User talk:Jared Preston

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This is a Wikipedia user talk page.

If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated, and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at

Wikimedia Foundation

Potsdamer Kickers[edit]

I'm currently updating football club articles in Brandenburg and came to the Potsdamer Kickers article in the process. I can't find any indication that this club is notable in any form, never having played above tier seven Landeliga level it seems. As the creator could you let me know what its notability is before I nominate it for deletion? I looked in the links but its pretty much orphaned as well. Thanks, Calistemon (talk) 08:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Calistemon, I created this article a long time ago and thought it was pretty cool that they had never been relegated. Whether or not that was grounds for notability, I do not know. Times have changed a lot! Anyway, the women's team competed in the 2013–14 DFB-Pokal der Frauen, which should qualify for notability. I have added a wikilink to the club in said article. Have a nice weekend! Jared Preston (talk) 10:17, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
No worries, the DFB-Pokal participation of the women's team settles the notability question. I know what you mean, sometimes I look back at an article and wonder why I bothered creating it! Have a good time, Calistemon (talk) 12:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Maybe you would be so kind as to add a short section to the article (something like "Women's football team") along those lines. I'm really not up to standards on footie articles of late, spending way too much time on tennis biographies and statistics. Having said that, what with the zillions of footballers qualifying for notability, there's a lot to be done in this field too. I'm very thankful that you've taken time to clean-up and update some of my older articles, especially here about the clubs. That's very kind. German football is so cool, a great atmosphere for any fan, and the action of lower league football in and around Berlin and Brandenburg is some of the best I've ever seen. If it wasn't for the fact that I don't live there any more, or my strange hours at work, then I'd love to be back on the pitch or visiting the stadium or Sportplatz every Saturday. Jumpers for goalposts! :) What actually got you interested in German football, if I may be so curious? Jared Preston (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Like you I don't live there anymore and only support my local team, FC Augsburg from a (very long) distance. The only time I ever get back to Germany seems to be during the summer break and I have not seen my favourite club play since 1995! The task of cleaning up all the club articles in Germany is daunting, there is so many. I have previously focused only on Southern Germanh, because of time constraints but doing a boring night shift on a remote mine in Western Australia has given me a bit of spare time. Calistemon (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Re: Hungarian spelling[edit]

Here it is listed as Csöregi on the Twitter page of the Hungarian Tennis Association. I think we should stick to this. here Keroks (talk) 06:12, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

A colleague over at Wikidata also found this news article with the "Csöregi" spelling. Jared Preston (talk) 11:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Lina Gjorcheska[edit]

Hi, I'm not sure about this, but should her surname be written as Lina Ǵorčeska? If you put her name in Cyrillic into google translate Лина Ѓорческа, it comes up with that form of spelling when it is romanised. Not too sure about this though as there isn't much information about the letters. Keroks (talk) 13:11, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Not only because all sources spell her name "Gjorcheska", if you see the Wikipedia article "Romanization of Macedonian", it seems that the letter Ѓ can be transliterated as GJ. So it seems the usual spelling as per WTA/ITF et al. is fine. Jared Preston (talk) 13:21, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Tournament flagicons[edit]

Hi Jared, just a gentle reminder that flagicons should only be used for players and not for tournament locations (per WP:Tennis and MOS guidelines). Keep up the good work. --Wolbo (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in updating ITF player articles to comply with WP:MOSICON. There have been several discussions in the past on the proper use of flagicons in articles, and debates on that topic pop up with some regularity. This shows points of contention still exist regarding their usage but there is a broad consensus that they should not be used for (tournament) locations, even if some sources, such as the ITF website, use them for that purpose. Almost all player articles on the WTA/ATP level have already been cleaned-up so I was surprised to see that so many ITF player articles still use them. If we comply with this part of the guidelines we have a stronger position in any future discussions on using flagicons for the representative nationality of players; it will at least show we are not flagicon-fetishists. --Wolbo (talk) 14:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata parameters[edit]

Hey, Jared. How do I add birth place and birth name to the list of Wikidata parameters for a given profile? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:32, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: Hi, under "Statements" click "add". In the left hand box you then see "property" where you can either type date of birth, or the property number P569 and then on the right hand side add what is known of the date (i.e. just the year, or the month and year, or the full date) and press save. With "birth name" (P1477), you add the full name given to the person at birth, and where the language box shows up underneath, add their native language. If the person is Russian, for example, you'd give the whole name (including patronymic) and specify Russian. Again, all you need to do is hit "save". Hope that helps. If you want be to do any particular edit for you on a Wikidata item, just specify what and where. Jared Preston (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Jared. I'm not trying to do anything fancy, just get the basic datapoints down on the Wikidata profiles before the persondata templates get removed. A lot of folks bought into persondata for the last 5 or 6 years, and it would be a shame to see all of that work wasted by simply removing it without any real effort to transfer significant and accurate data like fullnames, maiden names, married names and birthplaces. Is there any plan to do another Wikidata bot run to pick up newly entered persondata brief descriptions, etc., since the last bot run? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:04, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
I have no idea who runs what bot when and how, but a lot of work is also done semi-automatically by users such as you and I, too. As for maiden names, only rarely have I seen those detailed with persondata's "alternative names", so that obviously has to be added manually. I see you have already been busy adding aliases of maiden names today already! Jared Preston (talk) 18:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
More married names than maiden names. I've spent a lot of time working with American college athletes and Olympic swimmers from the English-speaking countries over the last several years, and invariably women athletes in their late teens and early 20s are widely known by their maiden names, but most later get married (some more than once). Those are the accurate name variants I'm keen to preserve. I've also noticed that whether the birth place has been imported into Wikidata is rather hit-and-miss. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 18:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── FYI, Jared, here's an example of what the Wikidata-persondata transfer bot missed in the last article I just edited: [1]: occupation, birth place, updated brief description, full name. The transfer bot is leaving behind a lot of perfectly accurate and usable information. I just transferred all of that data manually to Wikidata. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

why you moved it back?[edit]

hey man, it's al sUbah. We don't say sAbah. Sabah is a lady's name . Khaleejian (talk) 07:38, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Funny how he's been known by that name all of his life until you came along and moved the page. Jared Preston (talk) 13:31, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Navay Asatid (album)[edit]

