:I hope you can adjust your editing to accommodate this topic ban, which I think you could appeal in 3-6 months (without any violations). I think you have a positive effect on Wikipedia but I don't think you handled the AE complaint with enough seriousness which hurt you with the admins.
:I hope you can adjust your editing to accommodate this topic ban, which I think you could appeal in 3-6 months (without any violations). I think you have a positive effect on Wikipedia but I don't think you handled the AE complaint with enough seriousness which hurt you with the admins.
:I hope you stay but, to be honest, I took two wikibreaks, one for six months and one for a year, and I came back with much more enthusiasm and energy so I don't think breaks are a bad thing. I encourage you to appeal the topic ban after a few months, when you've shown you can abide by the terms of the ban. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 04:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
:I hope you stay but, to be honest, I took two wikibreaks, one for six months and one for a year, and I came back with much more enthusiasm and energy so I don't think breaks are a bad thing. I encourage you to appeal the topic ban after a few months, when you've shown you can abide by the terms of the ban. Good luck! <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 04:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
::Thank you. I appreciate the advice - I'll step back. [[Special:Contributions/PeterTheFourth|PeterTheFourth]] ([[User Talk:PeterTheFourth|talk]]) 04:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Note: When emailing me, please also post a {{You've got mail}} template to this page. I check my Wikipedia email account infrequently.
Wise words given to a blocked editor: This absolute adherence to the idea that your interpretation of the rules is paramount and everyone else's input is merely an obstacle to overcome is an accurate summary of how you ended up in this position. Basaliskinspect damage⁄berate 4 August 2013 Well said!Liz Read!Talk!
No matter how cute you are, expect no quarter in the cruel world of Wikipedia.
While Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines should be taken seriously, they can be misused. Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policy without consideration for the principles of policies. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus. (WP:NOT)
[1] If we want to disagree on something, we'll have to find something better ;-) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:57, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We just needed a link to the article. LizRead!Talk! 17:09, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Breitbart is blacklisted, technical wizardry is required. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:38, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
All questions are welcome
No I didn’t. Signpost is part of Wikipedia and we have every right to enforce our policies there. Defamation is a “hair on fire” situation where you remove first and ask questions later. JehochmanTalk 17:24, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.
The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.
Miscellaneous
In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.
He also joined the person from the redacted site in calling me a sick and twisted pervert. True crime is a specialist subject for me, not an obsession. I feel that someone should care about victims after the media spotlight has changed. If i was wrong, i am sorry. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 00:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Signpost ArbCom case
Hello Liz, I believe the very first sentence of your ArbCom statement may be disputed. I invite you to read paragraph 4 of my statement, where I provided some evidence. starship.paint (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think my questions are valid, Starship.paint. Did Smallbones get permission from Fram? If "yes", then he can't be faulted for publishing the Signpost article. If "no", then he violated Fram's rights to not be accused. I don't think one can only take on-wiki evidence, ArbCom needs to see the email exchange that Smallbones mentions that occurred between them. I don't know if that will happen because Smallbones states that Fram wanted to keep it private. But I do know that I'm undecided on the matter until consent has been determined. Otherwise, it is he said, he said.
While you have been very polite, I think you have already made up your mind that any charges against Fram are false.. That's definitely the standpoint of the most vocal Wikipedians but I don't know that this is actually the Truth, with a capital T. But, as you know, Wikipedia doesn't care about truth, we care about verifiability. So, let's have ArbCom see all the available evidence and they can come to a decision. But what I do know for sure is that NONE of us knows the whole story behind this whole mess. Ideally, WMF would disclose more information to ArbCom to make this possible but, unfortunately, that doesn't seem like it will happen. LizRead!Talk! 01:18, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(1) Yes, Liz, one cannot only take on-wiki evidence, but that is all I know of and can show, and that shows that Fram disputed before press time. (2) Yes, Liz, ArbCom should take a look at private evidence. (3) No, Liz, I don't agree that any charges against Fram are false. I don't even know Fram, actually. There's so much we don't know. That doesn't mean that we can keep casting more and more aspersions, I hope. Fram might very well have done many bad things, and if so, he has to go. Let ArbCom see it all and decide. starship.paint (talk) 01:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll strike that comment then and apologize. You have been so adamant about this issue that I made assumptions about your position. I guess we can both agree that ArbCom should step up and take the lead here because otherwise, there will be continuing acrimony between hard-working editors and the WMF which I think is an unacceptable state of affairs. LizRead!Talk! 01:43, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we agree, ArbCom needs to do the work. Thank you for apologizing. I do want justice for Fram, that does not mean an acquittal on all charges, but that does means the right to reply / defend oneself / appeal, that's all. starship.paint (talk) 01:56, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lightburst (talk) 20:41, 3 July 2019 (UTC) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.[reply]
To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
That was just a little bit after midnight for me, Liz. I need to watch the late night comedy talk shows to unwind, while editing Wikipedia during the commercials and boring parts. Cullen328Let's discuss it 00:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I totally understand although I'm an early bird, rather than a night owl. I edit while watching sitcoms that don't require rapt attention. My family has gotten use to watching me edit while the television is on. I couldn't do this if I was working on content creation but for evaluating spammy pages and tagging them, it's no problem. LizRead!Talk! 00:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Original Barnstar
Hi Liz,
I appreciate your work on Wiki, and i need your help
Can you help me for editing ?
