Jump to content

User talk:Northamerica1000/Archive 85

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 80←Archive 83Archive 84Archive 85Archive 86Archive 87→Archive 90

4th Nomination to delete Artur Balder in English WP

As you remember the same Spanish user 'SAVH' has managed to delete an article that was previously by consensus approved by a board of English WP users and administrators. The situations has all the odd looks of a persistent 'sham', and I think someone has to do something to clarify this. The deletion has been the work of 'haters'.

If you analyze the voting, at least one of the 'delete' voters comes from the Spanish WP, and had been previously involved in similar polemics in favor and coordination very often with 'Savh'. On the other hand, there are a tone of arguments against the deletion, it is just very insane. The user 'Savh' acknowledges direct contact via twitter with a journalist, and exposes all from a defaming perspective. I think we should be able to recover the article and clean it if necessary, the WP was born to grow and to be neutral, this is against its purposes...

Savh avoids at all cost for instance any collaboration with Academy-award winner Susan Sarandon, there are fotos of them together, and a trailer out there...

I think the 4th nomination is just another sham, and it is necessary to elevate the action to the attention of administrators, and to examine the article. There is enough traceability of notoriety. For instance, 'obsessed' Savh insist on a fine of 30,000 euros because allegedly Balder said a journalist has 'friends in high places'. Well, this is relevant in Spain perhaps, but according to the First Amendment there is no way to sue someone in the USA because of such facts, there is wider freedom to criticize a public figure... On the other hand, the same source, El Pais, exposes the 'success' of Balder's children books as back as 2006, see here: https://elpais.com/diario/2006/06/10/cultura/1149890405_850215.html SAVH is obviously biased and obviously, it recognizes it, in direct contact with a journalist that obviously has had problems with Balder. This is not enough to delete any article. --FirstAmendment1 (talk) 20:54, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

  • Hello FirstAmendment1: Well, I didn't participate in the most recent deletion discussion, so pinging the admin who closed the discussion here (@Sandstein:). I did close two previous AfD discussions, both as no consensus (second nomination, third nomination) as per a lack of adequate input received for a particular action to be ascertained. The no consensus closes resulted in the article being retained each time. North America1000 09:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
    • Thank you Northamerica1000 (@Sandstein:): At this point I don't know what to think about all this. I requested preemptively from you to put a 'locker' on the article to guarantee 'fair' evaluations, because if you analyze the details of this ongoings there are many odds. Now my petition seems to make a lot of sense. Once Savh recognizes himself in personal contact with the journalist his insistence looks weird. Why cannot we see the snapshots of the entire twitter conversation with her verified twitter account? The beginning of the 4th deletion proposal starts by putting all the wight on the article of El Pais voicing the civil fine of 30,000 euros. In the US you cannot sue anyone because he/she told that you 'have friends in high places'. Well, the Quenn Leticia of Spain is someone in a high place, and the Spanish media is abundant regarding the fact that the queen, not having nothing to do officially regarding RTVE, 'defends' the journalist as her 'champion' to become president of RTVE... (See here just as an example among many others: http://www.periodistadigital.com/periodismo/tv/2018/07/09/lio-en-casa-real-dona-letizia-implicada-en-la-guerra-sucia-del-nuevo-consejo-de-tve.shtml ) Here in the US we have constitutional rights to speak freely opinions about public personalities... But this is just proof of the opposite seeing the other references at El Pais, for instance, back to 2006 as a 'successful' children books writer (https://elpais.com/diario/2006/06/10/cultura/1149890405_850215.html) and this is just an example among very many. Then the votes on the 4th nomination list: Savh secretly calls for Orland, another Spanish editor who was engaged in very heated debates about 'Balder's notoriety'. Additionally the fact that Savh is trying to sell his reliability as long-term WP admin, etc, to enforce recalcitrantly his POV, clearly COI. We should either recover the article because of sheer biased argumentation, and respect the first evaluation of the article. It was approved years ago under scrutiny of English WP contributors, it was a 'fair' discussion. Now that decision by the community has been reversed after an insistent, suspicious petition by the same user, and a vote much narrow, including long-term collaborator ORLAND across the Spanish WP. Curiously when we see there is a new film coming up with an Academy-award winner Susan Sarandon and a trailer out. I have the sensation that all this can backfire somehow. What do you think? Neutrality is going to be necessary to go on.--FirstAmendment1 (talk) 15:29, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
This is just to say that the above messages by FirstAmendment1 are too confused for me to make any sense of, and so I don't intend to comment further. Sandstein 16:04, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
      • Northamerica1000 (@Sandstein:) Do you think the article should exist or not? Do you think Savh argumentation is unbiased? We can go from there. Sandstein just one question: have you ever collaborate with Savh in any project in the past? Have you been in contact before? Did you check the few references noted above? You don't have nothing to say about Savh stating it was in contact directly with that journalist whose reputation so much Savh is worried about? What is it so confusing, if I am explaining that there was a previous vote to keep the article discussed by a larger number of WP contributors, years ago, and that it has been deleted with a vote of 2 against 1, when the 2 voting in favor of the deletion are long-term collaborators? --FirstAmendment1 (talk) 16:53, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Right. I have no idea who this Savh is and no opinion about them, but I recognize a WP:NOTHERE situation when I see one. I've indef-blocked FirstAmendment1. Sandstein 17:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Deletion review for Education Not for Sale