Hello Jared Preston. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Navay Asatid (album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: the artist Alireza Eftekhari has an article, so WP:CSD#A9 does not aply. Album may not be notable - consider PROD or AfD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

@JohnCD: your call. Note that the article has since been blanked by one of the prolific Iranian spammers. Jared Preston (talk) 13:30, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

WikiData question[edit]

Hey, Jared. My Wikidata interface previously displayed English, French and Spanish language input fields in the top section of article profiles, and I was using all three for input data. I have accidentally screwed something up, and now it is only displaying English language data fields. How do I restore the French and Spanish fields? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 20:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: I never had any luck by setting the languages in "Preferences" by Wikidata, which is the reason why I created a babel box. I'd suggest you do the same. Maybe it's some sort of javascript problem, a Mediawiki bug has been affecting many bots, especially here on Wikipedia the last few days, but I guess that's not it either... Have you heard of LabelLister? This tool is very, very useful for adding/editing labels/descriptions/aliases in any language. You can activate it as a gadget and I don't know what I'd do without it! Jared Preston (talk) 12:29, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Jared. I activated the LabelLister gadget in my preferences, but nothing happened. I tinkered with the language preferences some more, and then I got Spanish and French labels to re-appear (minus the Chinese, which was previously present). Not sure exactly what I did, but it seems the gadget somehow interacts with the main language preferences. Works for me, but I'm not sure I could duplicate the process. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 12:55, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Hey, JP, what's the correct Wikidata parameter to use for honorary inductions, like membership in the College Football Hall of Fame, or the International Swimming Hall of Fame? Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:44, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Dirtlawyer1: with hundreds of properties on offer, I don't know if there is a special one for inductions, but what you could do is use P166 (award received; award or recognition received by a person, organisation or creative work), see how it is already used in the item about U2 for example, together with P585 (point in time) as a qualifier. For a swimmer link Q744713 (International Swimming Hall of Fame) and the point in time for the date of induction. I don't think there's anything wrong with that; data is data, whatever property is used. The important thing is that it's added! Jared Preston (talk) 17:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Two photos uploaded by you on 8 September 2013[edit]

Hi Jared,

For your information, please note this (and consequently this).

According to her ITF junior profile, Indy de Vroome played against the Swedish Ellen Allgurin during that tournament (2011 Junior US Open). And the face seems to match her photo of one year later.

For good understanding: I am not blaming you. I guess that the photographer (robbiesaurus) made a wrong note of the player's name when shooting at the 2011 match.

Kind regards, Vinkje83 (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, robbiesaurus made the mistake which I just copied back then, not knowing any better. Since you very kindly pointed it out, I had a look around and found Richard van Loon's set on flickr, which confirms who is who. I don't think there is any doubt left, so I asked on Commons for the file names to be changed, which has just been done. The files are now located at:
Thanks for letting me know! Jared Preston (talk) 08:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Well done! Thanks for taking these effective measures. Vinkje83 (talk) 09:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Joan Ingram[edit]

Hello Jared,

I suspect that the 'Joan Ingram' who played tennis in the 1930's (and possibly also table tennis in the 1920's) might not be the same person as described in the article Joan Ingram (no birth date there, alas).

Perhaps this is a matter you might be able to investigate and possibly solve, somehow.

Thanks and regards, Vinkje83 (talk) 16:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vinkje83: I'm not quite sure why you're asking me as I've never made any edits on tennis-related articles going back that far in time. First of all, I found this (@, and with my findmypast account, can at least confirm that those details are correct (although the date of death for this particular "Joan Mary Ingram" could have been at any time in the first quarter of 1981, I don't see where the "March" comes from). I guess the Scottish broadcaster Joan Ingram is a different person, as is the Joan Ingram at IMDb. What else can I do? I don't own any tennis archive books... Jared Preston (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry for bothering you about something that now appears to be outside your area. Somehow you have become my primary point of contact about women's tennis on en-wiki. Perhaps you know any colleague who operates in the far history of tennis, and pass the matter on?
In the meantime, I did what I could do to split the three persons up. See the new Joan Ingram. Hopefully I did't violate too many local rules, being from a different wiki. Vinkje83 (talk) 19:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
It's not that you bothered me. Please, if you have any questions, I am always willing to help where it's possible. I know you'd do the same! Maybe Wolbo is more knowledgeable on this one. As for the new disambiguation page, that seems fine to me! Jared Preston (talk) 20:10, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I don't have a lot of info at hand on Joan Ingram, but I'm happy to have a look to see what can be found. She should have an article. In any case, the three instances of Joan Ingram seem to be separate persons so the disamb page is fine.--Wolbo (talk) 23:11, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Kristina Pliskova listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Kristina Pliskova. Since you had some involvement with the Kristina Pliskova redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. 333-blue 08:25, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Requesting help translating info from German wikipedia to stub in English wikipedia article Gun-Brit Barkmin[edit]

