Jump to content

User talk:Safiel/Archive 8

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11

File:Greater rayalaseema.jpg

If there is no existence of any such region, why there is a file? Earlier an article of the same user was deleted at Greater Rayalaseema.--Vin09 (talk) 05:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

@Vin09: I actually am going to take this file to Files for Deletion myself. Speedy deletion is the wrong process in this situation, FfD is more appropriate. I will make the nomination in just a moment. Safiel (talk) 05:56, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I thought it may work for WP:A11. Confused for articles and files which is here I guess Wikipedia:Files for discussion.--Vin09 (talk) 05:59, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
@Vin09: Link to the discussion Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 8. Also, I don't believe A11 is applicable to files, though not entirely sure. Safiel (talk) 06:03, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Arbitration committee notice

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

05:01, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Dato Sri Tahir listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dato Sri Tahir. Since you had some involvement with the Dato Sri Tahir redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Alexander Iskandar (talk) 02:11, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Alexandros Jakupović listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Alexandros Jakupović. Since you had some involvement with the Alexandros Jakupović redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Rovingrobert (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

David Teeuwen

Thanks Safiel, for responding.

I'm not sure how to dispute an article. I am extremely unsavy at wiki editing. I would say that David Teeuwen doesn't warrant a page. The page seemed to be created two days after he died, as a tribute.

The claim is the he was "a pioneer of digital news." The only reference to this seemed to be in the obituary written by his employer.

I'll point out that of the three references, #1 is just a badly translated (broken English, see "USA Nowdays" instead of "USA Today") copy of reference #2. That is, The first two references are the same obituary, just one copied onto another site. And reference #3 no longer exists.

Basically, it appears someone read the USA Today obituary, and created a wikipedia entry.

Best to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.231.249.138 (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States Chief Justices by age for the reasons why the changes were made. I don't care about the reverts, but just want to add that the use of templates within templates within tables is decidedly user unfriendly. AIRcorn (talk) 00:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Alex Wiesman

I may be nominating it for the wrong type of deletion. But he does not warrant a page. You can pick any semi successful regional actor and create a simmilar looking page. It also seems to me that the page is being used as his personal website and promotional tool. He does not have his own website which further leads to my suspicion that the page is being used as a free webpage instead of paying for a domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.72.205.3 (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Other article I could use your opinion on

Hi, so I was the one who found a bunch of "pillory" articles while doing a search for military imposters, one being James Shortt. I would like your take on another, Alan Mcilwraith. Like Shortt, he is not notable in any particular way and the article content is almost entirely focused on pointing and laughing at him. I raised issue with this article but was shot down by a single user who promised to raise a stink if I nominated the article, but failed to make any compelling arguments. Again, the Mcilwraith article is sourced, but there is no evidence of notability other than on-wiki (he tried to make an article about himself) or persistence.Legitimus (talk) 16:09, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

@Legitimus: I will take a look at it. Safiel (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
@Legitimus: This article has been kept three times at AfD already, so I am afraid I will have to decline on nominating for AfD. The keep votes on all three previous nominations were overwhelming. Safiel (talk) 16:23, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited William Burnham Woods, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Strong. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:39, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Comment

Hi Safiel, Can you please tell me what the differnce between this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rip_current and my article is? The rip current article sais "dealing with a rip" which is instructional.

WillisBrothers (talk) 17:42, 31 May 2016 (UTC)WillisBrothers

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Francis A. Winslow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ossining, New York. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:14, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Harsimrat Kaur (campaigner)...