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Education Not for Sale. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tyw7  (🗣️ Talk • ✍️ Contributions) Please ping me if you had replied 09:10, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Third opinion

I've requested a third opinion on the appropriate level of detail in the Political activity of the Catholic Church on LGBT issues page. However, after several days, no one has stepped forward. Since you have been involved on the parent article, I thought you might be kind enough to opine on this matter as well. Thanks. --BrianCUA (talk) 14:01, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@Briancua: Thanks for the notification. I'm not sure at this time whether or not I'm going to become further involved. North America1000 00:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. I hope you will, but understand if you don't. --BrianCUA (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ForgeRock logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ForgeRock logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:21, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-32

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

Problems

  • The MediaWiki version that was released two weeks ago was late to some Wikimedia wikis. This was because of bugs. It was on all wikis 30 July. [2][3]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 August. It will be on all wikis from 9 August.

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 7 August at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 8 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

19:39, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:51, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

added Sro23
readded KaisaL • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 32, 2018)

A selection of MDMA pills, which are sometimes used as a club drug.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Club drug

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Liqueur • Louis IV of France

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 6 August 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Two things to be aware of

Hello N. I hope you are well. I wanted to let you know that the articles about naval ships like Charles F. Adams-class destroyer do not have bare urls. In investigating them I found the refs are in a template that looks like this {{NVR url|id=DDG2}}. I know that they look bare but they aren't and they aren't subject to link rot. Now if you can track down who created the template you can ask them if they could reformat it to look like other refs but I just haven't had the time to look into this myself - sorry about that.

One other request when you add the bare url tag to an article with multiple issues like List of application servers please place the tag outside of the MI template. You see the regular template {{linkrot}} has a link that allows an editor to run refill directly from said template. That link is not available when it is put inside the MI (multiple issues) template so we have to make an extra edit to move it outside. Now having it inside the MI tag isn't the worst thing in the world but it does saves us a step if you can just add it to the top of the article.

