User talk:Shinsi Bohansetr
Welcome!
[edit]
Getting StartedTutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.
The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.
The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.
Tips- Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
- It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
- If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
- Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
- When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
- If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
- Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.
Happy editing! Cheers, Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Your AfDs
[edit]Hi there. I am not sure why today you chose three articles I created to nominate for deletion (I certainly hope it wasn't because I argued for "keep" in another discussion you started, as that would be a form of WP:HOUNDING), but you may not be familiar with WP:BISHOPS. The longstanding precedent is that bishops in the major traditions (Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, etc) are presumptively notable, and when nominated for deletion over the decades the articles are almost always kept. If you weren't familiar with this, now you are and I'd invite you to withdraw these three nominations so as not to prolong the community's time reaching a "keep" decision.
I also noticed that you have started several AfD discussions since 3 October after previously not participating in any (unless you have participated under a different account). May I recommend participating in AfDs before diving into more nominating articles? Observing and participating can give you a better sense of what is considered notable around here and how to structure your nominations. For example, your nominating statement in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fried Water Films and Entertainment does not actually provide a rationale for deletion. I agree that the subject is non-notable but a proper nomination should have an appropriate rationale to move forward. Finally, deletion is a really important part of this project, and we need more volunteers to participate in discussions, not just initiate them. I'd invite you to slow down a bit, participate in other discussions, observe and learn. Thanks for joining AfD and I hope you'll take this onboard for more constructive participation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback. I’ll take your advice. But WP BISHOPS is only an essay and it is not an official Wikipedia policy. Shinsi Bohansetr (talk) 11:19, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your continued edits today -- notability tagging exclusively on articles created by me -- definitely looks more like you are WP:HOUNDING me over our disagreement about the notability of bishops. As you can see from the AfD discussions thus far on Steve Maina, Joel Millanguir and Nathan Ingen, there is no support from other editors for your perspective. As I told you above, WP:BISHOPS represents a long-established consensus in the community, and bringing nominations to AfD that have no likelihood of success just wastes the community's time. Moreover, since you've already seen the expression of consensus and you've been advised to withdraw these nominations by @Schwede66 and me, drive-by notability tagging of similar bishop biographies could be considered WP:DISRUPTIVE editing as an expression of WP:ICANTHEARYOU behavior. As you've seen, other editors respect WP:BISHOPS as an expression of community consensus. If you truly believe that it should be disregarded by the community, then please start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability or Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). That's the place to begin changing community consensus and implementing policy, not in bringing AfDs with little likelihood of success. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Shinsi Bohansetr, I suggest that you proceed with restraint and caution. Hounding is one of the fastest ways of getting blocked. Do not edit in a way that gives the impression that you are hounding another editor. Schwede66 14:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Your continued edits today -- notability tagging exclusively on articles created by me -- definitely looks more like you are WP:HOUNDING me over our disagreement about the notability of bishops. As you can see from the AfD discussions thus far on Steve Maina, Joel Millanguir and Nathan Ingen, there is no support from other editors for your perspective. As I told you above, WP:BISHOPS represents a long-established consensus in the community, and bringing nominations to AfD that have no likelihood of success just wastes the community's time. Moreover, since you've already seen the expression of consensus and you've been advised to withdraw these nominations by @Schwede66 and me, drive-by notability tagging of similar bishop biographies could be considered WP:DISRUPTIVE editing as an expression of WP:ICANTHEARYOU behavior. As you've seen, other editors respect WP:BISHOPS as an expression of community consensus. If you truly believe that it should be disregarded by the community, then please start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability or Wikipedia talk:Notability (people). That's the place to begin changing community consensus and implementing policy, not in bringing AfDs with little likelihood of success. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)