Hello, Jared. I found your name at Wikipedia:Translators available. I contributed a stub on the German soprano, Gun-Brit_Barkmin. I tried a machine translation of the German source but it isn't good enough to figure out its meaning (What on earth does "Both parents went to sea and developed a fondness for Swedish name." mean for example?) Do you think you could help me in translating the page over to English? I don't speak German at all. Thanks! SageGreenRider (talk) 19:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

@SageGreenRider: It appears you've done a good job so far, speaking as a Briton living in Germany. German isn't an easy language to speak fluently, although it's not the hardest either! I'm always a bit suspicious of one-to-one translations, and I'm afraid I can't offer you much specific help here since I have no knowledge of operas. However, I can tell you what the sentence means: quite simply, her parents were sailors (and as sailors, whilst travelling [at sea] developed their fondness for Swedish names). I can't confirm this though, the Berliner Morgenpost article is hidden behind a paywall. Jared Preston (talk) 05:33, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Ok Thanks! Do you think it means sailors as a profession? Or as a hobby? I'm guessing the latter from the context. (Rostock is a port town on the Baltic Sea not far from the Swedish coast.) SageGreenRider (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
No, the connotation is actually the former. But such a wishy-washy source text (the original German) probably shouldn't have been written in a Wikipedia article anyway. Having said that, I don't know much about East Germans working on cruise ships in the time leading up to 1971, the year of Barkmin's birth. Anyway, the German article says she now lives in Berlin, in case you wanted to add that. Jared Preston (talk) 12:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
OK I'll fix it... one more thing... the Badische Zietung cite has "Und etwas Hell-Kindliches spricht auch aus Gun-Brit Barkmins Sopran: eine "weiße" Stimme, die in den hochdramatischen Gipfeltouren immer wieder schafft, was man ihr eben noch kaum zutrauen wollte – ein Kristall-Sopran von eigenartiger Faszination dazu, der öfter etwas Klirrend-Gläsernes hat." which Google translates as "And something light and childlike speaks from Gun-Brit Barkmins Soprano: a 'white' vote, which creates in the highly dramatic summit tours always what one you just barely wanted to trust - a crystal-soprano of strange fascination to the often slightly clinking-Gläsernes has." [my emphasis] Any clues about what "Klirrend-Gläsernes" are/is? And could Gipfeltouren be translated as climaxes? Thanks again SageGreenRider (talk) 12:21, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Seldom have I read such a badly written newspaper article, full of metaphors that make absolutely no sense whatsoever! "Stimme" means voice (as well as vote), and a "Gipfeltour", as far as I know, is simply a tour of mountain peaks, of which I'm sure Switzerland has many... Jared Preston (talk) 12:49, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
OK I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to hack through Herr Koch's flowery language! ;-) SageGreenRider (talk) 13:02, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Valeria Gorlats[edit]

Hey there, just wondering about Valeria Gorlats as I've seen some Estonian websites spell her surname as Gorlatš but then some sites just simply spell it as Gorlats. Would like some clarification on this! Thanks. Also how come you've sort of abandoned me on the ITF Women's Circuit :( At the moment it's basically myself carrying the whole ship! Thanks! Keroks (talk) 22:53, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

@Keroks: I can't really help! I see the same, some Gorlats, some Gorlatš. I'd have thought her parents wouldn't be ethnic Estonian (judging by both the given and family names) and so Gorlats, to me, would appear to be right, because, well, it's more Russian. Or Ukrainian? I haven't got a clue, but it just doesn't seem very Estonian to me. I came across a topic in her name on, there it's Gorlatš. Are you a member there? I've never posted anything, it's not really my thing. In fact, there's a bit too much going on there for my liking, but I've had a quick look a few times over the past few years. The Estonian Wikipedia, by the way, also has the article at Valeria Gorlats, so I don't know! Anyway, yes, I'm afraid I've not been up to much here and there are a number of contributing factors for that. First of all, I've been really busy on Wikidata lately. In September I was on holiday and since then I've twice had a cold and not been well. What doesn't help is when other things get in your way, be that pointless AfDs on-wiki (just a more recent example), or more shifts at work "in real life". There's always something to do! Are you in need of help? I should be up to speed in a couple of weeks. So please bear with me! Something else that has been playing on my mind, though, is the 2016 calendar. Back in the summer (or winter Down Under!) I saw that the ITF are overhauling their tournament categories for the coming year, so we'll need to think of some colour coding at the very least. Are you willing to have a look into that now/soon/or shall we do this closer to the time? And one last question, Keroks, will you be watching the 2015 Rugby World Cup Final this weekend? I can't wait! Jared Preston (talk) 00:02, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
@Jared Preston: Yeh the member who changed the title to Gorlatš isn't quite trustworthy haha! And yes I do post there quite regularly. I guess if Estonian Wiki has Gorlats then we'll just keep it like that. No, not really that much in need of help, except in the next couple weeks I do have some exams but I'm afraid that I am spending too much time on Wiki! (It's too addicting). That's okay if you are too busy to contribute, we should always put real life first :) Yes the ITF are changing the prize money range, but however as you can see here that only in 2016 they are scrapping 15ks so we don't have to worry about it until 2017. But I guess in 2017 we could just change the 100k colour to 125k, 75k to 90k, etc. Gonna be confusing with ITF 125ks and WTA 125ks haha! And no, I don't watch rugby haha! Basically my life just revolves around tennis 24/7. Anyway, hope you are well, take care :) Keroks (talk) 01:06, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
@Keroks: I've just made my first update to 2015 ITF Women's Circuit (October–December). A lot of new redlinks reaching the quarterfinals! Although I think there were more earlier in the year. Cool that you're a member on tennisforum. I don't know how you manage to navigate around the site! But I guess Wikipedia is the same for new users. Do you know if a lot of other users there edit articles here? Some people seem to have a lot of knowledge and personal connections to the sport, I was just thinking that it would be really good if some would donate their photos to Wikimedia Commons for use in our articles. Anyway, I wish you all the best of luck for your exams! Don't forget to revise and go to bed early the night before! Jared Preston (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
@Jared Preston: Great to have you back :) The site is easy to navigate haha! I'm not quite sure there are many people who edit wikipedia on there actually, not that I'm aware of. One member called catgamer used to do the ITF Women's Circuit with me but he's kinda disappeared from wiki and more on tennisforum now. There are some people who post pictures from tournaments, but not often, I'll ask them if I get a chance. I also have been going to the Australian Open for a couple years now and I do take pictures as you can see on my flickr here, I've only updated pictures to Priscilla Hon and Bojana Bobusic though, feel free to use any if you want :) Keroks (talk) 00:38, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Another obscure German phrase...[edit]