Well, he is certainly passionate. I'll check the accounts and that article. LizRead!Talk! 23:19, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are possessed by deamons, thats why you dont want to accept the legitimate and well documented contribution regarding Martyr TunomTunom (talk) 07:17, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think I made any personal attack. Martyr Tunom is a well known Saint who is closely related to the Holy Fire. Additionaly he is a person who gave a testimony of the existance of the Holy Fire, and paid this testimony with his life. You allow all other testimonies (mostly against Holy Fire), but you deny this one which was paid by a person's life. Some wikipedians dont want this perfectly legitimate and documented information to appear here. Not only they revert but also they delete the contribution fiercly. For this tottaly irrational attack what other reasonable explaination could you give, if not that they are possessed by deamons, the same deamons that caused Tunom's death? You will certainly be punished by God, for fighting against Truth. Tunom8 (talk) 08:45, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Tunom inserted three nails into the ground and said. In this way, the nails will be inserted into the eyes of those who do not believe. In this way the nails will be inserted in to your eyes too. Just pray that this to happen to you in this temproary life, and not in after life that never ends.Tunom9 (talk) 11:06, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Liz, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Category:1954 in volleyball, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Category is populated or is otherwise allowed to be empty. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. -- Amanda(aka DQ) 09:44, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I know the criteria, DeltaQuad. Empty categories that have been tagged sit for 7 days in a separate category and often times get populated during this week. In those cases, we remove the CSD tag and they are removed from the category. It is only when they are empty for seven days and stay empty that they are deleted.
There are strict criteria for empty categories that are allowed to stay empty...tracking categories, category redirects, categories that are subjects of CfD discussions. Otherwise, empty categories are deleted. They can always be recreated if there later proves to be a need for them unless they were subject to a CfD deletion. If you ever see a CSD C1 tagged category that has pages that have been assigned to it, feel free to remove the tag from the category. LizRead!Talk! 18:15, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz, sorry, I didn't know it was you that put up the notice, I know you are aware of the policy. I failed to actually look who put the notice as I just use a script that easily declines or deletes. I didn't notify for the two other ones. Had I known it was for you, I would have just declined without the automated notice. Apologies. -- Amanda(aka DQ) 01:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was surprised by your message, DeltaQuad, but I don't mind your questions at all. I am disturbed by admins I think are acting on CSD notices without evaluating the page first. I declined one speedy delete the other day and then I found another admin had gone ahead and deleted the article. So, I restored it.
I'm not sure what to do but I am sure there are pages being deleted that if I had looked at them first, I would have removed the deletion tag. Probably not enough material to take someone to ArbCom but I think we have to rethink our mass delete approach. Especially when an article is in a sandbox or in draft space, we should allow pages to improve over time. I wish admins would spend more time educating new editors rather than obliterating their efforts. LizRead!Talk! 01:35, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Jshorton11/sandbox deletion
Hey Liz,
I guess I moved my sandbox page to the public space?
Certainly didn't mean too.
My apologies,
Jeff — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshorton11 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You moved your sandbox to M. Basheer Ahmed M.D. where another admin deleted the page because it was deemed to be a copyright violation, text taken from a press release (which you can see if you look at the deleted page). I deleted the sandbox page because it was a broken redirect to the deleted page.
