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

18 September births

Please help me understand why you removed my edit. All the people I listed had a Wikipedia page and therefore are 'notable' surely. Your comment was no new entries without "inline citations". I don't understand what that means. Can you please explain what an "inline citation" is? Rhyddfrydol2 (talk) 20:36, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

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)

Dennis Relojo-Howell and Psychreg

These two articles have now been improved. Can we now remove the advert and COI warnings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClassEsu78n (talk • contribs) 05:48, 14 August 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)

Why my article has been deleted?? Ketsrubelle 19:01, 25 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ketsrubelle (talk • contribs)

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

please let me know wheather these links for ganesh gargote are reliable links or not https://www.rediff.com/movies/2008/jun/30slide4.htm http://www.muhurtnews.com/ganeshgargote https://mr.wikipedia.org/wiki/गोळाबेरीज_(चित्रपट) https://www.loksatta.com/manoranjan-news/padmavati-movie-controversy-censor-board-sanjay-leela-bhansali-1591166/ https://marathimovieworld.com/moviedetail/odh.php https://marathimovieworld.com/?s=Ganesh+Gargote https://www.hindustantimes.com/india/the-marathi-screen-beckons/story-op8GnO853HkrjC9mWjV6NK.html https://maharashtratimes.indiatimes.com/editorial/samwad/marathi-cinema-promotion/articleshow/49118713.cms https://divyamarathi.bhaskar.com/news/BOL-marathi-actor-bharat-jadhav-turn-as-a-producer-4307681-PHO.html?seq=4 http://marathiworld.com/gaiir

i dont have any relation with ganesh gargote but as he is biggest pr in marathi film industry i wanted to create his article please reply

To whom? Deb (talk) 22:07, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

BitcoinZ page deleted?

Hello, please explain why you deleted this page? Please explain me where you see “Unambiguous advertising or promotion” this page is only info page about btcz. Lest me explain

You said “We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia”, but is’s community coin, everyone can do their contribution. I am a volunteer, and i decided to write wiki page about project.

“avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles“ it’s not my organization, btcz exist without any leaders. Many project include to their wiki article official web link. A There only 2 official links 1-web site and block explorer, 1 link github source code, and another 2 links i added, cause some wiki editor mention to me that i have to add wp:sigcov and wp:independent and i include 2 links which i found. Btcz small project and no review on new york times etc.. Again, i’m valunteer who decided to made page. I tried to made page which only consist true information without any coin prices and any attractions. Only main occurred changes like algo change... I’m newbie on wiki, I understanding that i can make mistakes, but this page which you’ve delete it’s info page and not more. Any Links is not necessary there.

I’m discussed about that article with community members before move it from draft to main, as i understood you cannot justify your decision except referring to you personal understanding. Yes i’m not native speaker, but another community members can fix my mistakes. About external links i told you. You can easily delete links, why all article?

If violation of rules is only links please restore BitcoinZ article and i will clean all links except github link. Thanks

Deb, understood Thanks

Music By Women Festival

Deb, could you please restore this and move it to draft for improvement. (I know I can do it myself, but I like to ask). It seems likely to be notable , and the promotionalism seems removable. DGG ( talk ) 06:17, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Chairing of the Bard

Thanks for putting the place names into English - I think that's more appropriate on the English site. I've done some that you missed. --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Mohamad Barakat

You moved this article to draft after a single purpose account destroyed it for the umpteenth time.[2] Please restore the previous version that is well sourced, correct, and has been edited by numerous editors during more than a year without complaints.[3] If you have issues with that version, please specify them. Omikroergosum (talk) 18:38, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

You cannot just move an article to draft space because you personally think it doesn't have enough content. There are well established criteria and procedures for this, and at the very least you should specify what you think is lacking, and you should have used the talk page. Please rather block the single purpose account that vandalizes this article time and again, presumably also with aliases. Omikroergosum (talk) 18:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

I already submitted it to review as you might have seen and I find it extremely rude to move an article that has many reliable secondary sources and has been edited by a number of users for more than a year to draft without even elaborating on the reasons, and not even on request. Omikroergosum (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

From WP:Draft:

"The aim of moving an article to draft is to allow time and space for the draft's improvement until it is ready for mainspace. It is not intended as a backdoor route to deletion. As a matter of good practice the editor moving a page to draft should mark its talk page with the tags of any relevant projects as a means of soliciting improvements from interested editors.

...

Requirements for page movers

To unilaterally move an article to draft space, you should:

• notify the author (this is facilitated by the script User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js),
• be accountable for your draftification decisions per the standard described at Wikipedia:Administrators#Accountability

If an editor raises an objection, move the page back to mainspace and list at AfD."

Please follow the rules and good practice in the future. Since it seems to me you are not the only one who is not aware of them and users should be held accountable for such actions I brought it up at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#WP:Draft. Omikroergosum (talk) 16:12, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

FxPro

Hello Deb. Re the protection you've added to FxPro could the same be done to Draft:FxPro? The repeated recreator of the mainspace article has started a new draft on the same subject. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw that but I'm not sure I have good cause to delete at the moment as the present wording isn't promotional. Deb (talk) 09:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

I wanna ask why you delete my page without citing any reason. Its so rude. Im translating the FxPro page which already exists in german, spanish, russian, turkish language. its for general reading purpose not any advertisement.