Thanks so much for all the work that you do here at the 'pedia and cheers. MarnetteD|Talk 23:43, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @MarnetteD: Duly noted about the naval ship articles, and no problem with leaving the link rot tag outside of the multiple issues template. I notice that you perform a lot of bare url fixing, which is appreciated, and I know that reFill automatically removes it when it's outside. I've also noticed how the What links here page for the linkrot template has entries relatively quickly taken care of, which is amazing. Thanks again for your work to keep Wikipedia up-to-date. North America1000 01:06, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your message. Interesting - you use the "what links here" to check on things while I use Category:All articles with bare URLs for citations to find the articles that need some work. It is nice that there are different ways to the same info. There are a couple editors along with myself that try to clean the bare urls when they get tagged but - if we ever go on vacation at the same time the category might balloon up quickly :-) Best regards. MarnetteD|Talk 01:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: Also, to find articles with bare urls, I use this search in Wikipedia. Works great. North America1000 03:24, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads up N. MarnetteD|Talk 04:15, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: Addendum: If there is already an article issues template and I add the linkrot template, it automatically adds it within it. However, upon consideration, I had better leave it in there. Someone could come along and complain about me not following the proper procedure. Sorry to flip-flop on you about this, but I'm an admin, so it's necessary for me to follow all of the rules to a T. This is because 1) admins are expected to do so, and 2) admins are expected to set a good example. Sorry again, but upon further consideration, I have to follow the standard procedures. Otherwise, hope you're doing well, and thanks again for your work to improve Wikipedia. North America1000 09:07, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Well that makes me sad N. First, there is no hard and fast rule that the MI template must be used. Along with that I would note that there there is WP:IAR. Next, I see articles with multiple issues that don't use the MI template every day. Lastly, I would point out that it would the frequency with which the bare urls are worked on would mean that the template would only be there for a day or less. I would add that anyone who complains could be pointed to this conversation to explain why having the template outside the MI has occurred. On the days when there are dozens (and occasionally 100 or more - there are 73 at the moment that I will be working on) bare urls to fix having to move the template outside thew MI is a pain in the patoot so I hope you will reconsider but I will understand if you don't. MarnetteD|Talk 14:09, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: I use WP:TWINKLE, which automatically adds new templates within the multiple issues template. There's a reason why this occurs: it's ultimately for the WP:READER. Combined tags look neater compared to scattered ones. Ultimately, it's probably best for the tagging to be performed as per the status quo of how tagging typically occurs. I'm not comfortable changing the format to suit one user, even though I'm well aware of the significant amount of linkrot repair work you do, and how quickly the articles are improved when the tag is applied. Again, this is much appreciated. North America1000 14:28, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
It is a crying shame that these reasons are worth creating more work for those of us (and yes it would help more than one editor) since, as I mentioned there are 100s of 1000s of articles that don't use the MI template and I have seen no complaints from readers about the aesthetics of them. I do hope you are never in the situation of asking another editor for help and get this kind of refusal. Don't get me wrong I still think you are a big asset to the 'pedia. Best regards and have a great week. MarnetteD|Talk 14:35, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
@MarnetteD: It's not really a refusal, more of a consideration. After thinking it through a bit more, I changed my mind a bit about your request, and sorry for the surprise changeup in my opinion. At any rate, most articles I tag don't have the multiple issues template present, so it's not that bad. ✌ North America1000 15:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Curiosity

Hello NorthA.,

I have been fixing and removing all the dead link tags you have pasted to try to reduce the backlog. I have one question though, how do you find these articles? Do you hit "random article" or do you have a system? Keep up the good work. You're a fantastic admin.

Thank you AmericanAir88 (talk) 01:58, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Abella Anderson // Admin-Log

Hey User:Northamerica1000. Can I create an article about that topic and we discuss its "comeback" ? What is your opinion? Should I try it? Thanks for your opinion :) Sambias (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Sambias: Abella Anderson is presently protected from being created (WP:SALTED) per having been recreated using the same version of the article twice after it was deleted at AfD (see WP:G4). For more information, see the Log page for the article. Per having been deleted multiple times per G4 speedy deletion, I am not willing to userfy a copy of the deleted article. If you feel that the subject may meet notability standards at this time, you can create a new article in Draft namespace, and when you feel it's ready for review, you can then submit it for review by Articles for creation by adding {{Userspace draft}} atop the draft page and then select the "Submit your draft for review" link. If a reviewer accepts the entry, I or another admin can then be contacted to unprotect the page so the draft could be published in main (article) namespace. North America1000 03:48, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-33

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • CSS in templates can now be stored in a separate page on all wikis. This is called TemplateStyles. This is to make it easier to edit how templates look. [4]

Changes later this week

  • There is no new MediaWiki version this week.