...is a complete nobody.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Harry Sandhu

Dear sir i created this page which meet WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO but someone Amitbh07 is adding tags to my page and removing references he is also adding tags from ip address. Please warn this user to stop vandalising this page. Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Priyaa Malik (talk • contribs) 11:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Harry Sandhu not eligible to be on Wikipedia

Not a notable musician to be on Wikipedia. No Such Google Search Result is there when we are searching "Harry Sandhu". His No such online links of news articles are available in internet. Very Less Reference Links are there. Other information in the page has no such reference. He is not eligible to be on Wikipedia. He is not notable enough to be on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.202.196.132 (talk) 21:26, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Peewee ORM

Given that they have been at it for two months I really don't think a weeks protection is going to stop them. If they start up again then let me know and I protect it for a longer period. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 02:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)


Hey guys, thanks for stepping in and doing something. Good God Almighty. Let me know what I can do to help, I'm the maintainer of this project, which has been targeted by an *extremely* disgruntled user for a campaign of shame.

Please feel free to just delete the thing, I'm so unbelievably sick of this game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.45.154.125 (talk) 03:44, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

CD Color

Hi, can i ask you what is the sense of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:CD_color ? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cadeymar (talk • contribs) 09:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Cadeymar: This is a poorly designed, poorly documented and poorly implemented template, designed to add color to railway infoboxes in several article. However, it is used in a number of articles and deleting it would mess all those articles up. The best thing to do is just leave it alone. Hopefully, an experienced template editor will come along and improve it. Safiel (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, now i understand, i asked cause my company is called "CD Color" and that template is indexed by google and appears in the first google page searching "cd color" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cadeymar (talk • contribs) 08:45, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I am wondering why article about Teo Boban was not deleted. I am the author and creator of the article and Teo Boban, who is my brother, asked me if I can delete that page. The page was created out of joke and I am shocked that it is still online after more than a year. I am also surprised that everybody can put inaccurate informations on wikipedia without getting deleted in a few days, it is very unprofessional. There is no reason for Teo Boban to have a wikipedia page because he is NOT famous person and majority of information were made up, inaccurate and without any resources. Please delete this page, if you are not able to do that please advise me on what to do next in order to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafael fernandez3624 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Teo Boban

Hey, I am wondering why article about Teo Boban was not deleted. I am the author and creator of the article and Teo Boban, who is my brother, asked me if I can delete that page. The page was created out of joke and I am shocked that it is still online after more than a year. I am also surprised that everybody can put inaccurate informations on wikipedia without getting deleted in a few days, it is very unprofessional. There is no reason for Teo Boban to have a wikipedia page because he is NOT famous person and majority of information were made up, inaccurate and without any resources. Please delete this page, if you are not able to do that please advise me on what to do next in order to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rafael fernandez3624 (talk • contribs) 16:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Sughada

I have WP:DEPRODDED as there appear to be some WP:ATDs worth considering. ~Kvng (talk) 14:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Akash Deo

Hello,

You previously put up a PROD for Akash Deo. This has failed and I have moved to delete the article via the AfD process. This is a courtesy notification to allow you to give input.

Thanks,

Dane2007 (talk) 08:21, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

PROD after AFD

How can I get China Next Generation Internet deleted if nobody chimes in on an AFD and I can't PROD it anymore? I get the feeling that had I just prodded first, without going through AFD, the article would be gone now. Nobody seems to care about this. --Ysangkok (talk) 08:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

  • @Ysangkok: The only thing you can really do in this situation is try taking it back into AfD. I would probably wait a bit before doing so, but it is really your only option at this point. Safiel (talk) 01:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Page for Dan Schneider

RE: request for PROD of Dan_Schneider_(writer): Reference links provided in support of user are either all dead or were nonexistent to begin with. My query is why this page is allowed to stand on the basis of misleading and non-existent information beyond the poster's own wish for self-aggrandizement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rik Halvorsen (talk • contribs) 19:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

  • I understand that this has been brought up before, and denied, but if the article is edited to remove misleading or false links, there will be ZERO supporting evidence that the page is valid whatsoever, which is my point. There is nothing to suggest that this person is noteworthy in the least, nor anything to support that assertion. This needs to be take higher, it seems to me, given the suspicious nature of this article being allowed to remain. Thanks! Rik Halvorsen (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