Already explained on your talk page. The fact that there are articles about it on other Wikipedias doesn't alter the fact that it was promotionally worded (the Spanish version is also tagged as promotional). Deb (talk) 11:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Psychreg and Dennis Relojo-Howell

These articles are properly sourced. Templates have been removed for Dennis Relojo-Howell and Psychreg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.148.60.72 (talk) 13:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

hello

A barnstar for your recent edit to 2019 in politics and government. and for all your edits to Wikipedia in general. wow. I see that you've been active here for a while. nice to meet you! thanks for all your work. cheers!! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		for all your work on Wikipedia Sm8900 (talk) 13:49, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Perfect participles

The possessive perfect participle is a beautiful structure. 'John's having left the building made my entering of it far happier'. Anyway I have compromised. Discussion preferred in future. Best wishes.NEDOCHAN (talk) 14:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

By all means do discuss. Deb (talk) 14:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Removal of Revisions

Could you tell me why my Revisions were removed. As far I so know, there is nothing that needs edited for the Inline Citations like you said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GovernorLegislator (talk • contribs) 18:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thanks for your support for my unsuccessful RfA. Editors like you are the mainstay of this project. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

fyi

I answered for you at [4], if you think it necessary to add anything. DGG ( talk ) 20:51, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Fargo44/Adler1997/GITMOE?

All I can say at this point is here we go again.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/GITMOE --Thescrubbythug (talk) 18:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Religion deletion

Church of God, a Worldwide Association has been deleted three times in past years. It is a real church organization which EXISTS, and therefore deserves an article to recognize its very existence. I want to know about it. I do feel you are being too argumentative concocting fussy reasons for denying a right. I'm trying to be an objective Wikipedia commenter. George Slivinsky (talk) 20:00, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @George Slivinsky: No, it does not. You might want to read Wikipedia:Existence ≠ Notability and Wikipedia:Existence does not prove notability for more information. Regards SoWhy 20:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

I don't think the article was deleted due to lack of notability. George Slivinsky (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

There's an article called Church of God. It's a disambiguation page. If you are talking about some other article, please be specific about what it is. Deb (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 at Women in Red

September 2019, Volume 5, Issue 9, Numbers 107, 108, 132, 133, 134, 135 Check out what's happening in September at Women in Red... Online events: New: Law / Military history / Writers / Geofocus: defunct countries Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Missing articles about notable women by "nationality" vs. "country of citizenship" Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 16:23, 27 August 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Can you please undelete my page.

It was written impartially. Several other users simply stated that the references needed to be improved, so I don't know why you've taken it upon yourself to delete the page without first giving us the chance to improve it.

Many Thanks,

RobPositive — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobPositive (talk • contribs) 15:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Maybe you could let us know what your connection with the company is before I consider that request. Deb (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Restoring a deleted page

I have put a notice on my user page that discloses my compensation and addresses potential conflict of interest. Now that I have done this, can you store the page I created for Bedford Technology, LLC (company) Shanemurphy22 (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

No, I'm afraid not. I have re-read the deleted text and in my view it still meets the criteria for speedy deletion. If you are not happy with this decision, you can open a request at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Deb (talk) 14:24, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Deletion before contesting

Deb, you deleted my article prematurely. I am contesting the hold on publishing already and found you had simply deleted. Are you able to undo the deletion? I was provided an option to contest and you completely bypassed my right to do so. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sccros (talk • contribs) 19:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

First article deleted

Hi,

I've just written my first article and it's been rejected. I appreciate your point around advertising, but i followed a very similar approach to that of Tony Robbins and I don't understand how mine is different and has been rejected. Any pointers are much appreciated. Thanks (RKleaderlikeyou (talk) 10:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC))RKleaderlikeyou

I don't understand reasons for speedy deletion

Deb, you put the page Ty Bennett up for speedy deletion under G11 citing "unambiguous advertising..." and also state that it appears to be promotional. Further, you insinuate a relationship between me and the subject. I have no such relationship, we've never met and I have no connection to him, and I wrote the article as objectively as possible (which is why it has a ton of objective citations). Can you please give me an example of something I wrote that is unambiguous or promotional? I'd like to write even better Wikipedia articles in the future and I'd also not like to have my hours of hard work speedy deleted just because someone didn't like it. Any advice is welcome. Cheers, tbc32

NYZCCC

Hi Deb, You nominated my draft for speedy deletion under suspicion of advertising. I have since removed any non-objective parts of the article and added more citations. Would you mind reviewing it again and letting me know if there is anything else I can improve? Thanks and hope you’re well. SahmSchiller (talk) 01:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Also, you removed the photo of the meditation room even though I myself took it. Please clarify? Thanks again. SahmSchiller (talk) 01:27, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