Hi! Me again!

I placed a cite on Communicant Semiconductor Technologies. The German title is:

Valerius, G., Gleiche Chancen ungleich genutzt? : erwerbsbiographische Mobilitätspfade im ostdeutschen Transformationsprozeß zwischen 1990 und 1996 ; Studie zum beruflichen Verbleib einer ausgewählten Ingenieurgruppe des VEB Halbleiterwerk Frankfurt (Oder)

Using Google translate and some guess work I came up with:

"Equal opportunities used unequally? : Work biography mobility paths(tr.?) in the East German transformation process between 1990 and 1996 ; Study on the professional fate of a selected group of engineers of the state-owned enterprise, Semiconductor Factory in Frankfurt (Oder)

...but I'm having trouble with "erwerbsbiographische Mobilitätspfade"

Any clues?

Cheers SageGreenRider (talk) 00:38, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@SageGreenRider: Again, you've picked some really fancy, made-up German shit! Well, erwerbsbiographisch is the adjective to "Erwerbsbiographie" – employment history. Mobilitätspfad (plural Mobilitätspfade) is a made up compound word. It's one which I don't really know how to explain, let alone translate. It's not translatable, let's just say that. Anyway, here's an attempt at an explanation: if you have trained for a job and worked in this field for 20 years, then, for example, the company goes bust and you become redundant, but can't find a similar job, you end up becoming flexible and work in another field. This journey, so to say, of changing your profession, could be a Mobilitätspfad, but this is only my understanding of the word. Maybe it has a different meaning, but I doubt it has a real denotation, because it is not a word you will find in any normal dictionary. With that, it's hard to define a single word, or even short phrase, in English for comparison. I'm sorry! Jared Preston (talk) 20:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for giving it a shot! I think I get the idea at least. It's something to do with forced career development, retraining and so on.SageGreenRider (talk) 20:59, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Meaning of paragraph?[edit]

Hi! Can you help me again? In:

...I'm struggling to understand the penultimate para:

Allerdings sollen namhafte Ausrüster nach anderen Informationen von der Konkurrenz in Dresden – dort entstehen derzeit neue Fertigungsstätten für Infineon – gewarnt worden sein: Sie sollten keine Verträge mit Communicant abschließen, weil die Bund-Landes-Bürgschaft nicht gewährt werde. Bei Communicant glaubt man, dass eine mächtige Lobby, die bis ins Bundeswirtschaftsministerium reicht, den Bau der Chipfabrik in Frankfurt verhindern will.

Google gives:

However, to well-known supplier for other information apart from the competition in Dresden - there are currently emerging new production facilities for Infineon - be warned: You should not conclude contracts with Communicant because the federal-state-guarantee was not granted. that a powerful lobby, which dates back to the Federal Ministry of Economics, wants to prevent the building of the chip factory in Frankfurt.

The "However, to well-known supplier for other information apart from the competition in Dresden..." and "In Communicant one believes..." phrases don't make much sense to me. SageGreenRider (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@SageGreenRider: This one is easy compared to the others before, I've translated the whole thing for you!

However, well-known suppliers have been warned by new information coming from the competition in Dresden – for it is there that new production facilities for Infineon are being developed – they shouldn't negotiate new contracts with Communicant because federal-state-guarantees have not been granted. Communicant believes that a powerful lobby, reaching as far as the Federal Ministry of Economics, wants to prevent the building of the chip factory in Frankfurt.

Jared Preston (talk) 09:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Wow! That's intriguing. Is the journalist implying that Infineon is or is part of powerful lobby against Communicant? They certainly seem to be at each others throats on many fronts... SageGreenRider (talk) 12:45, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes. Jared Preston (talk) 16:42, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Savvyjack23 (talk) 07:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Christian Saba - Part 2[edit]

Hi there JP, from Portugal,

thanks for being a kind TPS. However, does this (also) mean I have translated the ref in Mr. Saba's article poorly? If so, can you help out please?

