards to this template, whether it has value, and whether I should proceed with a discussion or a deletion discussion, or forget about it?
I'll close the template talk tab in the meantime, as I can always refer back to the diff here if I want to resurrect the draft! :) --kingboyk (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an immediate response to your suggestion but will think about it this weekend and offer my thoughts. There has been a lot of research done, some by WMF, on bringing new editors into the fold and helping them become valued contributors. I'll see if there has been any assessment about the Wiki Adventure.
As for WikiProjects, I once did an assessment of them and they really need somewhere between 5-10 committed editors to keep them going. Lots of WikiProjects get started by an enthusiastic individual but they need a core group to really keep them going for more than a few months. They are really demanding of people's time to keep them active. LizRead!Talk!02:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Liz. Just to make sure I'm being clear: I'm talking only about the templates (and their usefulness relative to the general welcome template which includes a link to the Adventure). The Wiki Adventure I have no problem with. Have a nice weekend! --kingboyk (talk) 03:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Islands of Taranaki
I've contested this. I only created the category yesterday and populated it as I was doing so. It certainly hasn't been empty for seven days. Grutness...wha?04:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize that the Twinkle message that is left for category creators is not more clear. Empty categories that do not fall into a limited number of categories (disambiguation categories, category redirects, categories that are the subject of CFD discussions, etc.) are tagged. BUT they are not immediately deleted. They sit in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for 7 days. Nothing happens to them for a week. If, after 7 days, the categories are still empty, they are deleted. If there are pages assigned to an empty category over that 7 days and it is no longer empty, the tag is removed and it is removed from Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion. Every week, a certain number of empty categories end up being filled and the speedy tags are removed. All you need to do is have at least one appropriate page/article assigned to an empty category over the next week and the tag will be removed.
But know that if an empty category is deleted, there is nothing to stop you from recreating it when if it can be later used. Categories that are deleted due to Categories for discussion debates can not be recreated but empty categories can be, at any time. I hope this allays your concerns. LizRead!Talk!04:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I know all that well - I've been an admin here for about ten years :) It's always worth checking how long since a category's been made before tagging it, though - if it's under 24 hours it could yet be filled. In this case I was just letting you know that the category had been incorrectly emptied,so wasn't really prod material. I'm glad you notified me though, otherwise I wouldn't have known about the prod! Grutness...wha?05:47, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz, I have User:Vatsmaxed's talk page on my watchlist, and I noticed your notification that you had nominated Category:Railway stations in Komaram Bheem district for speedy deletion under CSD:C1. As I read the criteria, the category has to have been unpopulated for at least 7 days before CSD:C1 applies. I don't think that was the case for Category:Railway stations in Komaram Bheem district which was only created yesterday. I note that there are some other categories you've nominated that are also new creations under 7 days old. Rather than revert a bunch of those, I thought I'd ask here; have I misunderstood the criteria? Thanks, (talk) 05:54, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think if you look at the conversation I had above this one, you'll find an answer to your question. Basically, the 7 days BEGINS when the page is tagged, it doesn't precede it. Without tagging an empty category, we have no way of tracking which categories have been empty 7 days. The deletion happens if the tagged category is empty after 7 days. If it isn't empty after 7 days, then the tag is removed and the category is not deleted. LizRead!Talk!22:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's the Twinkle message to category creators that needs to be changed. I proposed a change a few months ago to it but I have neglected to carry it out. You're right, it is misleading and it has created unnecessary anxiety. LizRead!Talk!22:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Masks in western dance, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Catherine Duncan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Dear Liz, I am Mary
I have been an intern in a chinese renowned company for months now. I was in charge of updating the profile of the company in wikipedia. Before my arrival there was already an article on wikipedia but the data were out to date. Few months after i started the updating process. the page got suspended by you. The name of the page was 'CHINT Group' and the article got deleted on August 3rd 2019. Could you please restore it or at least explian me what i should do for the page to be restored? if not the most recent versions, the previous one that already existed before i started updating it because the company does not have any wikipedia page now. All the information that i updated were correct,i was using the intern data of the company, problem is most of them have not been officially published. If it is the reason why you deleted the article, please kindly let me know how to remedy to this situation. Regards, Mary.
Hello, Mary,
First, I have looked and looked and found no email that has been sent by you.
The article that I think you are referring to has been moved around to a lot of different titles. The pages I deleted were broken redirects...they were redirects to a page that had been deleted. I did not delete your article, just few pages (CHINT Group, CHINT Group Corp, CHINT Group Corporation) that pointed to it.