BLP tagging

In March 2012, you added two BLP tags, {{BLP sources}} and {{BLP primary sources}} to the article now titled Lincoln Birch. I believe the "primary sources" still belongs, but it seems to me that the "sources" is no longer needed. Could you review the article in its present condition? Thanks! YBG (talk) 04:22, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joox (music streaming)

Hi there, I saw that you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joox (music streaming) as "no consensus. Insufficient participation after relist." I'm intrigued to know why you chose not to relist it again, as they can be relisted up to two times. I also can see that in your archives, another editor has brought this up. Was there any reason why you chose not to relist it? jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:14, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@Jcc: To be blunt, in my experience, I have found that shutting down an AfD and starting an new AfD results in more participation than attempting to relist multiple times. I shut it down and then immediately started a second AfD, which appears to have enough participation at this time to result in successful deletion of the article. Of course, that is just my personal opinion on how to do things, but for me personally, closing and restarting seems to work better than multiple relistings when participation is low. Safiel (talk) 17:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

CFD

Hey you Removed the CFD on Category:Colonia, for one, how could roman colony be better than Colonia, the actual word for it? For two, please dont remove CSD's.Iazyges (talk) 04:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

@Safiel: I have done it, I was planning on doing it alone purely because Colonia is the actual word for it, so it makes little to no sense to have it be roman colonies. Iazyges (talk) 04:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
@Iazyges: Just a note that I have formally objected to the speedy rename request. It will likely be moved to the regular rename process that lasts 7 days. Safiel (talk) 05:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
@Safiel: Ive moved it myself, and added in all the necessary information. Iazyges (talk) 05:48, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Marc Straus

JIC you haven't put this article on your watchlist - Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Marc Straus. Narky Blert (talk) 00:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Elizabeth Ulanova page deletion

Contrary to your baseless claim, the Elizabeth L Ulanova page did indeed meet criteria for speedy deletion, and was deleted under criteria WP:A7 (speedy deletion: no indication of importance). That is, the earlier A7 tag was valid. When uncertain of Wikipedia guidelines, please exercise caution in removing such templates in the future, and refrain from editing hastily.

Refer to: 01:23, 20 September 2016 Drmies (talk | contribs) deleted page Elizabeth L Ulanova (A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): earlier A7 tag (or attempt thereto) was in fact valid — Preceding unsigned comment added by IcarusLivesX (talk • contribs) 22:58, September 19, 2016 (UTC)

@IcarusLivesX: Before you go around lecturing other users about policy, I suggest when you do, that you 1. Place new posts UNDER existing posts on a talk page and 2. SIGN your posts. Doesn't look to good to be lecturing other users about policy when you yourself are getting it wrong.

  • As for policy itself. Criteria A7 for deletion states that an article may be speedily deleted if "It does not make a credible assertion of significance for the subject of the article." If it makes any credible assertion of significance, the article should not be tagged for speedy deletion and instead it should be taken to Proposed Deletion or Articles for Deletion. If there is ANY doubt as to whether a credible assertion of significance exists, a user should err on the side of caution and use PROD or AfD instead of speedy deletion.
  • I have tagged on the order of thousands of articles for speedy deletion. I have also removed hundreds of speedy deletion tags from articles when I felt the criteria did not properly apply.
  • You, on the other hand, have slightly over 400 edits TOTAL and about 6 months of experience.
  • I saw the administrators little snark on the deletion summary. Very unprofessional on his part. And administrators have no additional standing or authority above that of ordinary users. They merely have access to tools unavailable to ordinary users. I have seen a number of administrators that were deopped for abuse of tools and many administrators have circumvented policy. Just because something comes out of an administrators mouth does NOT make it right.