Happy 2016, cheers -- (talk) 00:36, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

It is a very literal translation, but seems fine to me. I don't see the need to translate the titles of references, as it's the text that needs to be understood. That's only my opinion though! Jared Preston (talk) 00:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, great point! Does not do any good if one understands the title perfectly then makes nothing of the proper text. -- (talk) 01:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Tournament date[edit]

Hi Jared, can you tell me if the tournament date mentioned in a player's 'ITF finals' table is always the start date of the tournament? Noticed that your update at Indy de Vroome shows the start date (1 February 2016) of the Grenoble tournament. The reason I'm asking is that, to my knowledge, the same date field in a player's 'ATP finals' table, e.g. Roger Federer career statistics, shows the date of the final instead of the start date. It would be rather confusing to our readers (and editors) if the same field in the same table has different meanings depending on whether it is ITF or ATP/WTA. --Wolbo (talk) 17:33, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

No, it's not the tournament start date. Nor is it the date of the final. It is the date of the Monday of the week in which the tournament commenced. Maybe not ideal, but it aligns well with the rankings, as they are always dated on a Monday. It is not always certain when exactly a tournament final is played, especially going back just a couple of years on the ITF circuit. Singles finals are sometimes Saturdays, usually on a Sunday, but have also quite often been on the following Monday due to bad weather delays, etc. Some events in the UK don't even start until a Wednesday, unbelievably! Theoretically, one could start adding in the exact date of the final, although, given that it is impossible to know the exact day that a particular final was played (and completed!) on for every current and former player, going back in history, I find it a fair consolation to leave it as is. After all, as far as I'm concerned, the player has played the whole week before making the final. You may disagree with my theory, but it is uniform (like the week commencing rankings) and that's how it was when I started editing articles – I'm fine with it, but it's fine to ask. Jared Preston (talk) 17:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

About Yuuki Tanaka[edit]

Hi Jared, and thank you for taking the time to check that article.
I'm no specialist in the area of tennis... and quite frankly, I'm no specialist in any area...
I found her article as a red-link in the February 2016 "most wanted articles" list. I note there are also now by my count 73 tennis biographies and tournament articles that link to her article:

  1. 2007 Wimbledon Championships – Girls' Doubles
  2. Jessica Moore (tennis)
  3. Anastasija Sevastova
  4. Dunlop World Challenge
  5. Luksika Kumkhum
  6. Melanie Klaffner
  7. 2010 ITF Women's Circuit (April–June)
  8. 2010 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September)
  9. Aleksandrina Naydenova
  10. Nungnadda Wannasuk
  11. 2011 ITF Women's Circuit (January–March)
  12. 2011 ITF Women's Circuit (April–June)
  13. Veronika Kapshay
  14. 2011 Kofu International Open
  15. 2011 Kofu International Open – Singles
  16. 2011 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September)
  17. 2012 ITF Women's Circuit
  18. 2012 ITF Women's Circuit (April–June)
  19. 2012 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September)
  20. 2012 ITF Women's Circuit (October–December)
  21. Ipek Soylu
  22. 2013 ITF Women's Circuit
  23. 2013 ITF Women's Circuit (January–March)
  24. 2013 ITF Women's Circuit (October–December)
  25. Varunya Wongteanchai
  26. Makoto Ninomiya
  27. Peangtarn Plipuech
  28. 2013 Fukuoka International Women's Cup – Doubles
  29. 2013 Kurume Best Amenity Cup – Singles
  30. 2013 Kurume Best Amenity Cup – Doubles
  31. 2013 Kurume Best Amenity Cup
  32. Mari Tanaka
  33. Ayumi Oka (tennis)
  34. Xenia Knoll
  35. Tennis at the 2013 Summer Universiade – Women's Singles
  36. Tennis at the 2013 Summer Universiade – Women's Doubles
  37. Lesley Kerkhove
  38. 2013 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Singles
  39. 2013 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Doubles
  40. 2013 Dunlop World Challenge
  41. 2014 ITF Women's Circuit (April–June)
  42. 2014 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September)
  43. 2014 ITF Women's Circuit (October–December)
  44. 2014 Fukuoka International Women's Cup
  45. 2014 Fukuoka International Women's Cup – Singles
  46. 2014 Reinert Open – Doubles
  47. Hiroko Kuwata
  48. 2014 Korea Open – Singles
  49. Tian Ran
  50. Nao Hibino
  51. 2014 Dunlop World Challenge
  52. Eva Wacanno
  53. 2014 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Singles
  54. 2014 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Doubles
  55. 2015 ITF Women's Circuit (January–March)
  56. 2015 ITF Women's Circuit (April–June)
  57. 2015 ITF Women's Circuit (July–September)
  58. 2015 ITF Women's Circuit (October–December)
  59. Elise Mertens
  60. 2015 Kangaroo Cup – Doubles
  61. 2015 Fukuoka International Women's Cup – Doubles
  62. 2015 Kurume Best Amenity Cup – Doubles
  63. Miyu Kato (tennis)
  64. Xun Fangying
  65. Wang Yan (tennis)
  66. Kofu International Open
  67. 2015 Ando Securities Open
  68. 2015 Ando Securities Open – Singles
  69. 2015 Dunlop World Challenge
  70. 2015 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Singles
  71. 2015 Dunlop World Challenge – Women's Doubles
  72. Akiko Omae
  73. 2016 Launceston Tennis International – Women's Doubles

While the article about Tanaka may not pass the WP:NTENNIS test, perhaps she may otherwise meet the WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO and so on tests. What do you think about this? --Shirt58 (talk) 12:17, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