A second look if you would be so kind

Hi, Deb. I've made adjustments to this pending article. Per your advice, I ran a revised version by the Teahouse and received some great feedback and progress towards having the article published. Please take a look if you have a spare few minutes and I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks! Sccros (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Days of the year articles

Hi, I'm curious. What is the requirement for adding a name to the above? I thought it was possible if the person had their own article in Wikipedia. Have the requirements changed? This is not an urgent request. Regards Denisarona (talk) 11:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your fast reply. Again, sorry to disturb you, but I don't understand what else is required if the person already has an article. Regards Denisarona (talk) 11:57, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Many thanks for your help. That was a long discussion. Anyway, it's a bit clearer now. Enjoy!! Denisarona (talk) 12:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

October Events from Women in Red

October 2019, Volume 5, Issue 10, Numbers 107, 108, 137, 138, 139, 140 Check out what's happening in October at Women in Red... Online events: New: STEM / Fashion / Geofocus: landlocked countries / Stub Contest Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Women vice Chancellors in Top 200 universities Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The last three messages have been deleted. If you want to see them, you'll have to look at the history. Deb (talk) 17:10, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Ty Bennett

Hi Deb. You recently deleted a page that I created Ty Bennett. Is it possible to get that page put onto the talk page or onto my sandbox? I got some good feedback on the Articles for Deletion page and would like to improve the article and resubmit. - tbc32 (talk) 014:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm prepared to restore your text into your sandbox if you remove the overtly promotional content that's already in there. Alternatively, I could just speedily delete that myself. Deb (talk) 10:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

I've removed everything from my sandbox. But I would like to know what made the article I was working on "overtly promotional". Obviously that wasn't my intent. Any advice you could give me to improve my writing would be very welcome. Cheers. Tyler (talk) 02:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for the suggestions! Natalie17 (talk) 06:18, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Fat fingered idiocy

Apologies for this - mobile phone mishit. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:43, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Scanlan follow up

Hi Deb,

Following up on the earlier Scanlan flag. Thanks for letting me know! I am helping Scanlan create the page - since it’s been a significant company in its community for almost 100 years, having a simple page with an overview of its history and function is important.

I completely understand concerns around making entries biased or promotional, so I would welcome any edits to the site to make it better for Wikipedia users. Would you recommend re-editing in the Sandbox? Again, the primary purpose is to inform of the company’s existence, not to market any products.

Apologies for the oversight, and thanks again for the heads up!

Bold North (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2019 (UTC)Bold North

Thanks!!! ♥

Thank-You Deb For being so nice!! (SmartCaptcha (talk) 15:29, 10 October 2019 (UTC))

Deb, as you have recently moved my article, can you help with the current submission. I have re-submitted it today after re-writing as my previous tag said that it had some promotional stuff and needs to be written again in order to meet the encyclopedic form. Can you tell if my current submission is good to go or does it need further improvement? (SmartCaptcha (talk) 15:35, 10 October 2019 (UTC))

Deletion?

According to the "standard" most of Wikipedia should be deleted! (Wallumbase (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC))

The article Copysafe PDF was added to support a forthcoming edit to the article at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PDF_software and was written similar to other supporting articles linked from there. In fact one was used a template and wording simply replaced where applicable. If my article does not satisfy the "standard" then none of the articles associated to "PDF Software" do either. So what is the purpose of "PDF Software" and why are all the other PDF applications listed and how can they be acceptable when all they do is "list the apps features" which seemingly is deemed to be "advertising"? (Wallumbase (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2019 (UTC))

I've already explained this on your talk page. You'll need to find a better argument than "other stuff exists". Deb (talk) 06:40, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

PDF24 Creator

Hi Deb. You speedy deleted PDF24 Creator, which was kept at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PDF24 Creator. I looked at the cached version of the deleted article and do not consider it to be "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Would you restore the article? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 07:41, 12 October 2019 (UTC) @Cunard:, Thanks, I missed that. The version I deleted was substantially different from the one that was kept, but isn't any worse in terms of its promotional content. I deleted after a complaint from another editor who pointed out that his recently-deleted article was similar. I have restored, even though I don't think it's notable and I still think it has promotional content, so I've tagged accordingly. Deb (talk) 07:55, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of The Residences Providence

I agree that page was, at the time you deleted it, fairly advertising-like. However, it looks like it had been a more neutral article for a while until someone added the ad material[5]. Would it be reasonable to undelete it and then revert the article to prior to that edit? DMacks (talk) 19:38, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! DMacks (talk) 02:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...

