- 1 Ali Saremi
- 2 Speedy deletion declined: Kimberley Leonard
- 3 New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019
- 4 Mis-use of the Twinkle rollback tool
- 5 I have unreviewed a page you curated
- 6 I have unreviewed a page you curated
- 7 AiroAv Anti Virus Software
- 8 Chahat Pandey
- 9 Speedy deletion nomination of Chahat Pandey
- 10 Airo Security (AiroAV)
- 11 Paid editing suspicion on Jeannine Bailliu
- 12 Kareem Khubchandani
- 13 A barnstar for you!
- 14 New page reviewer permission
- 15 Churaliya hai tumne jo dil jo removal
- 16 G12 speedy
Hello, I want to ask if you could not delete my article. I have in hand other reliable international sources such as from Amnesty international that I can add. This page is already published in Wikipedia Persian. Please remove the speedy deletion tag. I’ll really appreciate that. Thanks! Nikoo.Amini (talk) 23:53, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Kimberley Leonard
Hello Etzedek24. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Kimberley Leonard, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: presenting the news on a major news channel is a sufficient claim of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 07:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi Etzedek24! I have looked over my page of Morphe Cosmetics and believe that the information is now presented in a more objective manner. Hopefully you agree, I tried to find sources regarding this topic and pulled as many as I could from as reputable of mediums as I could. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vertyped (talk • contribs) 22:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Mis-use of the Twinkle rollback tool
AFD discussions very much are discussions, and rolling back the article creator's response to the question of an article's sourcing, with Twinkle's rollback tool, is wholly inappropriate. Do not do that again. Uncle G (talk) 23:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing MIT Vishwashanti Gurukul, Etzedek24.
Onel5969 has gone over this page again and marked it as unpatrolled. Their note is:
Hi. As per the discussion on the NPP talk page, articles which have been tagged for prod or speedy, should not be marked "reviewed" until after the tag has been adjudicated.
Please contact Onel5969 for any further query. Thanks.
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
AiroAv Anti Virus Software
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 the subject of 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 contribution. My name coincides with my own username here on Wikipedia and can easily be found online and emailed if necessary to confirm who I am. My Twitter handle is @dancohens and screenshots there can confirm my work. So that is my "affiliation" to security and purpose for creating the page as AIROAV is a Anti Virus company. But to be clear, my company Speed-net.com is not affiliated with AiroAV nor 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. I don't use the software myself, nor have I ever used it - so clearly not promoting it. Everything I stated in the Wikipedia 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 innocent computers into a reverse proxy that's used for malicious activity. This is not PR, rather HISTORICAL FACT and in the future, such reference on Wikipedia could prove invaluable for security researchers to follow up on.
All I stated in the Wikipedia was reference to the company as reported on Crunchbase (this helps malware researchers cooperate to find other coders who identified the malware variants) and the reference to the malware variant itself. How in the world can that be PR?
Finally, I was in Prague at Hackathon last month hanging out with Brian (the head of Wikipedia Security) and Sylvain (head of France's 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.
- @Danielcohens: Your credentials have nothing to with whether a page is kept or deleted from Wikipedia, nor do they make you better than any other editor on the site. The core issue is that the company did not meet the general notability guideline of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The linked articles discuss the company in only a passing mention, which does not satisfy the significant coverage guideline and thus the article, having little encylopedic substance only served to publicize the company. It may be helpful to see what Wikipedia is not to potentially further understand why it was not appropriate for the company to have its own article. It was also improperly created in mainspace after having been denied at Articles for Creation. Being an expert in the field and hanging out in real life at Wiki events and with Wiki staffers is not a substitute for understanding the process of the website. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 19:41, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
My only purpose of mentioning my credentials (in security) and even going to Hackathon is to ensure I'm not some PR guy cause the majority of people who arrive to both learn and contribute to Wikipedia are techies (as oppose to PR people). My education and work is security related only, but with and without connection to identifying and publicizing vulnerabilities, the purpose is raising awareness and community contribution. With no relation whatsoever to this subject, if you look at my edit committed a week ago, you can see it has nothing to do with PR, rather just updating an existing wikipedia with international news coinciding with the cancellation of a European countries democratic elections. As for this specific publication, I was not the original author. I read an article on the Register.co.uk of the virus and then started checking out the company. Google revealed a previous publication of the company here on Wikipedia which was up for speedy-deletion and subsequently erased. To me that publication appeared like PR. But I assure you that was not me publishing, nor my intention when I re-created with the proper references to Fossilebyte and the Register's article.