Please remember that all content has to be original, written by you and not taken from any website, book or magazine. Please look over Wikipedia:Copyrights for more information. If you have any additional questions, I recommend visiting the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you advice. LizRead!Talk! 20:19, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Liz, I will re submit that article again after I fix these issues. I am new to wiki so I will take any help I can get! I think the descriptions of the organizations he founded may have been the problem but I'm waiting to hear back from the administrator that deleted the article. I wish he had given me a heads up about the problems and I would have fixed them right away. Anyway, hope your having a great day... and Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshorton11 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz, can you offer some advice for me on this article? Can I get this article back in my sandbox as it was so I don't have to rebuild it? I know you are probably very busy but any help would be so appreciated. Also will I be able to resubmit this from my sandbox once I fix the issues? Wikipedia suggests using Special:Mypage to create a new article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshorton11 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have emailed you a draft. Please do not put it back into your sandbox without fixing the copyright issues or it will be deleted again. We can not have copyright violations on Wikipedia. If you want help with the article, I recommend vising Articles for Creation. And please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 22:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Liz, I understand. Thanks again! Jshorton11 (talk) 22:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done I have to investigate the editor, I just can't block a user because you say so. That said, you were right, they were spamming Wikipedia. Thank you for letting me know. I appreciate it. LizRead!Talk! 23:46, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please undelete this page. I had added a few refs, but had not gotten the opportunity to fully source it yet. Thanks. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 10:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done, FieldMarine. Please remember the criticism of original research that prompted the PROD and make sure you have some additional reliable sources to verify the information in the article. Happy editing! LizRead!Talk! 14:34, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will do my best. If it does not work out, we can delete it. I will need some time though. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. We can always move it to your user sandbox if you want to protect it from deletion. Just let me know. LizRead!Talk! 15:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please restore Thonburi University F.C. because Thonburi University Football Club is a football club in Thailand, it competed in Thai League 4 since 2019 season. This is the club's data from Thai League official website. This article has deleted in 2018 since the club has not promoted to the professional league. at that time, they have not enough of sources. But now in 2019 season, They has promoted to Thai League 4 that is a professional league. We could found the club's info in the official website of Thai League that have a lot of data including fixture, result, standing, and all player's statistics. In addition, Thonburi University Football Club has competed in 2019 Thai League Cup and advanced to the round of 16 by beaten the club from the top division Samut Prakan City F.C.. This is the news from Thai League official website about drawing in the round of 32. And this is drawing in the round of 16 Thonburi University vs PT Prachuap, this is the match highlight. There are a lot of news about Thonburi University F.C. such as this showed that Thonburi University funded 5 millions Thai Baht to competed in the 2019 season of Thai League 4, and they will renaming to Thonburi United F.C. in 2020 season, now you can found this name on the club's official Facebook page that update every situations of the club. —Gunkiet (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, Gunkiet, but I can not restore it. It was deleted because of a decision at the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayodhya City F.C. which came to the conclusion that Discussion shows that whilst some sourcing can be found for these clubs the level of coverage is at best trivial / routine. You can appeal this decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review if you feel like the deletion discussion was closed in error. LizRead!Talk! 23:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gunkiet, Deletion Review is usually where we send editors to recover pages that were deleted due to a deletion discussion but you could also try Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion. You might have more success there. Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 00:28, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Parker's Ferry?
Hi, I'm Ajack87. I wrote an article called the battle of parker's ferry. However, it got deleted for copyright infringement. Can I rewrite it again using legitimate sources? How can I fix it. What sources can I use that would be legal and legitimate for my article? And how do I site them properly? Ajack87 (talk) 00:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)Ajack87[reply]
Of course you can try again, Ajack87! Wikipedia:Copyright violations has information about copyright on Wikipedia but it is pretty dense. Basically, you can not reuse any material you find anywhere (websites, books, magazines, etc.) verbatim. The content of an article has to be written in your own words.
Thank you Liz. Thank you for the chance to fix my article and re-write it properly. Thank you for the Reference for beginners and the help introduction.
Sincerely Ajack87 (talk)
Thank you very much, Mjs1991. I don't keep track of these dates and it is nice to be surprised! LizRead!Talk! 00:43, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you...