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 14 August at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 15 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • The developers are planning more ways to block users. This could be blocking someone from just a page or a namespace. You can read more. You can leave feedback on the talk page. [5]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Pings

Question ,how do I use pings on this site?? When i reply to someone i always go to their talk page ,but that probably goes against WP:MOS. Also, should all users gets 4 warnings before I report them to AIV or is there times when 3 warnings is enough?? (not that i am racing to report them to AIV). JC7V-constructive zone 05:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @JC7V7DC5768: Check out WP:PING. Many users like to keep conversations on one page, rather than having a user respond to them on another page. Regarding AIV, if a user is severely violating policies, such as WP:BLP, or stating really bad, vile things about a person, or entity, or whatever, they can be reported to AIV before four warnings have been given. When working in anti-vandal activities, I assess each violation on a case-by-case basis, relative to any recent violations that may have occurred. North America1000 05:37, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Talk:Wreathgate

Talk:Wreathgate, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Talk:Wreathgate and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Talk:Wreathgate during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. ---Snowded TALK 08:56, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 33, 2018)

Anna Anka is a Swedish-American model, actress and author.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Anna Anka

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Club drug • Liqueur

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 13 August 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Portals WikiProject update #016, 15 Aug 2018

Future portal tool

Discussions are underway on the design of a portal tool (user script) that will hopefully have features for modifying portals at the click of a menu item, to make editing them easier. It might do things like change the color for you, add to a selection, add a new section, move a section, and so on.

If you'd like to be involved and suggest features for the tool, please join us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Portals/Design#What would you want a portal tool to be able to do?.

Progress report: upgrade of portals

As new portal components are built by our Lua gurus, those components are being used to upgrade portals. Each component automates a section of a portal in a particular way.

The sections that are mostly upgraded so far are the Intro, and the Associated Wikimedia section.

The sections currently undergoing upgrade are: Selected image, Categories, and the Intro.

The Intro? Isn't that done already?

Yes, and no.

The upgrade of the excerpt in intros is mostly complete (there are about 70 non-standard portals that still need it).

Now we are doing another upgrade of intros in the form of adding a panoramic picture at the top of the intro, on portals for which such a picture is available on Commons:. Dozens of panoramas have been added so far, and they are really starting to affect the look of portals — the portals that have them look really good.

Regions are the most likely subjects to have panoramas, but a surprising number of other subjects have banner-shaped pictures too. Some examples of non-geographic portals that they have been added to are:

Speaking of pictures, several hundred Selected image sections have been upgraded to include image slideshows.

Progress report: design

The push for automation continues, with new components under continuous testing in the field. As problems are spotted, they are reported to our programmers, who have done a fantastic job of keeping up with bug reports and fixing the relevant Lua modules fast. I am highly impressed.

Construction time on new portals is now down to as little as a minute or less. Though not in general. If you are lucky enough to spot portals that fit the profile of the new tools (their strengths), then a portal can be complete almost as soon as it is created, with the added time it takes to find and add a panorama. Source page titles are not generally standardized, and so it source pages in many cases must be entered manually. Where source page titles follow a standard naming convention, portal creation for those subjects goes quickly.

So, we still have some hurdles, but the outlook on portals is very good. New features, and many improvements to features are on the horizon. I'll be sure to report them when they become available.

What will the portal of the future look like? That is up to you!

See you on the project's talk pages.

