User talk:Tokyogirl79

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


Upcoming editathons: Women in Nursing & Women Labor Activists[edit]

Florence Nightingale headshot.png
Rose Winslow of New York 158010v.jpg
You are invited...
Women in Red logo.svg

Women in Nursing editathon & Women Labor Activists editathon
Hosted by Women in Red - September 2016 - #wikiwomeninred

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

Hey, Thanks I need help[edit]

Trophy.png Hey, Thanks I need help
how do i format my draft properly? Skyegh1234 (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

THANK YOU[edit]

Dear Tokyogirl79, I thank you for your valuable feedback, guidance and time. Such guidance and feedback from Wikipedians like you motivates people like me in a very positive manner to follow guidelines and policies of Wikipedia strictly. Thanks once again. --Piyushratnu (talk) 07:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

  • It's no problem :) Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:12, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

New article improvement drives[edit]

Check out the following new article improvement drives/contests. North America1000 11:51, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Anime Matsuri[edit]

I would appreciate getting your input on the Anime Matsuri article. Long story short, AnimeDisneylover95 and I have been in a long term back and forth about sources. AnimeCons.com now provides all of the content we would normally use for the article, including attendance figures and guests lists, and I usually remove any primary sources used at that point. AnimeDisneylover95 feels that Facebook sources should remain despite them now being redundant. This latest back and forth started of the simple fact of them not using sources at all for the latest guests, of which I revered and posted to their talk page. So far on most of these issues, AnimeDisneylover95 will not talk except in rare circumstances on their talk page, or only communicates via the edit summary, while reverting any warning posts on their talk page.

I've gone back in, did all the usual cleanup including removing those redundant sources, cited the guests, but made additional updates as some content had changed. Again, reverted, but this time they've missed most of the new edits. At this point, if I have to walk away on the Facebook issue, so be it, but AnimeDisneylover95 needs to at least have basic communication to improve the article. They seem very intent on using Facebook Primary Sources, something not exactly usual. Esw01407 (talk) 01:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Restoration of Creately from deleted PROD[edit]

Thanks for pinging me when you restored Creately from a deleted PROD. I have neither the mop nor the secret handshake so am unsure about what the book of rules says in these cases, but I do wonder if it might be better restoring such articles as Drafts rather than into main space. That would at least encourage (although not enforce) a review of the content before it came back as a fully fledged article. It might just save some time in managing AfDs. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   19:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

  • True, but I figured that I'd see whether or not you wanted to pursue anything further. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Hi Tokyogirl79, should there be a Template:Old prod full, or something on the article's talkpage? kitten stalker - meowr! Coolabahapple (talk) 07:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Added! :) Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 08:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Creating For Redirection Purposes[edit]

I noticed that you were the last person to delete the page for Kyle Kulinski. I request that the page be able to be recreated to be redirected to the Secular Talk page. Kyle is more than big enough to have his page created for redirection. His channel is the 5th largest political channel in terms of views on YouTube at 19.5 Million+ views a month, making his content some of the most viewed political commentary online. In addition, he regularly appears on The Young Turks and other TV news shows. TempTTC (talk) 22:02, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

  • I'm somewhat concerned about the lack of sourcing on the Secular Talk page - the sourcing there looks to be entirely WP:PRIMARY, which cannot show notability for the show. My concern here is that even if I create a redirect for the show the article may still be deleted because the show might not pass WP:GNG. One thing to remember is that popularity (WP:ITSPOPULAR) does not give notability on Wikipedia, nor does its association with other networks (or its host's association with other things) give the show notability (WP:NOTINHERITED). Right now the most important thing is for you to add coverage to the article to show where Secular Talk has been covered in independent and reliable sources per WP:RS. Views and followers on YouTube will not give notability on Wikipedia - at most it might save it from being speedied via WP:A7, but that's about it and it could still be deleted via WP:AfD if it was nominated and notability giving independent RS could not be provided. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 02:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

2Leaf Press[edit]

Murph9000 referred me to you. Please tell me why you deleted 2Leaf Press. Thanks. Gdavid01 (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