"I have enough boring bits< of my own to work on"
... you were recipient no. 2047 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:14, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

And I didn't even know! Deb (talk) 06:55, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Wanted your opinion on something

Do you think the page Nuseir Yassin should be moved to Nas Daily because of the common name? IsraeliIdan (talk) 15:47, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

New York Zen Center for Contemplative Care

A while ago, you informed me that the article did not meet the standards for publication. I have since removed any "weasel words" and added a sentence to the opening paragraph that I think shows the Center to be notable. Mind taking another look and letting me know if it's improved? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SahmSchiller (talk • contribs) 03:05, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Baron Cobham concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Baron Cobham, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:40, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

November 2019 at Women in Red

November 2019, Volume 5, Issue 11, Numbers 107, 108, 140, 141, 142, 143 Check out what's happening in November at Women in Red... Online events: New: Librarians / Leaders / Geofocus: Asian Women Month Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman / Stub Contest Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Disappearing articles Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:57, 29 October 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Michael III

With reference to the date of birth of Michael III, your source seems to contain a typo or other form of mistake. In cases of genuine scholarly uncertainty it is always best to give multiple dates, with citations, rather than delete any and give the reader a false sense of certainty, as this is essentially 'own research'. Urselius (talk) 11:14, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

There are a number of books - such as Skylitzes Chronicle - which give the 19th, however, the definitive article is by Cyril Mango, who states that the balance of evidence supports January of 840. I have added this with a citation to Mango's article to the page. Urselius (talk) 13:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

"Mary Jane Evans (Q20804657)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mary Jane Evans (Q20804657). Since you had some involvement with the Mary Jane Evans (Q20804657) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Grace Ihejiamaizu-- will we, nihil we

Well that's three of us now. I started to delete the thing and then had a doubt. Should we leave it or send it to AfD?-- Deepfriedokra 16:58, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Chinese American Alliance (CAA) Organization Wiki Edits deleted and copy right request

Hi this is Majxuh. I am not officially registered or affiliated member of the organization. I am new for wikipedia and learning. I am a volunteer and will try to write as objective as possible. I have contacted the organization to ask them and to include a statement for Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License on their website.

Is there a way to retrieve my original page history source? I see that they are completely deleted?

I also requested to have them to have a statement on their official website at http://caaus.org "CAA grants permission to copy, distribute and/or modify contents on this website under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License v.3.0 and GNU Free Documentation License."

Will this be sufficient? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majxuh (talk • contribs) 21:59, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:44, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi i am currently improving the norwegians of somali decent article

i debra i am currently reviewing and contributing to the article Norwegians of somali decent and i have noticed a lot of out of context and false information in regards to the actual sources that was quoted and i respect your help in improving the article i aslo believe that a new lead should be written thank you so much for your contribution--Kndnm64 (talk) 20:32, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

February 3

Regarding February 3, my revert was to correct a change that an IP user had made across the board relating to Emperor Ping of Han. Mr Xaero ^☎️ 19:58, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

September 27

Regarding this revert, you are mentioning that the referenced link can't be accessed. Which one - the original page (which is now a dead link, so that can't be accessed), or the archived one from WebCitation as well (which I have no problem accessing)? MPFitz1968 (talk) 08:52, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Kate Charles for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kate Charles 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/Kate Charles 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. HalJor (talk) 01:43, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Warning: Immigration and crime in Germany edit warring where you have deleted 3 times the same content

Your recent editing history here and here and here shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree.

In the three examples above you deleted valuable material added by A Thousand Words, then you were reverted by Pudeo, you persisted, I reverted you, you persisted, and finally 1Kwords had to fix your deletions.

To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. XavierItzm (talk) 09:53, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Sadly, you have misunderstood what happened. The fact that people reverted instead of discussing on the Talk page doesn't mean that I made the same edit three times, nor did I delete anything "valuable", only badly written POV content. The fact that you insist on keeping it doesn't make it any good, and "tit for tat" actions like this just make you look ridiculous. Deb (talk) 10:13, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

new lead for somalis in norway

can you also add a Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section on the page as well, as we clearly need a new lead for the article.--Kndnm64 (talk) 11:21, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

the existing one contains fraud deportations of somalis extremly negetive aspects of the somali community in norway i would appreciate if a new lead is created for this page also it doesn't seem neutral but one sided it would be better if the lead contains a summarry of the entire article.--Kndnm64 (talk) 12:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

thank you so much for the new lead you have created for the article --Kndnm64 (talk) 13:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

December events with WIR

December 2019, Volume 5, Issue 12, Numbers 107, 108, 144, 145, 146, 147 Check out what's happening in December at Women in Red... Online events: New: Parliamentarians / Classical musicians / 2019 deaths / Geofocus: Arab world Continuing: Suffrage / #1day1woman / Stub Contest Editor feedback: Check out the conversation regarding: Disappearing articles Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:42, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

User talk:Communitymacau77

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 09:30, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion at DRN

User:Deb - I realize that this happened three days ago, but I have only now followed up on it. I see that you deleted a statement by Santasa99 from DRN: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard&type=revision&diff=928762311&oldid=928760327&diffmode=source Did you consider the statement to be a personal attack, or was there a violation of discretionary sanctions? Why did you remove it? If you thought that it violated talk page guidelines as a personal attack or otherwise violated civility, I will defer to your judgment. However, in general, when I provide a statement for back-and-forth discussion, its purpose is to let the parties say silly stuff that can be ignored.

This isn't why did you delete my article. This is why did you delete someone else's insulting post. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

Tess Vockler

Hi Deb,

I am here because you recently gave my page a speedily deletion due to promotion.