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   21:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

August GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors August 2018 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the August 2018 GOCE newsletter. Thanks to everyone who participated in the Guild's June election; your new and returning coordinators are listed below. The next election will occur in December 2018; all Wikipedia editors in good standing may take part.

Our June blitz focused on Requests and articles tagged for copy edit in October 2017. Of the eleven people who signed up, eight editors recorded a total of 28 copy edits, including 3 articles of more than 10,000 words. Complete results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Thanks to everyone who participated in the July drive. Of the seventeen people who signed up, thirteen editors completed 194 copy edits, successfully removing all articles tagged in the last three months of 2017. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are here.

The August blitz will run for one week, from 19 to 25 August. Sign up now!

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators, Reidgreg, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, Miniapolis and Tdslk.

>>> Sign up for the August blitz! <<<
To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:25, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kings Food Markets logo.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kings Food Markets logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

About the edition of "Mamoru Shinozaki"

Hi. Couldn't you help me removing the Clean up template which pasted to the article Mamoru Shinozaki? For long time, there have not a person who deal with that task. I guess you may have interest in that article and are able to check English grammer, so I beg you. --uiki-pedeo (talk) 12:16, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Hi 宇井木辺出夫: I cannot devote my time to this article, as I am working on entirely other matters in Wikipedia. I did notice that the page is listed at Wikipedia:Cleanup, where a user has stated that the requested cleanup editing was performed in Early December 2017, but that the article "Still needs someone else double check." However, if you feel that the entry meets Wikipedia's standards at this time, as per your own double-checking, you can remove the cleanup template yourself. North America1000 04:39, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
    • I truly want to remove that template. But I also know that the article still needs double-check. It may good if I can do that. But we, I and who required double-check, are not native in English. So I again wait, until anyone may help us. Thank you for your reply. --UikiHedeo (talk) 16:13, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-34

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 21 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 22 August. It will be on all wikis from 23 August (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 22 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your closing

You do notice you closed my request for deletion by citing me using an invalid rationale, yet you cited WP:SK#1 which does not a criteria for you closing, right? --Gonnym (talk) 07:07, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

As I stated in the close, your qualifications for deletion were not congruent with Wikipedia's Deletion policies. Your rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Revuelta (season 1) is a statement of the article's general state, and does not qualify deletion per WP deletion policy. Incomplete articles, such as that you nominated, do not automatically qualify for deletion per being in an incomplete state. Also, as I stated in the close, check out WP:DEL-REASON for examples of valid rationales that are in accordance with said deletion policy. North America1000 13:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
This article was not incomplete but had no content (A3). Regardless if true WP:SK#1 does not agree with your closing. --Gonnym (talk) 14:06, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
  • You can think whatever you want, but you did not state a valid deletion rationale in the first nomination, and you stated nothing about the article qualifying for WP:A3 in the first nomination. Deletion policy requires a valid rationale for deletion to be present in AfD nominations. Your entire rationale at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Revuelta (season 1) was as listed below:

The article is composed of a 2 sentence lead and 6 empty sections and an empty infobox.

The close entirely conformed with WP:SK #1, which states, in part, (the nominator) "fails to advance any argument for deletion or redirection."
Furthermore, regarding WP:A3, it states there, "This applies to articles consisting only of external links, category tags and "See also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title", and also states, "However, a very short article may be a valid stub if it has context, in which case it is not eligible for deletion under this criterion."
While the page does not have a great deal of content, it does have enough content to identify the subject of the article. The lead of the article states:

La Revuelta is the first season of an All-Stars version of Gran Hermano and El Reencuentro. Mercedes Mila is the host and the speciality of this season is that all the housemates of Gran Hermano Spain (season 13) are going to be on La Revuelta.

.

The lead provides context, content and information about what the topic is about. It's the first season of a Spanish television show.
Hope this helps out to clarify matters for you. North America1000 22:37, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:DEL-REASON listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:DEL-REASON. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:DEL-REASON redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 11:23, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Portals WikiProject update #017, 22 Aug 2018

This issue is about portal creation...