So was just surprised that I'd be suspect of PR for something where my intentions were only pure. In general, there are various viruses and malware (i.e. Stuxnet ) that have their own pages for both researchers and computer users. I didn't see this company mentioned a name for the virus so I mentioned them. But make no mistake I don't honestly care about the company, rather only the significance of identifying the manipulation of Google and Bing search results as that is synonymous with cloaking and fake news, etc. Anyway, just wanted to clarify my intentions. My best. --Danielcohens (talk) 20:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
i have added some more information on this article based on your guidelines, see if this time the meets your demands.
Speedy deletion nomination of Chahat Pandey
A tag has been placed on Chahat Pandey requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the .
Thanks for your message. I'm wondering why do the notability of Airo security is not enough, compared to other similar security companies the coverage seems at the same extent. In a practical manner, what kind of coverage is necessary? Please make it perfectly clear and elaborate as much as you can (for example - 'only security articles or news that are particularly covering the company are considered as significant coverage' ).
Thank you for your assistance!
Lidorga (talk) 17:19, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
Paid editing suspicion on Jeannine Bailliu
Hi, just wanted to let you know I'm going to remove the PROD from Jeannine Bailliu as the article was created by a student, not a paid editor. Many students learn to edit Wikipedia through the classroom assignment, and few continue to do so afterwards, explaining the pattern of edits. If you want to nominate the article for deletion, go ahead, but I just wanted to let you know that the editor is definitively not a paid editor. I'll post the same thing on the article talk page. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Civility Barnstar|
|Thank you. The nomination was confusing, even though you appear to have been correct that they are not notable. E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)|
New page reviewer permission
- @Bbb23: Oh, I'm sorry, and this is this first I've heard of it? I'm not a mind-reader, Bbb. Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 00:56, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- A couple of recent examples in speedy tagging. You tagged James Baillieu as a G11. First, I'm not sure why you were even reviewing an article that was created over three months ago. Usually an article that is "established", if it has a promotional issue, can either be (1) slapped with an advert tag or, better, (2) edited to remove any promotional material. However, in this instance, the article couldn't possibly be considered a G11, and your action demonstrated a lack of understanding of the tag. Second, you tagged Kankrej, Gujarat, a place article, as a G2. What on earth made you think it a test page? It too was created months ago. Place articles are almost never taggable unless you can demonstrate it's a hoax. In this case, it certainly isn't a G2. Besides the recent mistagging, I've noticed that you often prod articles that are removed, and you often send articles to AfD that are kept. At least in one instance you actually withdrew your nomination because of the keep votes. I'm sorry to remove your permission because I can see you've been working very hard at curating articles, but I think you need to reflect more on what each tag means, when they are used, and whether they are applicable than you apparently have before you plunged in. The same is true for prodding and AfD. BTW, your ping didn't work. For a ping to work, you have to sign at the same time as you ping. If you sign it as a separate edit, no notification is made.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Churaliya hai tumne jo dil jo removal
Hello! I’m Nyantiaz, the person who created that page - I feel it was unfair that the page was just removed and turned into a redirect with no discussion, no notice, whatsoever. I feel this was unfair and unnecessary because there are many other song articles just like this one, and with NO discussion or notice given to me, the article creator, I feel suddenly deleting the article and just making a redirect with NO talk or notice at all was unfair. I would’ve liked at least a discussion or a sign that you were going to do this, and we could talk about the article’s significance or at least notify me. I feel this is unfair and just had to leave a message addressing my concerns. Please respond back. Nyantiaz (talk) 02:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi - just a small request when you nominate a page for WP:G12 speedy deletion. When you put the URL of the page in where the copyrighted text comes from, please include the HTTP or HTTPS portion of the URL at the beginning. This is required so that the copyvios report link will display. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 12:41, 15 July 2019 (UTC)