For a start, Shirt58, many of the links you provide above were only created by you with the edit summary "Link Yuuki Tanaka - article happening soon", and although I know redlinks are an urge to create an article, I don't want to chastise you any more as you aren't familiar with the project notability standards. I think the same thing happened to me when I started out editing tennis articles! As for the rest, as the article stands, I don't think it does pass either WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. As for the former, the onus is on you as creator, and the latter maybe in your administrative efforts. But further to that, I don't really have anything to add, sorry. Jared Preston (talk) 15:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
The feeling is mutual. I don't have anything further to say to you.--Shirt58 (talk) 12:10, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Changing tennis pictures[edit]


You have sometimes edited my daughter, Cici Bellis, Wikipedia page. I am trying to change the profile picture but cannot figure out how to do that. i have uploaded a better picture through Wikipedia Commons but dont know how to then upload and embed it on the site.

Would you have any tips?


Gordon Bellis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lydian64 (talkcontribs) 20:58, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Gordon: I'm afraid to say the picture you uploaded to Wikimedia Commons isn't better, it is in fact of a very poor quality because it is so small. The problem here, however, is that you've uploaded a picture taken from the Internet. This isn't allowed on the Commons because it is copyrighted. I suggest you read more about it at: Commons:Licensing. My advice to you, if you are her father, is that you take a photo yourself that you can directly upload, either here at Wikipedia, or at the Commons, under a "free license" – just like the photos I've taken with my digicam over the years. Jared Preston (talk) 21:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
I see now you've now uploaded a second, larger, photo to the Commons. Judging by the first, though, I guess this one is from the Internet too. Save your time and don't do this, because sooner or later these files will be deleted. Jared Preston (talk) 21:24, 15 May 2016 (UTC)


A few days ago on 27 Aug, a new editor deleted Cici's Junior and Pro Career sections. It would be easier for me to ask you to reinsert the sections than for me to undo all of the edits since then. I tried to undo just that one entry but was unsuccessful.


Gordon Bellis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lydian64 (talkcontribs) 13:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Third place medals in EUROs[edit]

You might want to open a discussion rather than edit war over the medals. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football might be the best place for the discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: I've never been involved in an edit war before and wasn't planning to over this either. Have you ever heard of third places being awarded at the UEFA European Championship? Jared Preston (talk) 06:35, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I suspected that you weren't going to go into an edit war, but I wanted to be fair to the other editor who appears to be heading in that direction. Maybe a mention on the project's talk page would be in order. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

2016 Aegon Classic[edit]

Hi Jared,

could I ask you to try and fix this duplication:


Looking at previous years (since 2009 all were named 20xx Aegon Classic), the one to be picked would be 2016 Aegon Classic.

I could try to repair this myself, but I do not know all of en-wiki rules and procedures, and I don't want to violate any of them.

Thanks for your effort.

Kind regards, Vinkje83 (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Vinkje83: Sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I've had a bit of a stressy time recently. Although I agree with you, I wasn't totally 100% sure at the time, because the LTA had marketed the tournament with the Birmingham suffix this year. I don't know exactly if that was the case in previous years though. Another user had already redirected the article, since 2016 Aegon Classic Birmingham had been created almost two weeks previously. All the information there was up-to-date too, so I don't think it's a bad thing. These WTA tournament pages are heavily edited by numerous users, and if none of them has taken affront, it's probably best to leave it. I hope you're not too disappointed – the appropriate way to go about a change would be Wikipedia:Requested moves. Jared Preston (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. In 2015, the tournament was also named 'Aegon Classic Birmingham' (see here), but nobody saw that to be a reason for using the Birmingham suffix in the article name. This year being no different than last year, I was surprised by how the situation had developed. For now, I agree with you that it's probably best to leave it.
In the meantime, I noticed that the duplication had been 'solved'. Just one chapter (containing the ranking points and prize money tables) was incomplete on the surviving article (in an earlier stage I completed those tables on the concurrent, now killed, article). I decided for acquiescence, and just dug up the completed tables from the overridden article's history (which, fortunately, was not destroyed). Vinkje83 (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Guideline troubles[edit]

Of course all of this is against hard-fought, long-established guidelines. If we simply put a small win total and a commented out runner-up total, maybe that would help with your editing additions? That way no one has to look at trivial tallying when the total is already in the header. Yet it allows for easy editing when a new event is added to the total. For my money I'd comment out the win total too, but you seem to like it in multiple places. But marking loss/win number 7 out of 32 is really fringe stuff imho. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