Creating new portals

Myself and others have been testing and experimenting with the new components in upgrading existing portals and in building new portals. They have now been applied in hundreds of portals.

The templates are ready for general use for portal creation.

They are still a bit buggy, but the only way we are going to work the rest of the bugs out is by using them and reporting the bugs as we come across them.

I look forward to seeing what new portals you create!

Be sure to report bugs at WT:WPPORTD.

The main portal creation template is {{box portal skeleton}}.

Portal creation tips

After starting a portal using {{box portal skeleton}}...

  1. Placing a panorama (banner picture) at the top of the intro section is a nice touch, and really makes a portal look good. {{box portal skeleton}} doesn't automatically insert panoramas. So, you will need to do that by hand. They can be found at Commons:. For some examples, check out Portal:Sharks, Portal:Cheese, and Portal:Florence
  2. The search term provided in the Did you know? and In the news sections is very basic and rarely matches anything. It is best to replace that term with multiple search arguments, if possible (separate each argument with a pipe character). For example, in Portal:Capital punishment, see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Capital_punishment&diff=855255361&oldid=855137403 Searches in templates use Lua search notation.
  3. Check the In the news and Did you know? sections for mismatches. That is, sometimes entries come up that shouldn't be displayed. If there are any, refine the search strings further, so they don't return such results.
  4. Finish each portal you've created before creating a new one. We don't want unfinished portals sitting around.

Need a laugh?

Check out the Did you know? section on Portal:Determinism.    — The Transhumanist   02:23, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 34, 2018)

Guacamole is an avocado-based dip, spread, or salad first developed by the Aztecs in what is now Mexico.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Guacamole

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Anna Anka • Club drug

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 20 August 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

A beer on me

A beer on me!
For your amazing work on articles. I'm drinking a nice Vegas yard of Guinness right now and would like to share in the fun. Drinks on me. AmericanAir88 (talk) 04:23, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
@AmericanAir88: Thanks for the brew. I remember you mentioning somewhere that you were going to Sin City, so have fun while you're there. North America1000 05:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Northamerica1000 My pleasure, Thank you! Nothing beats Wikipedia in the Bellagio! AmericanAir88 (talk) 05:31, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Well, if you go on elsewhere, don't forget to tip your stripper. North America1000 13:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Northamerica1000 Indeed. Cirque De Solei comes first! AmericanAir88(talk) 17:46, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Check in

Hello NorthA.

Hope all is well and you are enjoying your "Semi-Wikibreak". I am just sending this to check in and make sure everything is ok. No reason for this but just a check in. Thanks for being an amazing editor. You should be getting a huge surprise in around 13 weeks.

Thank you AmericanAir88(talk) 17:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Sounds like you're checking-in here as you are getting nearer to checking out there (e.g. Vegas hotel). Hope you're having fun there. I don't always like surprises, but okay then...Cheers, North America1000 04:42, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Northamerica1000 Yeah, I leave today for my 5 hour flight... Had a great time, Thank you. Trust me, you will like the surprise, the surprise is a very positive thing. Thanks again. AmericanAir88(talk) 14:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Stasis (fiction) - query

Hi,

I just had a question about the AfD on Stasis (fiction) you closed. I can see why, as it was, it was closed as NC. However I would have thought it seemed a good target for at least one relisting. If only via my own !vote discussion hadn't completely concluded, and so I was wondering if there was a specific reason behind it?

