User talk:Finngall

Greetings! Welcome to my talk page!
If you wish to leave me a message, please click here (this will place the message at the bottom of the page where it belongs).
I will normally place my replies here with a {{reply}} tag.
If you are here because I placed a deletion tag on your article, please note that I am not an administrator and cannot actually delete articles myself. If the article has already been deleted, you should probably take any protests to the admin who did the deletion, though I will gladly answer questions as well. Don't forget to provide a link to the article in question.
Finally, please always sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Thanks, and take care.

Hello Finngall! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —EncMstr 19:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Building consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Archives

New message from TheLongTone

Hello, Finngall. You have new messages at TheLongTone's talk page.
Message added 14:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

TheLongTone (talk) 14:15, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Although it occurs to me that as the subject of a previous AfD it is probably a candidate for a speedy delete.TheLongTone (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the message on my talk page is obsoleteTheLongTone (talk) 14:30, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Questions and response to Arthur C. Martinez article Jan 7

Hi Finngall, I'm being paid by Arthur C. Martinez to update the Wikipedia page covering him as much information is left-out or inaccurate. I plan on drafting a sandbox article for him with sources, per your recommendation. When I complete this, will I be able to send it to you for verification? Also, do you know how I can recover all of the article work I completed that was deleted? I spent the past few hours on it and would like to recover it. New to Wikipedia so unsure of these intricacies. Thank you for your help! MatthewSForner (talk) 22:42, 7 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Finngall. You have new messages at SS Bendure Hartwig's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SS Bendure Hartwig (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

redirects

Yes I think I got confused. There is no article about John Welles, Member of the Parliament of England for Newcastle-under-Lyme, who is clearly a different person. Rathfelder (talk) 23:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Decepticons

I've added a note on this article explaining clearly why it should be deleted but hasn't. The problem with {{db-xfd}} is you don't get to clarify the reason for it, so I look at it and thought "somebody's trying to CSD something during an AfD - that can't be right!" Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: Yeah, I troll WP:BADAFD regularly so I've actually done quite a few db-xfd's that show up there under "Articles with links to closed AfD's"--articles under that heading are frequently malformed renominations but often they're either articles that XFDcloser failed to actually delete, or "also nominated" articles in a multi-article AfD that didn't get deleted along with the "main" article. In this case, I didn't feel comfortable trying to flag down a steward myself so I tagged it so that an admin would notice and do the job. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 17:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Craggs

Hello, you took down my AfD on this article, the user Capewearer keeps deleting my deletion suggestions via PROD. I don't feel the article is notable, please you could you help me push it into the correct channels for evaluation. GavinMansfield (talk) 21:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GavinMansfield: As I alluded to in the edit summary of my removal of the tag, nominating an article via Articles for Deletion is a multi-step process for which tagging the article itself is merely the first. Please fully follow the instructions at WP:AFDHOWTO if you wish to proceed. After this, I'm willing to follow up if any cleanup is necessary, but you'll need to provide a clear and reasonable justification for deletion as part of the creation of the discussion page. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 21:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have tried to read through everything but it is very jargon filled and not at all aimed at a casual editor like me, although I understand why. GavinMansfield (talk) 22:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello sir, so the warning was deleted, how do I post an AfD warning on there GavinMansfield (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GavinMansfield: That’s step one. Step two is to create the discussion page and step three is to add it to the daily AfD log so that others can see it. --Finngall ^talk 15:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your help! GavinMansfield (talk) 15:39, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rudeness and commenting on contributors in edit summaries