I feel supported by the message you left about the legal threat; I've had quite a few of them over the years from the same type of people (owners of small and dying television networks insisting they're not collapsing; one of them used their website to taunt me)...but this one got to me because of their tenacity; I'm glad I have support in these tasks. I thank you again. Nate•(chatter) 08:16, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Encouragement is the least we can do for editors who face these threats. If it persists, please contact WMF Legal and let us know so we can block the new accounts. LizRead!Talk! 00:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hellow. Category is not empty. Bogic (talk) 10:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, Bogic. This is not uncommon. That's why we hold empty categories for 7 days after they are tagged in case they are later filled. We always check categories that are tagged to see that they are still empty before they are deleted. I removed the tag earlier today. LizRead!Talk! 00:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your "This is a valid redirect" reasoning on this edit and this one. They were created today and created with an obvious capitalization issue ("gondola" not being proper noun) so sure, someone might type them in that way but we don't need redirects for that because Wikipedia automatically handles differently cased entries without the need for a redirect. That is, if either redirect did not exist, people could still type or link to either "Burnaby Gondola" or "Burnaby Mountain Gondola" and get to the right place. In fact, where you created the new redirect "Burnaby Gondola", you've actually added a redirect that wasn't needed, apparently because I asked for them to be deleted, so... could you reconsider? I don't see what we gain by keeping these that isn't already auto-handled internally by the wiki software. —Joeyconnick (talk) 05:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Joeyconnick, I see your point. I think they were tagged incorrectly. Based on what you say, the correct CSD criteria is R3: Redirects as a result of an implausible typo or misnomers that were recently created. They fit that category. So, I've tagged and deleted them. Thank you for explaining your rationale for tagging them which was unclear to me. We have plenty of redirects with simple misspellings or other slight changes in title and it seemed at the time I reviewed them that these were valid redirects. LizRead!Talk! 05:59, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response and explanation! I wouldn't have thought to tag these as "implausible" typos or misnomers because it's quite plausible (and indeed it happened here LOL) that someone might misname something using incorrect capitalization. I thought there was a category for recently created violations of WP:SENTENCECASE but maybe I'm imagining that. I picked G6 because it includes Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace and felt the creation was unambiguously in error (albeit a minor error). Anyway, no harm done, apparently. 🙂 —Joeyconnick (talk) 06:12, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I want to delete the page José de Gregorio since the correct name is José De Gregorio. That's why I redirected it and put the previous one out. Please delete to not have double page. --Cuidro (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the page is serving a useful purpose as a redirect page. This ensures that if a reader types in the incorrect name--José de Gregorio--they will be immediately directed to the correct name, José De Gregorio. Wikipedia has quite a few redirect pages because not everyone knows the correct spelling for names or terms or what the correct title of an article is. LizRead!Talk! 19:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Liz reappointed full clerk
The Arbitration Committee is pleased to announce that Liz (talk·contribs) has been reappointed to the clerk team as a full clerk, effective immediately.
The arbitration clerk team is often in need of new members, and any editor who would like to join the clerk team is welcome to apply by e-mail to clerks-llists.wikimedia.org.
For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235·t·c) 14:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— --Lize56 (talk) 19:29, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Liz, my article has been deleted today. How can I do to prove that I'm the owner of the copyright of the page http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com/en/article-87.php . I created already a Creative Commons Licence CC-BY-SA 3.0 on this page (only this page) of my website to avoid copyright concern . But it seems it's not enough. Therefore I decided to delete the page http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com/en/article-87.ph from my website.
Please could you verify that it doesn't exist any article-87 on my website. I hope this will be enough to prove that I was the writter of this aricle , and that I am the owner of the website http://www.andremehu-aquarelles.com. Consequently I hope you will allow me to re-submit again for review.
Thank you.