Cheers,

Nosebagbear (talk) 08:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

  • @Nosebagbear: Relatively speaking, the deletion discussion received enough input from enough users for the NC result to be determined. Nowadays, seven participants in a deletion discussion is actually a fair amount, compared to when AfD had an overall greater degree of average input, say around four or five years ago, although lulls also occur randomly. In my opinion, the discussion had enough participation for the result to be determined, and the discussion had also become a bit of a stalemate regarding whether or not the article is a fork. Also, at this point, discussion on the article's talk page may be more functional, as the deletion discussion became to be a matter of redirection, possibly merging, or article retention, rather than deletion. North America1000 13:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Cheers for the answer - I personally find it easier to retain discussion in one spot in most cases where there is already an ongoing discussion then shift it, risking fragmenting discussion, but I realise that is both a viewpoint that be disagreed with generally and in degree. Thank you for the explanation Nosebagbear (talk) 14:01, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
@Nosebagbear: I agree with the notion of keeping discussions in one general area. I'm not entirely against reopening the discussion and relisting it, although I think the discussion has become a bit moot. To reopen, I would have to ask what your motives would be for relisting. Since you opined for the article to be retained, if I were to relist it per this discussion, users could potentially criticize the matter as a keep !voter trying to gain further keep !votes. Not to come across to you as "over the top" regarding hypotheticals, but just saying. Ultimately, as an admin, I have to keep WP:RELIST in mind, part of the Wikipedia:Deletion process page, where it states, "relisting should not be a substitute for a "no consensus" closure. If the closer feels there has been substantive debate, disparate opinions supported by policy have been expressed, and consensus has not been achieved, a no-consensus close may be preferable." Another idea is that people with an interest in the topic at this point may be more likely to continue discourse on the article talk page, although I have no way of predicting whether or not this will actually occur. Further talk page discussion may not occur at all. North America1000 14:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi - this wasn't a request to specifically relist this AfD, though I realise I should have made that clear in my original post, I just do quite a few NACs, so I like to pay attention to the more complicated ones done to pick up the nuances. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Hey, that's cool too. ⚡ North America1000 14:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 35, 2018)

"The noblest motive is the public good." Thomas Jefferson Building, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.
Hello, Northamerica1000.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Public good

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Guacamole • Anna Anka

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Tech News: 2018-35

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now see moved paragraphs in diffs in the mobile view. It also works on all languages in the desktop view. [7]
  • Bureaucrats on all Wikimedia wikis can now remove the interface admin user right. [8]

Problems

  • Some diffs show lines in the wrong order. The developers are working on fixing it. [9]

Changes later this week

  • The message you see when you thank a user will change. This is to make it easier to understand. [10]
  • AWB will stop adding using AWB in the edit summary. Instead it will add a tag that says AWB. [11]
  • Advanced item Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title. [12]
  • Advanced item Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age. [13]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 28 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 29 August. It will be on all wikis from 30 August (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 28 August at 18:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 29 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour. You can read more about this.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:16, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Request for Page Restoration

Hi,

I would like to bring to your kind notice the recent deletion of "Locus.sh" page from Wikipedia. I respect with great sensibilities the honor of Wikipedia and the team. I am also a true believer in the honesty and capabilities of the WikiPedia Team here. My reason to highlight the decision to reconsider the deletion of the page in question is the reason for deletion in itself is extremely weak. Quoting the reason given in 'as many words' below:

"Weak Delete: Two articles spaced two years apart in the Economic Times seem to point to two significant coverage; however they both seem to be PR pieces. The other sources don't seem to establish notability either." And there were 2 votes for deletion.

I want to highlight that this particular reason which is being highlighted is highly subjective(Locus.sh has been in operations since 2015 and has received over 200 media validations/articles since it started). The two articles mentioned here from Economic times are simply a factual representation of data with no hidden intentions to show significance. In your own analysis and validation process, you called it a "Weak delete"....When we found about the deletion request which indeed is a huge brand embarrassment for a global company like Locus, the team here fully trusting the Wikipedia Team, we didn't make any attempts to get votes, in fact we tried to understand the reason for deletion and we found that it was extremely weak. We did what was the right thing to do which is to trust "Wikiperdia's judgement". Please help us and consider the request for Page Restoration.