I believe that ultimately, the article that was deleted was on the page Chint Group that was deleted by admin Jimfbleak because the article was promotional and because of copyright infringement which would have happened if you, or another editor, used content that was taken from your company website or another source. Wikipedia content has to be original, written by you, not taken from other sources. If you click on Chint Group, you can see the reasons given for the deletion. Jimfbleak might have some additional comments if you contact him. LizRead!Talk!00:41, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, thanks for ping. Usually when I delete a company article I post a COI query and guidance on the main editor's talk. The problem here is that there have been multiple SPAs (one blocked as a user name violation) and ip editors. However, I'd guess that this ip is 玛丽1218 and I've posted this guidance on her talk page. Because of the copyright violation it won't be restored as it was, and earlier versions are even more promotional than hers, so it needs to be recreated in accordance with the guidance I've given Jimfbleak - talk to me?06:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Advice
Hi Liz! You've always struck me as a decent person and I wanted to ask your advice. I hope this question isn't putting you on the spot. I recently received a BLP topic ban - I don't think it stands up to scrutiny, but that's a personal opinion and I may be interpreting policy in a strange or outright wrong way. Additionally, maybe it's for the best anyway that I stop editing. I don't really edit in areas which don't concern living people, as that doesn't interest me, and I doubt that I have a noticeably positive effect sometimes. Do you think I should appeal it or not? PeterTheFourth (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen few (none?) immediate topic ban appeals that have been passed. The only hope is that if there was a rogue admin who went against the opinions of every other admin participating in the discussion which I don't think happened here. There were some folks weighing in who didn't think it was a major offense but several people did.
I hope you can adjust your editing to accommodate this topic ban, which I think you could appeal in 3-6 months (without any violations). I think you have a positive effect on Wikipedia but I don't think you handled the AE complaint with enough seriousness which hurt you with the admins.
I hope you stay but, to be honest, I took two wikibreaks, one for six months and one for a year, and I came back with much more enthusiasm and energy so I don't think breaks are a bad thing. I encourage you to appeal the topic ban after a few months, when you've shown you can abide by the terms of the ban. Good luck! LizRead!Talk!04:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz - I hope you may be able to help. I stupidly moved a page I was working on in Sandbox into the article section. I had not finished working on the content or confirmed the validity of the citations provided by the band I'm representing, so can understand it not being up to standard. Other artist pages were used as a template for the script, and it was definitely not my intention to use the Wiki platform as a promotional tool. I disputed the speedy deletion, and asked that the article be placed back in Sandbox mode so I may continue working on it, but now I can't find the person who actioned the decision to delete. I was not advised which sections of the article were seen as propaganda/promotional, or if only the citations were misleading. I intend on rebuilding the page in Sandbox mode with stripped-back information. When I am done, if I move to the article section, and you still feel it doesn't meet the guidelines, may I request the page be put back into Sandbox mode instead of deleted? Thank you in advance for any time you take replying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsthezues (talk • contribs)
(talk page watcher) The page was Iron Empire; if you click on the red link, you'll see a log of who deleted it, in this case user:Jimfbleak. I agree that is was correctly deleted; Wikipedia doesn't host advertising, and we're only interested in what independent sources have to say about the article subject not what the subject has to say about themselves, and when it comes to musical acts we only cover topics that meet Wikipedia's very specific criteria for inclusion. If you think you can improve this to Wikipedia's standards I can restore it as a draft for you to work on, but be aware that unless you can demonstrate that the group meets these specific criteria we won't host an article on it, and that all promotional language needs to be removed from the article before it's published as a Wikipedia article and that every claim needs to be cited to a reliable independent source. ‑ Iridescent15:10, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Let me be the first to congratulate you on your 100,000th edit! You are now entitled to place the 100,000 Edit Star on your bling page! or you could choose to display the {{User 100,000 edits}} user box. Or both! Cheers, — MarnetteD|Talk20:43, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
Hello Liz! Please take a look at this. I have already warned that the page has suffered vandalism since 30 August and that edits that have altered the page cannot be reversed, if not manually. -Aihotz (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Any vandalism can be reverted, the article does not need to be deleted completely. Again, if you wish to seek to have it deleted, propose it at AFD along with your reasons and perhaps consensus of editors will be with you. But it is not eligible for speedy deletion. LizRead!Talk!03:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, my intention is not to propose that the page be deleted, but to alert that for a few days now that page has been totally altered. Proposing deletion has been the only (and fastest) way for other users to be aware of the situation.. -Aihotz (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't tag your article, I just carried out the deletion. I am reluctant to restore any content that has been identified as a copyright violation and I am not up to speed on all the intricacies of permissions and licenses (as I should be). Please contact one of the admins listed in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to investigate copyright matters and I will defer to their expertise.