Hello. I seem to have accidentally reverted you at Category:The Dog and Its Reflection as you didn't remove the CSD tag. I read the deletion rationale, checked for incoming links, and read and rejected the note on the talk page. It was only after deletion that I saw you'd already deleted and restored. Sorry about that. Was it the message on the talk page that changed your mind, and do you want to undelete again? (Feel free to revert me). --kingboyk (talk) 03:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I thought when I restored the category, it would reset the category deletion date to August 7th, kingboyk. Yes, the editor who left a note on the talk page seemed a bit confused by the process so I gave him another week to find an article to place in the category. No problem with deletion, I'll just restore it. Sorry for the confusion. LizRead!Talk! 04:10, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Evidently it doesn't, and we've both learnt something today :) No worries, and thanks. -- [please ping me if you need a reply] kingboyk (talk) 04:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation on my talk page, Liz, and for extending the deadline. I didn't know that there had to be documentary proof for a pictorial category. Anyway, there were plenty of articles to mention in the new objection I have made on the discussion page. The trouble with fables dating back 2,500 years (as this does), is that they change title over time. An alternative title is "The Dog and its/his Shadow", which is traditional but confusing since the primary meaning of the word 'shadow' is no longer 'reflection' - although Webster's dictionary gives that as a secondary meaning. Sorry to be so technical! Sweetpool50 (talk) 08:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I saw you just handled the SPLC username issue, so just wanted to make sure we don't overlap with our editing. I'm looking at the page right now and I'll be dealing with some of the NPOV issues that their edits introduced. - Sdkb (talk) 18:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, Sdkb. I haven't looked at their edits, I was just looking at a list of newly created accounts to see if there are any group/company/organization-named accounts. LizRead!Talk! 18:59, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
I have made a mistake in my wording in my edit summary. I was meant to say that I was fixing the description of what Cultural Marxism is, because the previous description was wrong. Next time, I will say "fixed inaccurate information", rather than "fixed typo". Thank you 122.108.183.105 (talk) 04:46, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to work on Zane Gardner article I am a once Martial artist turned painter from Dekalb Junction, New York I do have some pictures of myself as a martial artist and a painter ZanerG30 (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Zane Gardner
Is this to short now (born March 16th, 1990) once a martial artist under Tae Kwon Do and Combat Hapkido now turned a painter he paints with watercolors and acrylics he trained in Tae Kwon Do and Combat Hapkido trained until he got his 2nd dan black belt and brown third tip until his latest surgery happened. He was also known for his long range shooting ability in basketball and for the love of the game earned him the Don Petty sportsmanship award. He went to school Hermon-Dekalb Central School in Dekalb Junction, New YorK ZanerG30 (talk) 17:25, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above paragraph can't be an article, ZanerG30. It needs references to reliable sources like books, magazines and prestigious websites, hopefully many references. Look at existing articles for other martial artists and check out Help:Your first article which can provide more guidance than I can offer. LizRead!Talk! 17:32, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Excel Fighters"
Aaron's short story of how he got his powers and regains his memory. ZanerG30 (talk) 03:57, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you are talking about. LizRead!Talk! 03:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a book I created about Martial artist I couldn’t send you the link it won’t let me would that be enough ZanerG30 (talk) 04:02, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz. I'm the editor who tagged Zane Gardner as an A7. If it wasn't already obvious, this guy is just trying to create his autobiography. I think a block would be in order if he keeps spamming. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 16:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I left a note for him yesterday. LizRead!Talk! 00:35, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
St. Joseph's Academy Page DELETED
Hello Liz,
Hope you would be fine and doing well.
I am Harshanandtheking007 and yesterday i created a page named St. Joseph's Academy.
You have deleted my page citing the source http://www.formzero.in/school/St-Joseph-s-Academy and it seems you thought that i copied from there and created the page. No, that's not the case. That website has copied from the original source that is https://www.stjosephsacademy.in . I am a student of this St. Joseph's Academy School whose page you deleted. I was just appointed by my school to create a page of it.
So, I request you to undelete my page and I am thanking you in advance for the same from the deepest point of my heart.
Regards,
--Harshanandtheking007 (talk) 10:12, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Harsh Anand[reply]
Harshanandtheking007, it doesn't matter that it is copied from a different website, it is still copyright infringement. The article has to be in your original words, not copied from any source. It can not be undeleted if it is a copyright violation. LizRead!Talk! 17:08, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If yes, could I 'borrow' you for 60 seconds? --kingboyk (talk) 02:16, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was eating dinner then but I'm online now. What's up, kingboyk? LizRead!Talk! 02:42, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, cool, thanks - just had a bite to eat myself but will be off to bed soon. I was wondering if you'd give me a second opinion on my deletion here - Draft:Naveed Mian? --kingboyk (talk) 02:44, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You made the right decision, kingboyk. I've seen a lot of these autobiographies this summer. I think it's rare that someone who is 20 years old would be notable enough for a Wikipedia article unless they are a stand-out athlete or a nationally known activist. Someone with a YouTube channel with 80,000 subscribers? I don't think that would even make YouTube's Top 100,000 channels. LizRead!Talk! 02:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely, thanks for the sanity check. Much appreciated! --kingboyk (talk) 02:53, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A barnstar for you!