Once again I would like to highlight our faith in the transparency and impartiality of Wikipedia administration.

Regards Pranay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pranay 0709 (talk • contribs) 09:16, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Hello Pranay 0709: Consensus at the deletion discussion for the Locus.sh article was for deletion, and as an impartial closing administrator I followed Wikipedia procedures accordingly and precisely in my assessments. I have thought this over for a bit of time before responding here, and here is what I feel is the most equitable outcome at this time:
  • I have restored the article for the time being and relisted the deletion discussion, adding a comment in the relist notice notifying Wikipedians about your request here. In this manner, the deletion discussion may run for another seven days, allowing you time to contribute to the discussion and provide your rationales for the article to be retained on English Wikipedia. I state that the discussion may run for another seven days because I have no control over what other administrators may do after the article restoration and discussion relisting.
  • I am performing the above actions in part per the manner in which none of the arguments in the deletion discussion stated whether or not opinions regarding notability were based upon overall sources available for the company, or if said opinions were only based upon the state of sourcing in the article at the time. The former is what true notability is based upon. See WP:NEXIST for more information. Consensus was for deletion, but all three of the !votes following the nomination, as they are worded, come across as potentially being only based upon the sources within the article at the time, rather than upon a consideration of all available sources, such as those available in various internet searches.
  • Since it's clear that you're a representative of the company, I strongly recommend that you first declare this when contributing to the deletion discussion or in editing the article. For the latter, you can state this on the article's talk page. For more information, see the Conflict of interest behavioral guideline page. Such statement of affiliation with the company is crucial, so people will know this from the start. Conversely, if you were to omit this, some users could hypothetically be dismissive your arguments from the start. Furthermore, any and all company personnel and affiliates should also make such declarations from the start, to prevent misunderstandings and for transparency reasons.
  • If you are not already familiar with Wikipedia's notability guidelines, check out WP:CORP, which covers companies and organizations, and particularly WP:CORPDEPTH on the page. WP:GNG is also another basic notability guideline that you should be aware of if you're not already. WP:CORP was recently made more strict in terms of what is considered an independent source to determine notability, just so you know this from the start.
  • After posting this message, I will message all participants in the deletion discussion on their talk pages to make them aware of the discussion that has transpired here, and to make them aware of the article's restoration and reopening of the deletion discussion.
– North America1000 12:30, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Reply Hi. Thank you so much for the kind consideration for providing us an opportunity to explain our situation. I would like to introduce myself as Pranay from the brand team of Locus who manages brand persona globally. The listing down of Locus has had serious repercussions on Locus's brand value. This is to bring to your notice that Locus has no promotional intentions here. Once listed on Wikipedia was truly a celebration for our worldwide team, investors, suppliers, and customers. We do believe that this seat is to be earned and hence I will be providing all the facts to reconsider deletion. I will be responding to all the comments by the voters. Once again a sincere thanks for investing the time which is so valuable. Pranay 0709 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:24, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-36

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • There is a new user right for users who can edit CSS and JavaScript for the entire wiki. Before this all admins could edit CSS and JavaScript. This was a security risk. This group is called interface administrators. Administrators can delete user CSS and JavaScript pages. [14][15]
  • There will be an A/B test on the Wikipedia mobile website. It starts this week. It tests how we show templates that show information about an article. The test will last two weeks. [16][17]
  • You can now use different CSS rules for different skins when you edit templates. This is because of TemplateStyles. [18]
  • wp10 in ORES is now called articlequality. [19]
  • When you get a new message on your talk page you get a yellow message in the toolbar. The preference to show or not show this has been removed. [20]

Problems

  • UploadWizard had problems with campaigns. Users could not upload files. This has now been fixed. [21]
  • You can get a notification when a link is made to a page you created. This has not worked since June. It was fixed last week. [22]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 4 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 5 September. It will be on all wikis from 6 September (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Northamerica1000/Archive_85&oldid=1258027891"