@Fyunck(click): The problem is/was/would be the totals. It may seem trivial, but it was easier to check that the totals at the top were correct. You are right in as far as commenting out the win totals as well seems better, because listing one and not the other seems strange. To that affect, I have updated the article on Réka Luca Jani, but with commented out sub-totals of fives – which may seem easier in scrolling (in the edit window) for the future. I picked this one, because the player in question has played in over 70 finals on the ITF Women's Circuit, and scrolling from top to bottom and back can be time consuming. But all-in-all, it doesn't really change much. I concede the old "No." columns for the new "Category" one. It is important for the visually impaired not to be excluded from Wikipedia, so it's really not a problem in adding those. So in summary, you will find the appropriate changes there with the only addition from me being the commented out #5, #10, #15, etc. I'd obviously appreciate some time to update the articles one by one. Jared Preston (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
You know, I had only thought of the commenting out just now in our conversations. Since it would be commented out, I would also conceded to you that it could also be done with the runner-ups. What about making the last entry of wins and runner-ups also having a commented out final total? That way a new editor only has to look at the last entry instead of 3 or 4 up? I like that we're working this through and trying to understand each other's povs. It seems like the way wikipedia should work. I always feel that first and foremost our readers are priority #1, but if there are things we can do to help out our editors we have to look at that too. Any other concerns or thoughts? Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:50, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
@Fyunck(click): I guess, it doesn't really matter if the final total is there or not. Some may add it, some may forget it, or forget to remove #23 when #24 comes up, or removes #25 when #26 is already listed. Thanks. Umm, yes, there is one last thing I cannot understand: We have the statistics for final appearances, let's take Federer's record of 27 Grand Slam singles finals. Some users started some time ago writing "(17 titles, 10 runners-up)", which although isn't wrong, just seems like repetition of the statistics already listed in that section. There are 17 "wins" and 10 "runners-up" right below the heading. So what is wrong with the simple yet effective "(17–10)"? There is no guideline about this, but I think the same as you – namely, that the average Wikipedia user and reader of our articles isn't dumb. There's nothing wrong with (17–10). I'm of the opinion that if you don't know what that means, then you probably shouldn't be looking at tennis players' stats. This may only be a minor issue, and nobody seems to mind my preference in the ITF stats tables, but for the WTA results (and only for those, strangely enough!), I seem to get reverted a lot – and due to a lack of guideline or example on our pages, I cannot see that I'm in the wrong. If you disagree, I will need a fair bit of persuasion on this issue! What are your thoughts? Jared Preston (talk) 22:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
I think I saw people arguing about this years ago and it wasn't worth my time to care if it was (17–10) or (17 wins, 10 runners-up). To me (17–10) is perfectly understandable, shorter and cleaner. No need for any more. And with it came a problem of my own making. Since they were all fully written out as wins and runner-up, I was changing all the multiple runner-ups to runners-up. It turns out that is WRONG. When tallying the number of runner-up finals it is properly "runner-ups" not "runners-up as in standard English. We had to consult many authorities to find this out. So I was wrong to change them to runners-up. I have since been changing them back. Non tennis editors also ask me why in the results table we have "winner" and "runner-up" when we could just as easily have "win" and "loss"... all I say is it's what we decided in our guidelines. It wouldn't really make the column less wide to use win and loss because "result" and the sort button take up 9 or 10 characters anyway. Otherwise we could use "W" and "L". But I agree with your (17–10) notation. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Pinging @Wolbo: for having reverted me just now at Mira Antonitsch, Jesika Malečková and Kim Grajdek. What now? Jared Preston (talk) 12:28, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
There was a recent RfC about the in/exclusion of the No. column and the outcome was that there is no consensus either way. The closer stated "None of that is a clear consensus to go change hundreds (thousands?) of articles to match the project's existing guidelines." (i.e. remove the No. column). For that reason I reverted the removal of the No. column. Unfortunately this also removed the category field which should be included and I will re-add it for these articles. Will also make an effort to add the Category column to other player articles in the future. As you may have guessed I'm certainly not in favor of removing the No. column. It is a long-standing edit consensus which provides info and takes up very little space. To prevent edit-warring it is probably best to revisit the discussion on the tennis talk page and in the meantime freeze the situation.--Wolbo (talk) 12:47, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@Wolbo and Fyunck(click): I'm really sorry, I completely missed that RfC! Would you, Fyunck, concede the No. column being left but still have the category added? Wolbo, honestly, I was trying to help, and without wanting to join anyone's side, as you can tell from Fyunck's talkpage, I was against the column being deleted as well. The category is important though, I will re-visit the article on Anna-Lena Friedsam. Maybe it would be a good idea to ask User:Graham87 on his views too, maybe he could chip in with his ideas and experience (sorry Graham, if you're not much of a tennis fan, I was just thinking about you when Fyunck and I started this discussion mentioning accessability yesterday). Jared Preston (talk) 12:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@Graham87: Having implemented the changes I understand to be correct, with consensus (more-or-less), would you mind taking a look at the article Anna-Lena Friedsam, to see if there are any problems with using a screen-reader on the statistics? If there is anything that we, the tennis project, should be doing, or may have missed, then it would be very kind if you could let us know! Jared Preston (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Absolutely not. I was not the only person that did not want the number column added. In fact there were more that were against it's addition. We were not to change thousands but I change some when I'm doing other corrections, and certainly we don't create new articles against our guidelines. Newer articles I try to keep on top of. But Wolbo is correct that per the RfC we shouldn't go changing thousands of articles on a grand scale. Super long-standing articles like Federer career stats, where only his ATP results are numbered, is not something to mess with per the RfC, but we are also not handtied in conforming some to our guidelines. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mira Antonitsch[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Mira Antonitsch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not appear to meet the notability requirements for tennis players

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Tazerdadog (talk) 03:43, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Unicode chart translation[edit]

Hello. I maintain multilingual Wikimedia charts showing roadmaps to the various planes of the Unicode Standard.
I'm hoping you will proofread and correct the German translations for me.
The current translations are at User:Drmccreedy/roadmap_multilingual along with context for how they're used in the charts.
The German versions of the charts are shown on
Thank you for any help you can offer. DRMcCreedy (talk) 22:14, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Nevermind - they were just reviewed by another user. Thanks anyway. DRMcCreedy (talk) 21:50, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Ladies Neva Cup[edit]