The Admin's Barnstar
Thank you for redacting that unbearably inappropriate-for-Wikipedia information on Erin HeathertonTrillfendi (talk) 02:19, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I wasn't sure about that so I decided to be bold! It seemed unnecessarily detailed and personal. LizRead!Talk! 02:43, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why you wouldn't have gotten the email - like you said, maybe the spam folder? — Ched : ? — 18:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
GMail has a "Social" inbox and that's where I found it. I responded...thanks for filling me in. LizRead!Talk! 20:57, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PDBe-KB page
Hi Liz,
I am creating a page on PDBe-KB - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:A2-25/PDBe-KB. It would be great if you can provide your feedback on the page so I can finalise it before making it into an official article. The previous page I created was deleted and I am not that experienced in creating new pages although I have edited pages before hence any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks A2-25 (talk) 09:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You need to demonstrate why PDBe-KB is notable which usually requires more than one reliable source to support that claim. I'm getting ready for a trip so I won't be around much in the next few days so I recommend going to Articles for Creation or the Teahouse for more specific advice. Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 15:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored the two redirects but I won't direct them to Camp Stephens as that is just another redirect, not an article right now. So, I've directed them to Camp Stephen's redirect target which is Scouting in California#Alameda Council. If Camp Stephens becomes an article, feel free to change the redirects to that page. LizRead!Talk! 15:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ilsetraut Hadot, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
I don't know that it should be deleted. I just know that it is empty. After 7 days, if it is still empty, it will be deleted. If you can find some stubs that could be placed in the category, please use it. We want categories that are being used! LizRead!Talk! 19:39, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, CLCStudent. I've blocked them both for a month and rev'deleted their rude edit summaries. I'm editing right now before sleeping but I'm in the midst of overseas travel so if they return, either you or Hell in a Bucket please contact a more active administrator. Thanks again for catching these accounts before they do too much damage. Your vigilance is appreciated! LizRead!Talk! 20:05, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi LiZ, You tagged Category:Climate change articles by importance for deletion. WP:WikiProject Climate change is a new project and we're doing a lot to get it off the ground. Please do not delete just yet. I left a more detailed message at the catgegory talk page. Please understand I'm going offline for several days, but havec been working steadily on categories, templates, and most recently finished a new 2.0 barnstar. Thanks for your patience. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realize that they were part of a WikiProject, NewsAndEventsGuy. I will remove the tags. WikiProject categories are typically exempt from CSD C1 tagging. I will try to make sure they are not retagged. But even if they ahyre, empty categories that are tagged fall into Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion and are not deleted unless they are still empty 7 days later which should be fine for your schedule. And if they are deleted, let me know and you or I can recreate them. No worries! LizRead!Talk! 06:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for understanding and such a fast response, and even more.... I saw from your contribs that you are out with a large push broom.... thanks for doing a lot of usually thankless house cleaning! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 10:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As an introvert at WikiMania, sometimes it is nice to go a quiet place & do some editing & admin chores. LizRead!Talk! 10:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Interview request
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Thanks for considering my request! Cheers, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 21:29, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am still traveling until tomorrow. So, there might be a delay in my response. But I do reply, you will probably hear back from me on Friday. Thanks! LizRead!Talk! 07:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
article deletion
Hello,
I provided ample explanation of why the Michael Brunstroem article had previously been deleted in error on the talk page for that article, referring to Wikipedia's guidelines.
The guidelines state that an entertainer may be notable if their work is innovative, and I provided many sources of evidence that that was the case (he won an award for originality for crying out loud). I find it really perverse that you guys keep targetting the article. I understand why TheVintageFeminist is doing it, but the administrators?? What's gotten into you?
What is your justification for deleting it, apart from that it had been deleted before?