Actually, one of these copyright pros, Diannaa is the admin who tagged your article for violating copyright so she might be best to speak to. Any of these admins handle these questions on a daily basis and will know exactly how to address your argument. I am out of my comfort zone here. Good luck. LizRead!Talk!19:19, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's basically continuous vandalism and reverts of vandalism. I realize that he doesn't like it protected but when it is just "vandalism-revert-vandalism-revert-vandalism-revert" etc. etc., it is exhausting for other editors to police it. The protection is only for 3 days and any admin can lift it if they disagree. Hopefully, it will discourage the recent vandals for hanging around until it expires. LizRead!Talk!20:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I noticed that you deleted this article after it was tagged for speedy deletion for having no meaningful content. However, I remember seeing at least some information on there, such as the creator of the character, etc. I agree that the article was extremely short (one or two sentences), but I'm not sure how this meets the CSD. You have more experience than me, so maybe you can teach me on this a little? Thank you. William2001(talk)00:05, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It didn't have enough meaningful content for an article in the main space of the encyclopedia. But it is perfectly fine to have this limited amount of content in a draft so I have restored it to Draft:Surly Squirrel (character) and will inform the article creator. It's a little surprising to me that you would speak up for such a weak article but you changed my mind. Maybe you can add some more substantial content to it. LizRead!Talk!00:17, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Johnbod when I closed his ANI complaint he had said "fuck off" on his user page so I assumed that was it for a while. I'll keep an eye on his account. I expect him to return, but hopefully with less of a single-minded focus on Machiavellianism. As far as an ANI complaint goes, I think I would have closed it even with no retirement. There was no support for any sanctions.
You might curb the dismissive language though...it only makes people angry and you don't want to be brought to ANI with any regularity. It's just a distraction from your good work creating and building articles. LizRead!Talk!01:46, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(EC) As per WP:3RR and frankly common sense, anything which undoes the edit/s of another editor in whole or in part is a revert. Adding templates once is not a revert. Adding templates back after they were removed is a revert [4][5]. It will definitely count against you in an edit warring case and so may lead to you being blocked. If you weren't aware that you had already done it once and it had been reverted so you were doing it again, this may be forgiven as an accidental revert but clearly when you say "this is being removed for no reason" [6] then you were aware that you were undoing the actions of another editor. Nil Einne (talk) 02:33, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I never said I would block you. I cannot do so since I am not an admin. And it does not look to me like your edit warring is sufficiently bad to merit a block anyway from the small amount I saw. If you want to retire that's up to you, as I told another editor recently in greater detail, you should do whatever is best for you provided it isn't something disallowed by the community. But if your are going to continue to edit here you need to understand what a revert is and that we don't like edit warring and will block editor's for it. Your earlier comments suggested a fundamental misunderstanding which needed to be corrected lest it causes problems. Note that I composed my reply to your initial 1:59 comment then got ECs Nil Einne (talk) 02:44, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the article was going to be deleted by prod within a few hours so moving to draft was in response to that, as there are sources that can be added, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 15:03, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, you nominated Category:Anarchist writers for speedy deletion because it's empty. The category was deleted by mistake last year and only restored yesterday after a deletion review; apparently it wasn't repopulated automatically when it was restored, so that will need to be done manually. Please don't delete it while I work on that. Jd4v15 (talk) 04:53, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've repopulated the category manually and removed the db-catempty template. Hopefully that was the right approach to prevent speedy deletion! Jd4v15 (talk) 05:49, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Jd4v15, if you created the category, you shouldn't remove the speedy deletion tag yourself but I don't think that's a big deal now that the category is no longer empty. After an empty category is tagged, it sits for 7 days before it it deleted in case it was emptied improperly. Looks like that has been taken care of. But thanks for letting me know. I check the empty category category daily so I would have gotten to it myself but it looks like you've done it so no worries. LizRead!Talk!16:52, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
to start with kindly let me highlight that I'm a newbee at Wikipedia. While highly appreciating the good content, I'm still getting accustomed to the article requirements (whereas I am also closely studying the official guidelines).
You deleted my draft page on the German shipping company "Peter Döhle Schiffahrts-KG" with the reason „G8:Redirect to a deleted or nonexistent page“ which I frankly speaking don’t understand. Merely a citation of a publication on the company by an independent publishing house as well as a link to their corporate website was included in my draft.
Furthermore, I would be happy to add some references like Financial Times, etc. and not only on this company, but actually others later on as well. But before preparing different drafts, I would like to know the exact requirements.