Please don't be rude in edit summaries they are permanent. Wikipedia rules are clear and users would not comment on contributors but should instead comment on contributions. If you wish to make comments which are of a rude nature that focus on a contributor and not the contributions please do so on the appropriate talk page. Rude comments towards other users is not collegiate and goes against the good faith working of Wikipedia. I do though thank you for being bold and making the improvements you saw necessary yourself. You could very easily have looked at is as you being helpful as opposed to calling it a chore and chewing up another user. Wikipedia is voluntary and things happen outside of Wikipedia which may not necessarily mean that all of the things one is "supposed" to do get done. Sparkle1 (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sparkle1: Another user had asked you to do the cleanup. You did not do so, and had made other edits in the meantime, so I assumed you were not interested and proceeded on my own. I am a volunteer, and generally the tasks I take on involve various forms of cleanup. Most often I'm cleaning up after vandals, which is inevitable and can't be helped. Sometimes what needs to be cleaned up is due to bugs in the system--again, can't be helped. Sometimes the problem is a well-meaning user who doesn't know what to do. If said problem only affects a single article, eh, it happens. Seventeen articles and leaving the cleanup to others even after a reminder (on what are undoubtedly low-traffic articles), well, I consider that to be rude. --Finngall ^talk 15:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with you making the statements that you have made, the issue I have is where you have made them. An edit summary is not the place to make them as Edit Summaries are permanent. If you wish to pass commentary on an individual do so on their talk page. Anywhere else is disruptive and not in the best interests of the encyclopaedia. Not how I am talking to you on your talk age and not disrupting anyone else on this encyclopaedia. All I am saying is if you want to talk about an individual do so, on their own talk page. Sparkle1 (talk) 17:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Omo Ranch

I removed your CSD tag from the Omo Ranch, California article, for two reasons:

Even though you placed the AfD tag on the page, it was never listed in the actual AfD, so none of the voters would have had a chance to look at it.
Unlike the pages in that AfD, which seem to have been mostly or entirely places that were never anything more than a single ranch, Omo Ranch was once a genuine community with a population of 200 or so. It's covered in a number of reliable sources; although this page isn't an RS itself, there's a bibliography at the bottom: [1].

I found this while sorting through the GNIS sub-stubs for El Dorado County. I'm doing a bit of research on each one to see which locations are notable and have sufficient discussion in reliable sources to make them into proper articles. Once I finish sorting through all ~200 of them I'm going to PROD the ones that don't meet those criteria. If any of those PRODs get removed I'll make a batch AfD. Feel free to take a look at User:CJK09/California locations cleanup/El Dorado County and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California#Cleaning up all those GNIS location articles if you want more info on what I'm doing or want to contribute. CJK09 (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@CJK09: No problem. I've seen other cases where the article wasn't actually on the AfD discussion page and the admin handling the G6 tag said "close enough to the others, delete anyway per the same criteria". Regardless of the particulars of the outcome, I just wanted it off of WP:BADAFD one way or the other. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 23:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bimal N. Patel

Greetings!

I am writing this message to seek clarity on the contents of Bimal N Patel. I had deleted a couple of paragraphs which were tarnishing his image and placed allegations on him. Please let me know how I can solve this.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KPSportz (talk • contribs) 08:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KPSportz: I don't believe there is anything to "solve". While Wikipedia's policies on biographies of living persons mandates that editors step carefully in editing such articles, and editors should both refrain from adding unfounded allegations and be quick to remove unfounded allegations added by others. However, this is not applicable in the case of this article. The information in the paragraphs which you tried to delete was well-cited, drawn from multiple sources which are considered to be reliable, and presented in a neutral fashion, as all information in an encyclopedia should be. Indeed, I dare say it was better-sourced than many articles of its type. "Tarnishing his image" is a subjective evaluation, and is not a valid basis for removing well-sourced information provided that it is not given undue weight within the article, and it certainly isn't in this case.

You are not the first to try to remove these paragraphs, and I am not the first to reinstate them. Each time it was claimed that the information was "false" or "defaming", but these claims have never been backed up by any proof that the information is false or that the sources upon which the information is based are biased or otherwise unreliable. None have presented any reasons based on Wikipedia's policies for the removal, and each time an experienced editor has evaluated the removal based on these policies and reverted it back to its original state.