This page should not be speedily deleted because this is a fan page for Tess Vockler, a DJ who I follow. She does not have a page already, so I wanted to create the page for her. I listen to her music & have been to her performances, and Wikipedia is where I find most of my favorite artists' information so I figured I would create the page in case anyone else came across her and was a fan of her music.

Could you please explain to me why this is considered promotional? And if so, what I am missing from the resources I have found on the site?

Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pholcomb9 (talk • contribs) 05:09, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion and Semi Protection of Draft: Fred Schebesta

Hi Deb,

I saw that you recently deleted the page Draft: Fred Schebesta and also added a semi-protection tag. You also left a message on my tag page. I understand that you may think the material is promotional, I am more than happy to edit it however I am unsure what parts you think are promotional (please let me know). However, would you please be able to update the tag and allow for the page to exist.

Cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avreetk (talk • contribs) 22:09, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Peace Dove

Peace is a state of balance and understanding in yourself and between others, where respect is gained by the acceptance of differences, tolerance persists, conflicts are resolved through dialog, peoples rights are respected and their voices are heard, and everyone is at their highest point of serenity without social tension. Happy Holidays to you and yours. ―Buster7 ☎ 00:28, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi am a norwegian somali and i just saw that your edits were reverted i understand their was a sockpuppet but their was no need for your lead to be deleted as well i would appreciate if you can restore your lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacoob316 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

somalis in norway article

Hi am a norwegian somali and i just saw that your edits were reverted i understand their was a sockpuppet but their was no need for your lead to be deleted as well i would appreciate if you can restore your lead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacoob316 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Harrick Plasma Deletion

Hello Deb,

Thank you for reviewing my recent article on Harrick Plasma. The article was deleted, I believe mainly because of my link to the Harrick Plasma website and the comment on over 4,000 peer reviewed technical articles. I see how these can appear promotional, so they will not be included again. I believed, at the time, that this would hold up as a good source because, if followed, the link displays all 4,000 citations.

My intent was to focus on the research, and not to promote. I believe Harrick Plasma easily fits within wikipedia's notability standards considering the shear number of third party sources. I could pivet from research articles to news sources, but those actually seemed much more promotional to me. If there is an aspect of this that I am missing here, please let me know.

If you have any additional comments that may help me, that would be much appreciated.

Thanks, Rarmbru Rarmbru (talk) 14:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

A watch

over the contributions of Gameofshadows, a long-term-SPA will be welcome :-) (Mentioning, since the article was redirected by you, as an alternative to G!!-deletion.∯WBG^converse 08:01, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

fCite

Dear Deb,

Did you read my explanation (on the article talk page) before the deletion of the page? Could you explain in which way I violated the Wikipedia rules?

--Lukasz.P.Kozlowski (talk) 16:25, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Ok, I'll not be spitting in the wind. I have better things to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukasz.P.Kozlowski (talk • contribs) 18:14, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Merry Christmas, Deb! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Vespasian

There is no dispute about my bad English, but with revert in article December 20 you have returned old vandalism or mistake. Vespasian has not been in Rome on December 20 AD 69, but in Egypt. De facto he has become emperor by acclamation. Look article Vespasian chapter Aftermath of the civil war.Analitikos (talk) 05:18, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for correction. I've replied on your talk page. Deb (talk) 09:29, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

January 2020 at Women in Red

January 2020, Volume 6, Issue 1, Numbers 146, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153 Happy Holidays from all of us at Women in Red, and thank you for your support in 2019. We look forward to working with you in 2020! Online events: New: Activists / Public domain / Geofocus: Central America / Year-long campaign: Sports! Continuing: 2019 deaths / #1day1woman Editor feedback: Help us plan our future events at the Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

Nomination for deletion of Template:1910s in music (UK)

Template:1910s in music (UK) has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:58, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pinnacle Industries

Hi Deb, Thanks for reviewing the article.

1. I do not have any association with Pinnacle Industries.

2. I saw that you recently deleted the page Pinnacle Industries and also added (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) tag. I understand that you may think the material is promotional. I am more than happy to edit the content which is more in-line with the guidelines; however, I am unsure what parts you think are promotional. Looking for your valuable inputs in this respect. Please let me know how I can make changes in the previously created/existing content, could you please restore this and move it to draft for improvement.

Vmaske (talk) 07:18, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michael Wilding (disambiguation)

The article Michael Wilding (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Disambiguation page not needed per WP:TWODABS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Michael Wilding (disambiguation) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Wilding (disambiguation) 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/Michael Wilding (disambiguation) 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. Boleyn (talk) 13:33, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for feedback

Hello Deb

Thank you for your speedy review. I would like to know whether you can suggest how to correct the errors as I have stated below:

The article has 1 external link to the company website. Do I remove this?

Otherwise I have read the Wikipedia rules and wrote the article based on published articles and styles.

I am not being paid for this article or have any affiliation with the company. I want to do so in the future, but I asked a few companies if I could write about their business on Wikipedia for free to gain some experience in navigating through the process. I have three companies who have agreed to this and I will receive no compensation as I did not guarantee any results. I do however let them read the article before I publish.