I think I deleted a broken redirect, I didn't delete your article. I think your article was moved (the page should state that) and then it was deleted by admin RHaworth on grounds that it was promotional. It will state this if you look at the deleted page. A broken redirect is just a redirect to a page that was deleted. You might contact RHaworth if you want more information. LizRead!Talk!16:31, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz, I've requested CSD for some of the categories if you wouldn't mind doing the rest? Also noticed you've been doing it for a long time too, I'll leave it to you if that's ok? Don't want it to look as if I've taken on the task, also busy at the moment and you've been doing a great job on this :) Steven (Editor) (talk) 01:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Liz, you are a veteran here, please advise regarding this [7] Should I really ignore it even though I'm sure it's about me. I'm really worried. If that gets posted, people might want to research who the racist editor is. Can they at least be told that an editor is concerned and asked them to rewrite it to make it less obvious? Please advice. GizzyCatBella (talk) 02:25, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
From what I could tell from the ANI summary, the page has been deleted. I think you shouldn't agonize about it if the page has been deleted. If it still exists, post a link to the page and I'll see what I can do.
But, honestly, unless you have an editor who is hounding you, which I hope is not the case, most editors are preoccupied with their own work and won't spend their precious time doing background checks on other editors. Like I said at ANI, most of us have been cursed at and maligned here. Such is life on the internet. Unfortunately, many people are not polite when they get agitated online. Life online can be abrasive. If the personal attacks are direct and personal, we can sanction an editor but it really has to cross a line into racist, sexist or anti-Semitic rhetoric.
Thank you Liz. I will. Hopefully, this is the end of this. I was very worried, that's why my desperate efforts for help. I really appreciate your reply; I can go to bed now. Thank you again.GizzyCatBella (talk) 02:55, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, I'm so sorry to retake your time, but the editor who created the page is now advocating for sanctions against me. According to them, I violated my Topic Ban by sounding my protest. If you have time (only if you have time) could you take a look at it? Here is the link to the conversation[8]. All I want is to have this chapter behind me and forget about it. GizzyCatBella (talk) 05:51, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know, Catfurball. I posted a warning on their talk page. We typically don't block or ban an editor after one or two bad edits. In the future, feel free to post a level 1 warning on an editor's user talk page if you come across an act of vandalism. If there are previous warnings, go ahead and post a higher level warning. If there is extensive vandalism over time, post a notice at WP:AN/EW. LizRead!Talk!22:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please Undelete
Hello, Could you please consider undeleting 2019–20 Florida Gators men's basketball team? The content of the article was fine despite being created by a banned user. I contributed several edits to it since it was created and all of the other conference teams' articles are up. Manually recreating the article from the point it was (full schedule, roster, etc.) would be a very long process. Thanks! Benhen199722:21, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at this article and found that it was originally deleted as a PROD which would enable it to be restored upon request. THEN, it was recreated by a blocked editor. So, I've restored the article from its beginning, before the blocked editor worked on it. I hope you go into the edit history, look at the earliest edits and utilize what was there before it was deleted the first time. Because there is still work to be done, I've restored it as a draft. You can find it at Draft:2019–20 Florida Gators men's basketball team. Good luck with it. LizRead!Talk!22:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The PROD was likely due to there being no sources available at that time. With the preseason exhibition just over a month out that is no longer the case. Benhen199723:48, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There are several other college basketball team articles that are currently deleted. Could you or a team of admins do the same action to these pages? Benhen199723:52, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This editor created dozens and dozens of articles on college sports that were deleted today, mostly by Barkeep49, although some by me. They'd have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If other editors did the bulk of editing, a case could be made for restoration. If they were a solo project by the blocked editor, they can not be restored.
It might help to know that he produced a huge number of these articles over a couple of days in August and then in September so I think they were likely modeled on previous year's seasons with new data typed in. Most of them were unsourced and some had been proposed for deletion. I think any editor well-versed in college basketball could reproduce them fairly easily with information from a university athletic department website. LizRead!Talk!00:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello and welcome to the September newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2019.
June election: Reidgreg was chosen as lead coordinator, and is being assisted by Baffle gab1978, Miniapolis, Tdslk, and first-time coordinator Twofingered Typist. Jonesey95 took a respite after serving for six years. Thanks to everyone who participated!
June Blitz: From 16 to 22 June, we copy edited articles on the themes of nature and the environment along with requests. 12 participating editors completed 35 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
July Drive: The year's fourth backlog-elimination drive was a great success, clearing all articles tagged in January and February, and bringing the copy-editing backlog to a low of five months and a record low of 585 articles while also completing 48 requests. Of the 30 people who signed up, 29 copyedited at least one article, a participation level last matched in May 2015. Final results and awards are listed here.