"Policy"

  • There was absolutely no doubt of any kind regarding the existence of a "credible assertion of significance" on the page, and therefore, the page met criteria for speedy deletion. Not to mention, essentially none of the links actually worked, and the ones that did had no mention of the subject.
  • The main source was the subject's personal blog. The deleted Wikipedia article was a mini-biography written by the subject herself, and it contained absolutely no credible assertion of significance. Therefore, your assertion that "If it makes any credible assertion of significance, the article should not be tagged for speedy deletion and instead it should be taken to Proposed Deletion or Articles for Deletion. If there is ANY doubt as to whether a credible assertion of significance exists, a user should err on the side of caution and use PROD or AfD instead of speedy deletion" did NOT apply here.
  • Whether or not you've made one or ten thousand edits/tags is irrelevant here. It doesn't follow logically that because of your experience, everything that comes out of your mouth is right. By the same token, my lack of "experience" doesn't automatically preclude me from making any appraisals regarding speedy deletions. While I'm sure you're quite knowledgeable, I think it was quite clear that the page was devoid of any credible claim of significance, and the fact that the admin agreed is a testament to that.
  • It seems you're quite upset, and I'm sure you may disagree with all of this; in that case, I suppose we will just have to agree to disagree.

Take care, and have a great day! ;) IcarusLivesX (talk) 23:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Festiniog Line Boston Lodge diagram

Hi Safiel. I see that you have left a message on User:Manstaruk's talk page inviting comment on the above. Please be aware that this user died in September 2011. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 09:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

FYI

The "Trump/Hitler" LTA (Encyclopediast) is Kingshowman. Regards, GABgab 15:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barry G. Silverman, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phoenix. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations

Hi, I'm just wondering if there's a way to contest the speedy deletion of Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations. I basically just copied the template from Bill Clinton sexual misconduct allegations. Every allegation in that article was properly sourced. Thanks. aqwfyj Talk/Contribs 02:41, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

@Aqwfyj: My tagging was primarily cautionary in nature. An administrator will review it and if it is cleared as not being an attack page, I have no problem with going ahead and expanding it. Safiel (talk) 02:43, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you

For your redirect of Italian colonization of Americas to Thornton expedition. The mayor of Yurp (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

hello safiel. you keep deleting the page zagace when it has valid sources that are clearly sourced and has a high readership in other regions in africa. you even go and cite that this is a new startup company. does it mean a new startup company cannot meet encyclopedic standards. this is outrageous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ierierie (talk • contribs) 02:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016

Information icon Hello, I'm Ierierie. I noticed that you recently removed some content from zagace without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. hello safiel. you keep deleting the page zagace when it has valid sources that are clearly sourced and has a high readership in other regions in africa. you even go and cite that this is a new startup company. does it mean a new startup company cannot meet encyclopedic standards. this is outrageous jane22 02:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

  • @Ierierie: Your use of the content removal warning template constitutes a bald face lie, as I have not removed any content whatsoever from that article. Also, nobody is impressed by your histrionics, so just stop with the "this is outrageous" line, you aren't impressing anybody. If you are truly interested in keeping the article on Wikipedia, then go and locate sufficient WP:Reliable sources that are independent of the the subject, that cover the subject in depth. Safiel (talk) 04:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Safiel. 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)

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi Safiel. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Herlambang Hashemi

But the consensus was delete. 36.81.14.214 (talk) 16:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

@36.81.14.214: True, but the recreated article has existed for over six months and has been edited by multiple editors, so speedy deletion is no longer appropriate. It may be appropriate to take the article back to Articles for Deletion, however. I haven't decided yet whether it is worthwhile to do so. Safiel (talk) 16:11, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Forex Club

This article is a translation of the Russian version. In the Russian Wikipedia this page has been recognized as a notable. In Russian, I wrote this article, so it can not be identical to the deleted version. This article was written based on reliable sources that are independent of the subject (not "press releases and entries in databases"): Veromosti, Kommersanr, Interfax, etc. Sorry for my English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrey Broker (talk • contribs) 07:38, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Namco X series deletion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Namco%27s_X_series