If you have any more advice for me I would truly appreciate it as I understand you are very busy.

Hope to hear from you soon and again thank you for your assistance.

Kind regards Phoebe (SpiderWorx - It is my online username for everything) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.131.29.62 (talk) 10:31, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Please sign properly or I won't know who you are or what you are talking about. Deb (talk) 11:12, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Race car

I only change racing driver to race car driver for the sake of consistency as it is the more commonly used term. Leebo131 (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Lady Margaret Sackville (1562–1591) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lady Margaret Sackville (1562–1591) 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/Lady Margaret Sackville (1562–1591) 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:29, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Joseph Karr O’Connor

Can you explain your concern of conflict of interest here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joseph_Karr_O%E2%80%99Connor

Deletion of page Padmakara Translation Group - request to restore

Dear Deb,

On the 9th January 2020, you removed the wiki page "Padmakara Translation Group", on the grounds of copyright issues. But the text, in question, had been taken from a website of the Padmakara Translation Group itself, and cited, so there is no grounds for this, I think. This is a non-profit organisation that belongs in Wikipedia because of its value to society, and Western Buddhism in particular, it's not a company, I know that they actually don't depend on sales or marketing, because all of their translators work on the basis on scholarship funds, and sponsorship like from Tsadra Foundation (see below).

I've just collected some links from other foundations and so on to try prove it's worth. I don't belong directly to the organisation, but "we" my girlfriend and I both noticed that the page had been deleted, because the content has been highjacked by this website: https://pt.qwe.wiki/wiki/Padmakara_Translation_Group . Which is displaying the page you deleted but as a way of showing advertising. They are abusing wikipedia material, and translating it with automatic translation.

This is an institution that cannot have its page merely deleted, because they are recommended by all the great teachers of Buddhism today, starting by the Dalai Lama himself. I just started to edit their page because there were abusive links placed there, and one was old.

Some other reference Links: https://khyentsefoundation.org/2016-khyentse-fellows/

http://www.tsadra.org/translators/padmakara-translation-group/

http://www.tsadra.org/translators/padmakara-translation-group-2/

https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Padmakara_Translation_Group

https://www.shambhala.com/authors/o-t/padmakara-translation-group.html#author-blog

https://84000.co/about/translators/

https://encyclopediaofbuddhism.org/wiki/Padmakara_Translation_Group

http://buddhism.lib.ntu.edu.tw/DLMBS/en/author/authorinfo.jsp?ID=14957

Therefore I request that the page be reinstated without the changes I made on the 9th January 2020, or else say what needs to be corrected.

Thank you for working on wikipedia, A. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaral Rodrigues (talk • contribs) 14:54, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I don't understand why you are asking for the page to be reinstated when you have already started work on a new draft. You need to go to Wikipedia:Teahouse if you have questions about how Wikipedia works. Deb (talk) 14:58, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Marathon_Group_(russian_company)

Hello. You deleted my article Marathon_Group_(russian_company) for advertising, but it seems to me that this is the result of a misunderstanding and, possibly, my lack of understanding of the features of the English literary style.

The company itself is very interesting both in the context of taking control of Magnit, the largest Russian food retailer by the state-owned VTB Bank, and in connection with its active presence in the Russian pharmaceutical market (there was a time when it entered the top 7 among Russian pharmaceutical manufacturers) and a failed merger with Naсimbio - russian semimonopolist in vaccine market, stateowned via Rostec.

Could you restore this article to me in draft page? I would like to finalize it, and do correct by removing possible problems whith advertisment-style clauses.

Personaly I have no connection with this company or its owner and writing my articles for my own satisfaction. Best regards Rus Investigator (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020

Your recent editing history at Kate Winslet shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on others again, as you did at Talk:Kate Winslet, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Krimuk2.0 (talk) 13:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Involved Admin

Please note that you have violated WP:INVOLVED with your recent block on WP:3RR where you were involved in edit warring. I would suggest unblocking and letting another admin at WP:ANEW to do the needful.--DBigXrayᗙ 13:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that.

You'll have noticed that the user's been blocked previously for the same thing. This present article is the first interaction I've ever had with him, but he's tit-for-tatting like mad. I'll lift the block if you'll replace it. Deb (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Violation of WP:INVOLVED is a bigger concern here and is ground enough for de-sysopping. We can discuss the merits, but You should unblock him first. I am not an admin, so I cant block him or replace the block. File an ANEW if you want.--DBigXrayᗙ 14:00, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I know, although I wouldn't agree that I was edit warring as I was still trying to achieve consensus by trying out different wording while Krimuk was repeatedly reverting me. Grateful for your intervention. Deb (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for agreeing to my request. I am not an admin so I cant block anyone here. Please file an ANEW if you feel a block is merited. thank you.DBigXrayᗙ 14:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Gee, thanks. Deb (talk) 14:08, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I had to revert you on Kate as your edit still contained controversial content on which both were edit warring. Please propose this on the talk first and attempt compromise on the talk page. For now I have reverted to WP:STATUSQUO version --DBigXrayᗙ 14:13, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

