User talk:King of Hearts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Old talk is at /Archive.

Please note that I will usually reply to messages on this page, unless you ask me to respond elsewhere.

Please use the link provided in the blue box above which says "Please leave a new message."
This way, you will be able to give your comment a subject/headline.

If an admin action made by me is more than a year old, you may reverse or modify it without consulting me first. However, I would appreciate being notified after the fact.


Hi, could you please review your decision at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2021 Austin shooting? The "merging" page is not eligible for inclusion in the target page, as the event does not satisfy the accepted definition of a "mass shooting". So, its inclusion in List of mass shootings in the United States in 2021 is problematic. Thanks, WWGB (talk) 03:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

I think the best approach is to get consensus either way on Talk:List of mass shootings in the United States in 2021. If consensus is that the shooting doesn't belong in the list, then we can look into relisting the AfD. -- King of ♥ 04:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Reply - I think it would be better to have this discussion at WP:DRV or WP:RFD, as this could be redirect either to List of mass shootings in the United States in 2021 or to Austin, Texas#Crime. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:47, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
I'm hesitant to do something too hasty, so let's leave the talk page discussion open for one or two days and if consensus is clear against including it, I can reopen the AfD. -- King of ♥ 14:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Reopened. -- King of ♥ 16:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-18[edit]

15:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Help needed... again[edit]

commons:File:Gobierno de Azerbaiyán, Baku, Azerbaiyán, 2016-09-26, DD 27.jpg, a featured picture locally, has been deleted on Commons, but I believe the image would fall under {{FoP-USonly}}. Could you upload it locally? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 02:45, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Done! -- King of ♥ 03:56, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

AfD on Pantera Capital[edit]

Hi, I'm not sure what I can do, if anything, and I'd appreciate a pointer. I had not noticed (or been notified) that a topic I had previously nominated at AfD (and been deleted) was restored and back at AfD. You closed as "No Consensus" as there appeared to be no clear consensus on whether the WSJ/FT sources passed *NCORP*. Looking at the Keep !votes though (DevokeWater, Astig, Hocus00, jpxg, JBchrch) not one of them argued that the sources passed NCORP, instead they provided reasons such as "very prominent", "good enough to pass GNG" (twice), and "reliable sources" - none of which are enough to overcome the criticisms of fails NCORP (in my opinion). The GNG is not the applicable guideline and it is accepted that NCORP is the appropriate SNG especially because GNG provides for a looser interpretation of standards for establishing notability. I know that I would have commented as per above and on the failure of the FT/WSJ sources to pass NCORP and !voted Delete. It would probably be seen as poor form to renominate immediately (but I feel I should have been notified when the article was restored and/or when it appeared back at AfD). Could it be reopened and relisted? Should I just let it pass for a few months and then renominate? Thanks for any pointers. HighKing++ 14:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Once plausible sources such as FT/WSJ have been presented (plausible = not obviously failing the guideline), the burden of proof is on those wishing to argue that they do not meet NCORP, just as with GNG. Apart from Scope creep, very little effort has been made to argue why it fails NCORP rather than simply parroting a bunch of policies. If you wish to renominate, I suggest that you present a comprehensive argument specifically picking apart why you consider the two to be "routine announcements" or are otherwise inadequate. And yes, it's hard because that's a subjective call. But if everyone sees the evidence and converts their interpretation of it into a !vote, then at the end of the day it will be hard to close the AfD any way but in line with the !vote count. Which is why your first goal should be to convince other participants to your side, above trying to convince the closing admin. -- King of ♥ 21:13, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).


Administrator changes

removed EnchanterCarlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-19[edit]

15:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)