Hi Jared, me again! I've got quite a big problem here and I'm not sure how to fix it. So there will be a $100,000 tournament in Saint Petersburg in September, which has the name Neva Cup. This should mean that it is a continuation of the Ladies Neva Cup which was a $50,000 in 2015. However, some users have already overtaken for the WTA event that occurred in January. I'm not exactly sure what to do now, but I believe that the WTA event should have its own separate page with the first edition occurring in 2016 and this tournament in September should be the continuation of the Neva Cup. Any thoughts? Keroks (talk) 07:00, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

@Keroks: I tend to agree. But you'll need a bit of time to entangle the mess! Jared Preston (talk) 13:06, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Input requested[edit]

Hi Jared Preston, the discussion on whether to keep or remove the No. column in the player career finals table has reemerged. Your input on this would be greatly appreciated at the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tennis#No. column in career finals tables. Thx. --Wolbo (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Actually it whether to add the number column against the recent RfC. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Actually it is about whether we maintain the No. column in the thousands of player articles which have been created over the years or remove all of them as Fyunck(click) proposes.--Wolbo (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand your comments about my edits in Wikipedia - I have told the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabinavankova (talkcontribs) 21:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

WP DAB banner[edit]

Hi, there's no need to create new talk pages containing only the {{WikiProject Disambiguation}} banner. There was a discussion about that recently: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disambiguation/Archive_41#WikiProject_Disambiguation_banner_discouraged_on_discussionless_pages?. Of course, you're welcome to put the banner on already existing talk pages – for example if they have other content (discussions, prod notices etc.), or if they're redirect remnants of page moves. – Uanfala (talk) 17:38, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

@Uanfala: OK thanks! I didn't know that. I'll take a look later, thanks for the link. Jared Preston (talk) 17:40, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Jared Preston. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ITF Circuit prize money increases[edit]

Hey Jared! Me again! Just wondering if you had any ideas for the new prize money changes that the ITF is bringing to the tournaments in 2017. I think that we should either create a new colour scheme or leave the colours as they are and just transfer them, e.g. 10k colour to 15k colour, 50k colour to 60k colour, etc. I think the second option is much easier, however this could be problematic for individual player pages and tournament pages as the colour schemes are also used there. I was just bringing this up now as we're just one month away from 2017 with the new prize money tournaments being listed on the ITF we should start thinking about what we should do with this as well as the fact that I am almost running the ITF Women's Circuit pages by myself with a few helping hands (I'm also doing ITF Men's Circuit now too) so would be nice to have your input about this situation. Hope you're well and hope to hear from you soon! Keroks (talk) 15:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

@Keroks: I think different colours for different tournament categories would be better. No need to "transfer" the $10,000 colour to $15,000, for example, because we already had $15,000 tournaments with the "#ccccff;"-background which are in use at many statistics tables. But I don't know what colours would be best; I don't even know how or why we use the colours we have now, to be honest. Jared Preston (talk) 14:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

BLP PROD on Martik Kanian[edit]

Just as an FYI I removed the BLP PROD that you placed on this article. Tough call, but it did contain a link to his official website which has a biography that makes the claim he is an Iranian musician, which is enough to get it past the BLP PROD bar if only barely. Just giving you a heads up in case you want to nominate it for deletion under another method. TonyBallioni (talk) 22:25, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Let's reduce the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement![edit]

Hi Jared Preson, please allow me to get in touch with you because you have stated sympathy with environmental causes on your user page. I would like to invite you to check out the Environmental impact project page on Meta, where I am trying to create some momentum to reduce the environmental impact of the Wikimedia movement. My first goal is to have all the Wikimedia servers run on renewable energy. Maybe you could show your support for this project as well by adding your signature? Thank you, --Gnom (talk) 19:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Can you help verify translations of articles from German[edit]

Hello Jared Preston,

Would you be able to help evaluate the accuracy of translations of Wikipedia articles from German to English Wikipedia?

Language icon.svg

This would involve evaluating a translated article on the English Wikipedia by comparing it to the original German article, and marking it "Pass" or "Fail" based on whether the translation faithfully represents the original. Here's the reason for this request:

There are a number of articles on English Wikipedia that were created as machine translations from different languages including German , using the Content Translation tool, sometimes by users with no knowledge of the source language. The config problem that allowed this to happen has since been fixed, but this has left us with a backlog of articles whose accuracy of translation is suspect or unknown, including some articles translated from German. In many cases, other editors have come forward later to copyedit and fix any English grammar or style issues, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the translation is accurate, as factual errors from the original translation may remain. To put it another way: Good English is not the same as good translation.

If you can help out, that would be great. Here's a sample of the articles that need checking:

  1. Anhalt University of Applied Sciences
  2. Anna Maurizio

All you have to do, is compare the English article to the German article, and assess them "Pass" or "Fail" (the {{Pass}} and {{Fail}} templates may be useful here). (Naturally, if you feel like fixing an inaccurate translation and then assessing it, that's even better, but it isn't required.) Also please note that we are assessing accuracy not completeness, so if the English article is much shorter that is okay, as long as whatever has been translated so far is factually accurate.

If you can help, please {{ping}} me here to let me know. You can add your pass/fails above, right next to each link, or you may indicate your results below. Thanks! Mathglot (talk) 06:21, 11 June 2017 (UTC)


Hallo! Can you please translate this article from German into English? I would be very grateful. Thanks! (talk) 16:49, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Frank Szymanski (politician) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frank Szymanski (politician) 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/Frank Szymanski (politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Bearcat (talk) 15:04, 27 September 2017 (UTC)