And now you're edit warring. That's disruptive if nothing else. Deb (talk) 14:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

There is absolutely nothing controversial in my edit. You can see from the talk page that there is no consensus for Krimuk's preferred wording, and you're simply encouraging him in his efforts to play off one person against another. As for "grounds for de-sysopping", that simply shows up your lack of understanding of how adminship works. Deb (talk) 14:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Deb Please answer this: Who introduced the controversial text into the article ? I restored the version before edit wars. I am neither encouraging nor taking sides here. If you disagree or If you think I am being unreasonable or taking sides here then please proceed to WP:ANEW and file a case, so that an admin "who knows well on how adminship works" with an "understanding of how adminship works" will do what is needed here. regards. --DBigXrayᗙ 14:24, 13 January 2020 (UTC) updated --DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

"knows well on how adminship works"? What's that supposed to mean? There was no "controversial" text introduced into the article. If you've looked at the talk page, you'll have seen that support was immediately forthcoming for my change, and as yet there has been none for Krimuk's reversion, despite his canvassing. Deb (talk) 14:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the typo. I fixed it above. Unless you have clear consensus for the change, you cannot change the article. The only option that you have here, is to continue the talk page discussion and follow WP:DR. If you believe the behavioral issues and disruption merits a block by an admin then please post a thread on WP:ANEW or WP:ANI.--DBigXrayᗙ 14:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

When you stated that my comment on "grounds for de-sysopping", "simply shows up your lack of understanding of how adminship works". Are you claiming that your block did not violate WP:INVOLVED or are you claiming that violating INVOLVED is not a ground for desysopping. Please clarify this. --DBigXrayᗙ 15:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Violating INVOLVED is not, in itself, grounds for de-sysopping. The process is far more complex than that. Deb (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Let me put it this way. Can the "complex process of de-sysopping" be requested with a case of WP:INVOLVED? --DBigXrayᗙ 15:28, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, but it's very unlikely to succeed. So it's a bad idea to threaten admins. Deb (talk) 15:31, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

From what I have seen, whether it succeeds or not will depend on the how the process goes, background investigation, etc. But the fact that the process can be initiated due to violation of WP:INVOLVED shows that my understanding after all is not flawed. You can call it "threatening", I will call it "reminding an admin that he is in conflict with a major policy". --DBigXrayᗙ 15:37, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I see you've already taken advice on this from another experienced user, so you know the score. The Arbitration Committee are not idiots: they are able to recognise when an admin is being baited by one or more editors, and they can tell the difference between a minor or unintended violation and a genuine abuse of privilege. Deb (talk) 15:50, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Obviously that is how an arbcom case proceeds, but the point being made here is that, an INVOLVED block can be grounds for desysopping. I just wanted to make this clear that my understanding after all is not flawed, as was claimed above. Now instead of wrongly accusing me of threatening, IMHO a more appropriate thing to do right now, would have been to apologize to User:Krimuk2.0 for blocking him in violation of INVOLVED. That I believe will certainly be helpful in calming the tempers, but that is just me. --DBigXrayᗙ 16:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

It's just you. Deb (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Akam Ata Anzali Free Zone

Hello Deb,

I hope you are well. The article I added to Wikipedia is not an ad and it is not promotional. It was just knowledge sharing. Btw, maybe I wrote it incorrectly. I appreciate if you help users like me and encourage us to contribute more to Wikipedia.

Many thanks.

Not if your aim is to promote commercial concerns, and especially not if you try to conceal what you're doing by creating multiple articles under different titles. Deb (talk) 08:57, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Manupatra

Hello Deb,

I hope you are good. I had posted an article on Manupatra Information Pvt. Ltd. which is actually a widely known name in the Indian legal field. I see that you have deleted the page because you think I was promoting the company or its website, but I tried to make it as brief and specific to point that it is only knowledgeable and not promtional. It would be really helpful if you could restore the article as a draft and let me know what necessary edits are required to get it approved.

Thank You. RoshiniB26 (talk) 03:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)RoshiniB26

Apologies

Hi Deb -- Er, sorry, as you've probably noticed, I've just mentioned you over at the arbitration case on RHaworth. I've been defending RH's actions in deleting plainly infeasible drafts G11 as a common practice engaged in by multiple admins. You deleted Draft:Fura Chhamzi Sherpa, which seems a reasonable example of this, while I was considering whether to waste everyone's time by declining it. Apologies for dragging you in. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

No issues, I'm about to respond.Deb (talk) 15:29, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

User:GIMEXCO LTD.