(And in case you are wondering, I have no personal stake in this at all--I have no involvement (or even any particular interest) whatsoever with the subject, and the article only came to my attention after an anonymous editor made a misguided and poorly-executed attempt to have the article deleted in its entirety.)

I hope this helps. Feel free to come back if you have further questions. Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 16:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for this clarification. I had been tasked with creating a new page for the subject. However, I understand that this will not be possible. I apologise for the inconvenience. Really appreciate your response. Thank you. KPSportz (talk) 22:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renaissance Workshop Company

At the end, everything about the Renaissance Workshop Company has been removed in favour of the Early Music Shop in Saltaire. As usual.

Fortunately, the truth will keep being the truth independently what is stated in the wikipedia.

Kind regards 81.34.79.85 (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please nominate GIMP version history for deletion

Hi Finngall.

Please nominate GIMP version history for deletion. Please credit it to me if you feel it is incorrect.

Sadly, I have no idea what you are talking about in your comments. I can't figure out these god damn processes. Wikipedia should be ashamed of itself for such shitty documentation and processes.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 01:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Noloader: The article GIMP version history had been a full article and was nominated for deletion in September 2019. The result of this discussion, as chronicled at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GIMP version history, was that the content of the article should be merged into the main GIMP article, which it was. GIMP version history is now a redirect to the main GIMP article, specifically pointing to the "Versions" section of that article, which seems to me to make absolutely perfect sense.

Your tagging of GIMP version history with an Articles for Deletion tag was improper on more than one level. Firstly, since that title is a redirect and not a proper article, it is not subject to the AfD process at all. Redirects undergo a related but slightly different process at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. Secondly, AfD (and RfD) nominations are a multi-step process and tagging the article is but the first step. See WP:AFDHOWTO (or WP:RFD#HOWTO) for the full process. Thirdly, the tag you applied pointed to the old discussion from last year. If it were proper to renominate this for AfD, then you would have needed to create a new discussion page for a new discussion (as per the instructions referenced above).

Finally, I see absolutely no reason for the redirect to be deleted. Someone searching for GIMP version history would click to the title, which redirects to the relevant section on the main article. This is precisely the sort of thing redirects are for, and it seems nonsensical to me for the redirect to be removed unless the version history to which it references were to be removed in its entirety from the main article. If you disagree, you are free to nominate it and state your case so that it can be discussed among other experienced editors.

If I am misinterpreting your intent or if you have other questions, please let me know. Thank you. --Finngall ^talk 02:52, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no second AfD delete. The one that was proposed (and deleted by you) was the first. Here is the Talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:GIMP_version_history.

A single page detailing GIMP releases is useless. It was not notable by any measure. The page never should have been created in the first place.

The empty page labeled as GNU software is polluting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:GNU_Project_software.

Jeffrey Walton (talk) 03:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If your concern is about the category being "polluted", then the category is easily removed from the redirect page, and I have done so here.

As for your insistence that there "is no second AfD delete", I do not know what you are talking about. There was a previous AfD discussion, to which I have linked above, the result of which was the the content was merged elsewhere as per a clear consensus. Whether the "page never should have been created in the first place" is neither here nor there. You appear to be arguing for the removal of material from a place where it was already removed months ago, on a talk page which is not the proper forum to discuss its deletion. Please clarify. --Finngall ^talk 04:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You might wanna look at Chris Troutman’s talk page...

...and see if that is something you wanted to do, or is some kind of Twinkle brain cramp. Qwirkle (talk) 15:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwirkle: Nah, the brain cramp was mine—Twinkle was merely the tool to make the mistake quickly and efficiently. :-) --Finngall ^talk 16:24, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can identify with that. Qwirkle (talk) 16:48, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieving my article on Prabhakar Singh

Hi, since my article has been deleted titled on 'Prabhakar Singh', I would like to retrieve the links of the same.