My justification is that the article had just been through a deletion discussion this year and the consensus was to delete the article. You can appeal that decision if you think it was closed in error at Wikipedia:Deletion review. I looked at the article as it had been recreated and it still didn't meet notability standards. If you had sources on the article talk page, you should have worked at incorporating them into the article. But the deletion discussion went into great depth, reviewing the existing sources and found them to be insufficient to establish notability. LizRead!Talk! 19:23, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Liz: For the record, Brunström first came to my attention in these two diffs: diff 1 and diff 2. I had never heard of him and decided to look at his bio which showed him to be non-notable. This was the response from Regularuk when I began an AfD Seems pretty vindictive of you to attack Brunström's page. I do not represent him.diff, and when I gave a warning about making personal attacks The way to convince me that you don’t have a vendetta is definitely to make a comment like this on my page. Very ironic.diff. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 17:13, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Heads up
Hey L, wanted to let you know I would be puling the maintenance tags off of:
and then let csd C1 do its job It is pretty clear from this discussion that these serve no purpose and should not have been created. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know, UnitedStatesian. I think this is appropriate. And thank you for your speedy tagging of empty categories. Between the two of us, we seem to get to most of them. ;-) LizRead!Talk! 07:54, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, GeoffreyT2000. Can you point me to a discussion of the undeletion of this article? I'm just curious as to whether there was any conversation about recreating a long-time article after it was deleted. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 07:53, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I could not find any discussion regarding the undeletion of the Super Why! article, which has been recreated by KStrain2000. For now, I have draftified the recreated article. Please re-delete the redirect SUPER WHY! and its talk page. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 23:34, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just surprised that after a deletion by an experienced administrator that this article is back. And "re-delete"? What does that mean? Do you mean "restore", GeoffreyT2000? LizRead!Talk! 23:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You have already restored the redirect SUPER WHY!. Also, I have self-reverted my draftification of the article. You should now restore the other 11 redirects to the article as well as the talk archive. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:05, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done, GeoffreyT2000. My apologies for the delay. I was off-line for much of the weekend. Having a link to the deleted redirects saved me from combing through my deletion log. Thanks very much! LizRead!Talk! 14:49, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz. I was going to leave the following (or something like it, this is a first draft) on the talk page of the above 'template' (I believe there is a sister template too, which is very similar - ah yes, Wikipedia:TWA/Invite):
Subject: This doesn't seem to me to the best way to welcome a user to Wikipedia
I've just seen this template placed (alone) onto some new users' talk pages in order to welcome them. I think this approach - and the template itself - is highly dubious.
Please don't misunderstand me - I support this project. I recently welcomed an off-wiki friend to Wikipedia and left her a standard welcome template, and she took part in the Adventure and found it quite useful.
However, the Adventure and the invitation to "Play" won't be for everyone. I for one am not interested in "Playing" anything. What, then, would I learn from my being welcomed by this template? Well, absolutely nothing, as this template doesn't offer any other information or alternatives should I not wish to "Play".The standard welcome template is far superior as it offers various links to read and promotes the Adventure.
I paused for thought as the talk activity around the WikiProject appears to be very low. I then considered proposing it for deletion but, well, I'm not sure.
I thought it might be worth asking you what your thoughts are with regards to this template, whether it has value, and whether I should proceed with a discussion or a deletion discussion, or forget about it?
I'll close the template talk tab in the meantime, as I can always refer back to the diff here if I want to resurrect the draft! :) --kingboyk (talk) 23:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an immediate response to your suggestion but will think about it this weekend and offer my thoughts. There has been a lot of research done, some by WMF, on bringing new editors into the fold and helping them become valued contributors. I'll see if there has been any assessment about the Wiki Adventure.
As for WikiProjects, I once did an assessment of them and they really need somewhere between 5-10 committed editors to keep them going. Lots of WikiProjects get started by an enthusiastic individual but they need a core group to really keep them going for more than a few months. They are really demanding of people's time to keep them active. LizRead!Talk! 02:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Liz. Just to make sure I'm being clear: I'm talking only about the templates (and their usefulness relative to the general welcome template which includes a link to the Adventure). The Wiki Adventure I have no problem with. Have a nice weekend! --kingboyk (talk) 03:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Islands of Taranaki
I've contested this. I only created the category yesterday and populated it as I was doing so. It certainly hasn't been empty for seven days. Grutness...wha? 04:12, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize that the Twinkle message that is left for category creators is not more clear. Empty categories that do not fall into a limited number of categories (disambiguation categories, category redirects, categories that are the subject of CFD discussions, etc.) are tagged. BUT they are not immediately deleted. They sit in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for 7 days. Nothing happens to them for a week. If, after 7 days, the categories are still empty, they are deleted. If there are pages assigned to an empty category over that 7 days and it is no longer empty, the tag is removed and it is removed from Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion. Every week, a certain number of empty categories end up being filled and the speedy tags are removed. All you need to do is have at least one appropriate page/article assigned to an empty category over the next week and the tag will be removed.