Looks like their userpage on Bengali Wikipedia is spam too, but I don't know what their policies are like. Do you know of anyone on en-wiki who's also active on bn-wiki that could check it out? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:19, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Princetoncole

Hello Deb, I'm honestly growing pretty tired of the "Yuni Wa" wiki page constantly being deleted, I didnt create this wiki for advertising purposes or for promoting. I'm just trying to make a wiki that has accurate information about "Yuni Wa" for the 10 million plus people that have streamed "Yuni Wa's" music. I just want to contribute positively to Wikipedia and make a accurate profile for this notable artist but I'm having a hard time because none of the editors can understand why Yuni Wa is notable because no one is reading the major press coverage links or paying attention to the traffic the music is getting. They are simply deleting the account because they think its self advertisement even though it isnt self advertisement, its about havng the most accurate information possible and no one has more accurate information about Yuni Wa than me.Princetoncole —Preceding undated comment added 15:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Even though you've admitted that you are the subject? You obviously haven't read Wikipedia:COI or Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Deb (talk) 16:24, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Leave Wiki now!

	Leave Wiki now!
	You are too biased to be in Wikipedia .Too short tempered too for everyone's good please leave this place to make it healthy! Swarojit seven (talk) 14:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the testimonial. Now I know I'm doing a good job! Deb (talk) 14:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Roshan Singh

Hi Deb

I have just noticed that you have reverted my entry in "births" section on January 22 article, by mentioning "no new entries without inline citations". I added an entry about Roshan Singh, who is a well known Indian freedom fighter and is already mentioned in "Deaths" section in December 19 article. I have made just a few modifications on Wikipedia to date. So, can you guide or suggest me exactly which type of inline citation should be added? I am not asking for the source of citation, I am just asking whether it is sufficient to add a citation from a biography available online on some other website, or there must be a citation from a book or official document? Amit Dua 21:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitduaamit (talk • contribs)

(talk page watcher) Hi Amitduaamit, you should be able to find a citation in the Roshan Singh article that supports the birthdate. You can copy the citation from Roshan Singh to support the new entry in January 22. Schazjmd (talk) 22:03, 22 January 2020 (UTC) Thanks Schazjmd

Hi Deb, thanks for your suggestion on my talk page and improvements on Roshan Singh page. However, just to make it clear that Roshan Singh article (not added by me) needs some factual corrections also apart from citations. Anyways, I will work further according to your suggestions. Amit Dua 09:07, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Seeking your advice

Hi Deb, I was wondering if you could take a look at the draft. Please suggest any further modifications required. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vmaske/sandbox Looking forward, Thank you. Vmaske (talk) 13:41, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Article deletion?

Hi sir, can I determine why my article was deleted and what do I need to do if i add an article to not be submitted as speedy deletion?? Can you help me to add mh first article? Plsss Ketsrubelle 16:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ketsrubelle (talk • contribs)

February with Women in Red

February 2020, Volume 6, Issue 2, Numbers 150, 151, 152, 154, 155 Happy Valentine's Day from all of us at Women in Red. Online events: New: Explorers / Black Women / Horror / Continuing initiatives: #1day1woman / Sports! Editor feedback: Schedule planning at the Virtual Ideas Cafe Join the conversations on our talkpage Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon

Hi. The Wikipedia:The Great Britain/Ireland Destubathon is planned for March 2020, a contest/editathon to eliminate as many stubs as possible from all 134 counties. Amazon vouchers/book prizes are planned for most articles destubbed from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and Northern Ireland and whoever destubs articles from the most counties out of the 134. Sign up on page if interested in participating, hope this will prove to be good fun and productive, we have over 44,000 stubs!♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:33, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Request for Review of Draft:Thaiboy Digital

Hi Deb,

You flagged a page I was working on a while ago, and I have now supplemented it with a proper amount of sourcing and information. Would it be possible for you to review it and have it cleared as an article?

Here is a link to the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Thaiboy_Digital

Thank you,

Lithexfree (talk) 13:58, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Deb,

Saw your response on my page, thank you for the speedy answer. I have submitted it for review but it has been three months now and the estimate for how long it will take only gets longer. Is there a way I could expedite the process?

Thank you,

Lithexfree (talk) 14:03, 2 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lithexfree (talk • contribs)

Bevan

Good deal. Thanks for the heads-up. Red Director (talk) 19:18, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Sheeri Cabral

Hi Deb,

A community member notified me that this wikipedia page about me had a flag on it. There was an external link to a site that redirected to yellowpages.org, which I replaced with an archive.org URL for the web archived version of the actual page. I carefully re-read the NPOV guidelines and each sentence on the page to make sure the statements are neutral and facts. If there's another problematic link, or the language is problematic, please let me know and I'll happily change it so it meets Wikipedia's standards. Awfief (talk) 19:43, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Deb,

If you check out the "Talk" page for Sheeri Cabral, you'll see that I went through this process 10 years ago - I did not write the article about myself, I am well aware of the conflict of interest guidelines. I have gone in and made small edits - cleaned up formatting, updated a picture, added or fixed citations as the policy allowed back then. I absolutely have not made the type of edits that would qualify as a "major contributor"! I have read the updated COI policy and I see that basically no edits are allowed; I will adhere to that now.

The links to blogs are the official MySQL blogs where news was announced 10 years ago; the link to iTunes is a citation for the podcast. These are primary sources that I do not manage (and again, most of the links were not added by me).

I have also removed the self-promotional content from my User page. (sorry, I never did read those guidelines, but I have now, thanks for alerting me!) Awfief (talk) 21:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)