Hi there, you assured me that the Namco X series re-direct would be deleted in under a week if nobody contested against it during that time, It's been over a week, the former redirect is not going to be used by anyone henceforth as to why it'd be ideal for it to be deleted. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 21:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Iftekharahmed96: Unfortunately, they are backlogged at Redirects for Discussion and the closure process is somewhat delayed. That happens. Nothing to do but wait for them to catch up. Once they do it will be deleted as nobody has objected to the deletion. In any event, the redirect is not hurting anything. Please be patient. Be glad that this is not a FILE we are talking about here. That process has been known to get backlogged to six months. We are looking at a week or two backlog here. Not enough administrators to keep up with the deletion process. Safiel (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for updating me with the information, I genuinely appreciate you telling me all of this. It's just that it's a stagnant link that will never be touched upon again so it's wasted space on Wikipedia. Let me know once a major update occurs with the re-direct. Thank you. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Go! Kids un-merge undone

So recently you turned Go! Kids into an redirect to 9Go!, yet the page hasn't been merged into 9Go! by you yet. Because of this, I have undone your edits and will keep the page forever (Like I said in the deletion discussion). There is no way that an kids block on an TV channel needs to be merged into the channel's page (Like what you were supposed to do). Thanks. Aaron's The Best (talk) 04:36, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@Aaron's The Best: So many things wrong with what you've said here, but in any case I've redirect the page per the outcome of the merge. You may not like the result, but that is the result. The substance of Go! Kids (start date, etc.) was already at 9Go! and anything else on the deleted page was either unsourced or relied on primary sources and thus shoudldn't be anywhere on Wikipedia anywhere. -- Whats new?(talk) 05:41, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Andrei Grimanov

Hi Safiel - I've removed the hoax tag from Andrei Grimanov as it's not a blatant hoax from what I can see. I could well be wrong on that front, and would welcome any comments you may have -- samtar talk or stalk 16:26, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

File:St peters school front gate.jpg

I used {{db-reason}} instead of the normal F3 template for a reason. To make the patrolling admin's life easier by explicitly stating why it falls under that speedy deletion criterion. The statement that triggers F3 is inside of another paragraph and can be easily missed. --Majora (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Paul Rawlinson

I removed the proposed deletion tag because this person is the "chair" (managing partner or CEO) of one of the largest law firms in the world, with over 4,000 lawyers. Bearian (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Page reversion

Hello Saifel, I noticed your page reversion of Nehru college. As this college is infamous for violation of student rights and recent controversies,this page does not meet Wikipedia standards. Please go through the following news articles.

http://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/kerala/penalty-for-talking-growing-beard-nehru-college-follows-bizarre-rules-kerala-college-jishnu-suicide-1.1643972

http://english.manoramaonline.com/news/kerala/nehru-college-thrissur-student-suicide-torture-methods.html

and decide what to do next — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishferrare (talk • contribs) 20:41, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Bayt.com

Thank you for proposing this article for afD - I had missed that this article already went through an afD (will the result being delete), so this article is most likely a candidate for speedy deletion G4 - just wanted you to know why the afD template was automatically removed (when I nominated for CSD), and if this pans the deletion discussion will take place! Thanks, Garchy (talk) 18:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

could you please be more careful...

The record shows that you moved the misnamed User:USS_Cole_bombing_video to Draft:USS_Cole_bombing_video, but, in doing so, you didn't leave a collegial heads-up on the talk-page of the person who started the draft.

I was the one who moved the original article USS_Cole_bombing_video to User:USS_Cole_bombing_video. I started USS Cole bombing video many years ago, when the wikipedia had frankly looser inclusion standards. When I come across an article I started, years ago, that measured up to the wikipedia's inclusion standards current when they were started, but which I was concerned didn't measure up to the stricter inclusion standards of today, I take a look to see if any edits made since I started the article had added any editorial content. Commonly, while other contributors will have edited the article, all of those edits will either be corrections to the article's spelling, grammar, punctuation, or will be changes to the article's internal metadata -- invisible to our readers.