But know that if an empty category is deleted, there is nothing to stop you from recreating it when if it can be later used. Categories that are deleted due to Categories for discussion debates can not be recreated but empty categories can be, at any time. I hope this allays your concerns. LizRead!Talk! 04:48, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. I know all that well - I've been an admin here for about ten years :) It's always worth checking how long since a category's been made before tagging it, though - if it's under 24 hours it could yet be filled. In this case I was just letting you know that the category had been incorrectly emptied,so wasn't really prod material. I'm glad you notified me though, otherwise I wouldn't have known about the prod! Grutness...wha? 05:47, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for not checking out your account before "instructing you", Grutness. It was clearly out of place. LizRead!Talk! 00:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
:) No prob. BTW, I see a lot of good work from you around WP - good to finally be able to say hi! Grutness...wha? 04:28, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Liz, I have User:Vatsmaxed's talk page on my watchlist, and I noticed your notification that you had nominated Category:Railway stations in Komaram Bheem district for speedy deletion under CSD:C1. As I read the criteria, the category has to have been unpopulated for at least 7 days before CSD:C1 applies. I don't think that was the case for Category:Railway stations in Komaram Bheem district which was only created yesterday. I note that there are some other categories you've nominated that are also new creations under 7 days old. Rather than revert a bunch of those, I thought I'd ask here; have I misunderstood the criteria? Thanks, (talk) 05:54, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think if you look at the conversation I had above this one, you'll find an answer to your question. Basically, the 7 days BEGINS when the page is tagged, it doesn't precede it. Without tagging an empty category, we have no way of tracking which categories have been empty 7 days. The deletion happens if the tagged category is empty after 7 days. If it isn't empty after 7 days, then the tag is removed and the category is not deleted. LizRead!Talk! 22:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see, thank you. That explains it. The text at WP:C1 is very misleading then. I will attempt to update it. Best, The Mirror Cracked (talk) 22:47, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's the Twinkle message to category creators that needs to be changed. I proposed a change a few months ago to it but I have neglected to carry it out. You're right, it is misleading and it has created unnecessary anxiety. LizRead!Talk! 22:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Masks in western dance, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Catherine Duncan, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Dear Liz, I am Mary
I have been an intern in a chinese renowned company for months now. I was in charge of updating the profile of the company in wikipedia. Before my arrival there was already an article on wikipedia but the data were out to date. Few months after i started the updating process. the page got suspended by you. The name of the page was 'CHINT Group' and the article got deleted on August 3rd 2019. Could you please restore it or at least explian me what i should do for the page to be restored? if not the most recent versions, the previous one that already existed before i started updating it because the company does not have any wikipedia page now. All the information that i updated were correct,i was using the intern data of the company, problem is most of them have not been officially published. If it is the reason why you deleted the article, please kindly let me know how to remedy to this situation. Regards, Mary.
Hello, Mary,
First, I have looked and looked and found no email that has been sent by you.
The article that I think you are referring to has been moved around to a lot of different titles. The pages I deleted were broken redirects...they were redirects to a page that had been deleted. I did not delete your article, just few pages (CHINT Group, CHINT Group Corp, CHINT Group Corporation) that pointed to it.
I believe that ultimately, the article that was deleted was on the page Chint Group that was deleted by admin Jimfbleak because the article was promotional and because of copyright infringement which would have happened if you, or another editor, used content that was taken from your company website or another source. Wikipedia content has to be original, written by you, not taken from other sources. If you click on Chint Group, you can see the reasons given for the deletion. Jimfbleak might have some additional comments if you contact him. LizRead!Talk! 00:41, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Advice
Hi Liz! You've always struck me as a decent person and I wanted to ask your advice. I hope this question isn't putting you on the spot. I recently received a BLP topic ban - I don't think it stands up to scrutiny, but that's a personal opinion and I may be interpreting policy in a strange or outright wrong way. Additionally, maybe it's for the best anyway that I stop editing. I don't really edit in areas which don't concern living people, as that doesn't interest me, and I doubt that I have a noticeably positive effect sometimes. Do you think I should appeal it or not? PeterTheFourth (talk) 03:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen few (none?) immediate topic ban appeals that have been passed. The only hope is that if there was a rogue admin who went against the opinions of every other admin participating in the discussion which I don't think happened here. There were some folks weighing in who didn't think it was a major offense but several people did.
I hope you can adjust your editing to accommodate this topic ban, which I think you could appeal in 3-6 months (without any violations). I think you have a positive effect on Wikipedia but I don't think you handled the AE complaint with enough seriousness which hurt you with the admins.
I hope you stay but, to be honest, I took two wikibreaks, one for six months and one for a year, and I came back with much more enthusiasm and energy so I don't think breaks are a bad thing. I encourage you to appeal the topic ban after a few months, when you've shown you can abide by the terms of the ban. Good luck! LizRead!Talk! 04:00, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I appreciate the advice - I'll step back. PeterTheFourth (talk) 04:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator changes
28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Miscellaneous
.jpg)
Done. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:32, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library
lists.wikimedia.org.
Arbitration