August Blitz: From 18 to 24 August, we copy edited articles tagged in March 2019 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.
Progress report: As of 03:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 413 requests since 1 January. The backlog of tagged articles stood at 599 articles, close to our record month-end low of 585.
Requests page: We are experimenting with automated archiving of copy edit requests; a discussion on REQ Talk (permalinked) initiated by Bobbychan193 has resulted in Zhuyifei1999 writing a bot script for the Guild. Testing is now underway and is expected to be completed by 3 October; for this reason, no manual archiving of requests should be done until the testing period is over. We will then assess the bot's performance and discuss whether to make this arrangement permanent.
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today!
Da Vinci Nanjing has been editing for 11 years! And ArnoldHimmler hasn't edited for over a year. You can try and file an Sock puppet investigation but ArnoldHimmler is stale. Checkusers don't retain data from that long ago. You need proof that these editors are the same person, not just your suspicions. And I'm not a checkuser so file a report at SPI if you think sockpuppetry is going on. LizRead!Talk!23:52, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Jenifer Rajkumar
Hi Liz, you restored the article after it was speedily deleted (I'm confused how that even happened), but was there any content at Talk:Jenifer Rajkumar or was it blank to begin with? I don't want to fill in the generic WPs if that would get in the way of restoring it. Thanks! JesseRafe (talk) 13:35, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, while I was removing the speedy deletion tag, it was deleted by another admin. So, I restored the article. It had been tagged with a request from the creator of the page to delete it. But if you look at the edit history, you can see that there have been other editors working on the article. Normally, we only delete pages on request of the page creator if they are the primary or sole editor. If other editors have made contributions, this request for deletion is less automatically granted.
Hi, yes, I know that other editors have made contributions, as I'm on of them. That's why it was confusing that the page was deleted in the first place -- was that an error on the part of the other admin who did so or is that the new norm? Just slapping on a request and it gets automatically deleted and if you as another admin hadn't noticed that'd be that? Doesn't seem right. Thanks for restoring the talk page! JesseRafe (talk) 12:54, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, admins vary with how they evaluate CSD-tagged pages. Some admins, like DGG, are very thorough and will check & see if the deletion rationale is valid. Others, are less thorough in assessing deletion tagged pages. I think that's all I'll say about that. LizRead!Talk!15:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
CSD log
Hi Liz,
Just calling to thank you for maintaining your public CSD log.
I came across a series of categories that were accidentally emptied by a careless template merge. It was very useful that I could easily trace them for undeletion from your log.
Of course this was also because you are doing consistent work on deleting empties – thanks for that too.
If you do happen to spot a bunch that look fishy, as if they might have been emptied accidentally or out of process, feel free to ping me to check. User:BrownHairedGirl may also be interested if it looks like a template issue.
Of course, Fayenatic. At times, I feel like I should not keep a CSD log because, well, I have a great many edits to it! It's almost all of my edits to User space and is even listed on Wikipedia:Database reports/Pages with the most revisions! But it can be handy if I need to see what has happened to a category I tagged. Also, UnitedStatesian also tags CSD C1 categories regularly as well and I think he might have a CSD log.
There are times that I do wonder about some tagging. There are dozens and dozens of Featured topics categories currently at Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion but WOSlinker, an admin, tagged them so I assumed this was okay. What I sometimes do is look at who tagged the category as being empty and see what else they have been editing if I am unfamiliar with that editor. But I will alert you or BHG if I see something suspicious. LizRead!Talk!20:18, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that you have two or three accounts. I hope this is the right one. I haven't done an article over a redirect in so long that I forgot I don't need to speedy delete. So I undid my speedy delete request. I will add text later if you have no problem with that. I started the article on a user page here and you are welcome to join in, at anytime. Thanks for contacting me. That was confusing. Regards, ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I recently noticed the draft was deleted and I am trying to have that action undone so it can be edited to the point where it is approved. Can that be done? It's the first article I've written and I've made all of the requested changes. If there's any help you can provide it would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
Edanjr (talk) 14:37, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like your draft was deleted due to copyright issues which means that the content was not original. I can see if any of it is salvageable but it would be easier to start from scratch.
Also, I am moving today so it will be a while until I can investigate this. If you are in a rush, it would be quickest to start over or ask the deleting administer to review it. LizRead!Talk!15:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the update. I was hoping the email I sent would have cleared up the copyright issue (the article was written based on info I provided to that site). I will contact the deleting administer as well. Thanks again!
Edanjr (talk) 16:56, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Done. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:32, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library
lists.wikimedia.org.
Guideline and policy news
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
Administrator changes
Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
Floquenbeam • Lectonar
DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Technical news