If no one else has added any editorial content, I think I am authorized to place a {{g7}} on the article -- deletion requested by sole author. Alternately, if I think the material can be brought up to our current standards, or placed in a sub-section of another article, I think I am authorized to remove the article from article space, by moving it to a subpage under User:Geo Swan, for review at my leisure.

That would have been my intent here.

I found it extremely unfortunate that you didn't contact me. I am sorry you didn't either leave me a collegial heads-up, telling me of your move, or alternatively left me a question asking what the heck I thought I was doing, instead of moving it to draft space.

Yesterday, I got a heads-up on my talk page that Draft:USS_Cole_bombing_video was about to be deleted, because it had sat in draft space for six months, without being edited.

I knew I had never started anything in the draft namespace.

I write on controversial topics. This has pretty regularly made my efforts the target of disruptive edits by bad faith POV pushing vandals. I try to roll with this, but I am only human, and I can't help getting furious when it seems I am being targeted by vandals. It took me about fifteen minutes to figure out you were operating in good faith. During those fiftenn minutes the only explanation for the unexplained movement of material I was working on to the draft space was that one of those petty vandals was targetting me again.

Until I figured that out I was as angry as if my efforts had been disrupted by a vandal.

Yes, I now realize you were well-intentioned, not a vandal. But I also think you acted quite thoughtlessly.

So, I am going to ask you to be more careful, in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geo_Swan (talk • contribs) 17:59, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Removing speedy tags/replacing speedy tags

Hi, Safiel! I saw you changed the custom speedy tag that indicated Stanley A. Motta was largely spammy/promo. I purposely used a custom criteria so that I could indicate a G11 deletion but explain why and perhaps engage other editors to create a new article that is not as spammy rather than a normal templated CSD. What reasoning was there for removing my comment? I also noticed that you removed another editors A7 speedy here but there is no criteria that prevents deletion just because it has a history. Though the history is what matters, if prior edits established notability. I don't know that is the case in the article but your comment implying that an article can't qualify for A7 simply based on age is confusing and wrong. Cheers! Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Deprodding of TVPaint Animation

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from TVPaint Animation, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Pavlor (talk) 12:16, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Minami Itahashi AFD

Thanks for taking a second look at the above AFD. If you come across similar articles in the future, please drop me a line and I'll see if I can help. I came across this one because it was listed in the daily article alert for the Japanese WikiProject. But sometimes they don't get listed if the project's banner is missing from the article's talk page. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump 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/List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump 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. Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 12:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Bowling Green Massacre

Okay. But there was one comment made that I will not repeat that did need blanking because it really was a BLP violation. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

USS ENTERPRISE page

After having been assigned to USS ENTERPRISE CVN65, I am trying to figure out why I can no longer edit the page.

I have contributed quite a bit to the page

What can we do to unprotect it. I have many private photos that I would like to add

Thanks

Mark Best oldnavy1024 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldnavy1024 (talk • contribs) 04:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

  • @Oldnavy1024: The page was protected due to vandalism and the protection lasts until January 18, 2018. However, I look at your contribution history and you should have enough edits to be autoconfirmed, but your account does not show you as being autoconfirmed. Lemme see if I can point you to the right help desk. Let me look and hopefully I will have you a link within a few minutes. Safiel (talk) 05:06, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Oldnavy1024: Try asking at Wikipedia:Help desk. Since your account is old enough and has about 35 edits, you should be autoconfirmed and thus able to edit the Enterprise article, but your account does not show as being autoconfirmed. Unfortunately, I can not really give you any more help beyond this, as I am not an administrator, but good luck. Safiel (talk) 05:10, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Safiel/Archive_8&oldid=1090600682"