  • I've answered this here. The long and short of all of that is that the article was extremely promotional, which was the main reason that I deleted the article. There were also concerns of notability, but that was more of an aside than the main reason. If the article had not been so promotional I'd probably have declined it since notability was borderline, but the article was so unambiguously promotional that it fully qualified under WP:G11. I've given examples of this at the editor assistance page.
I'm concerned about your conflict of interest here since it looks like you've made a lot of edits about this publisher and there's evidence that suggests that you work for this company. You have not disclosed this COI anywhere that I can see offhand, nor has the other editor that has been creating the pages either. This must be disclosed and I'm concerned that it looks like you've been editing since 2012 without disclosing your COI. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 00:33, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Sarah Tiana (revistied)[edit]

Hi Tokyogirl79. A while back you helped me sift through some possible sources for Sarah Tiana at Talk:Sarah Tiana#Possible sources. I have been looking for better sources off and on since then, but have not found anything at all. I also noted that User talk:Tokyogirl79/Archive 26#Sarah Tiana s statement was made which says Tiana's filmography should make her notable. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything in their which seems to satisfy WP:NACTOR.The only possibility I can see is "Has a large fan base or a significant 'cult' following", but I am not sure how this is assessed. The article has been edited a bit recently by the same SPA who created the article, but no additional sourcing has been provided at all. Anyway, I am wondering if you would mind taking another peak at the article when you get a spare minute or two and see if AfD may be warranted here. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Hmm... I remember it being very borderline and it looks like this is still the case. She has ties to various notable shows and people, but nothing to show that her roles were particularly major enough to show overall notability. Since it's likely that any attempt to redirect it to Reno! 911's cast of characters would be reverted, AfD would probably be a good idea in this situation. You can start one with the redirect option as a possibility. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 01:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for taking another look. I posted something at WT:BIOG#Sarah Tiana just as one last try; perhaps somebody there will be able to find some sourcing that I have missed. I can discuss a redirect on the article's talk page, but it does not seem as if it will get much of a response. I can also be bold, but as you say it would probably be reverted. So, it does seem as if this is eventually going to end up at AfD.-- Marchjuly (talk) 02:27, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • I'd say open up a discussion on the talk page and redirect the article. If it gets contested, take it to AfD. That way you can say that you at least tried to make it a redirect. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 02:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
I started a discussion at Talk:Sarah Tiana#Redirect to List of Reno 911 characters. Maybe other editors will offer some suggestions. Thanks again for your help. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Lake Bodom[edit]

Thanks for that nomination - it doesn't look notable to me, and it's blatantly self authored.

But one thing - Mr. Jeffries is a New Zealander so uses dd/mm/yy notation. He is saying it will be released on the 3rd December. Blythwood (talk) 02:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Ah! Thanks for that, I'd completely forgotten about the change in format! I think that the US is the only one that really uses the month/day/year format, honestly. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:45, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
OK. Might it be good to update the AfD then for fairness' sake? Blythwood (talk) 12:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Shoot, I meant to do that - thanks for catching all of this! Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 14:41, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection[edit]

Padlock-blue.svg Hello, Tokyogirl79. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.
Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons[edit]

Lady Elizabeth Wilbraham by Sir Peter Lely.jpg
Anne Stine Moe Ingstad (1918-1997).jpg


October 2016

Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
Faciliated by Women in Red

Women in Red logo.svg

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Request to Review Draft Entry[edit]

Dear Tokyogirl79,

I saw your profile on Wikipedia and realised you make very objective comments. You seem like a nice person who makes sense.

For a start, two of my entries were accepted Kok Heng Leun and Lim Teck Yin, but I thought I could do improve in my writing quality, especially when it comes to bio writing and helping local talents.

I am new to Wikipedia, so can I trouble you to help me review this draft entry? : )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kwong_Weng_Yap

PS: Yes, I was scouting, and Yap was on the news lately. So I thought he merited a wiki page after zooming through his online stuff. Realized it's not a one-time off event that he received some national fame. I think he does have something credible going on.

Thats why I decided to write it, and string it together first.

Look forward to hearing from you.

Warmest, Superwifi (talk) 08:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)