Shmego2
Speedy deletion nomination of Missael Rodríguez
editHello Shmego2,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Missael Rodríguez for deletion, because it's a redirect from an article title to a namespace that's not for articles.
If you don't want Missael Rodríguez to be deleted, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
C F A 💬 01:01, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yep. Completely fair, I made a mistake in not starting it as a draft. Shmego2 (talk) 00:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Re: Beatriz
editHi Shmego2, did you know about bold, revert, and discuss as a Wikipedia policy? Sometimes editors get bold, so they'll make a big edit for efficiency's sake. And then sometimes someone might disagree with that. If you disagree with the decision, then you can revert and start a discussion over whether you think Beatriz should keep its article. However, looking at the edits, I saw what JayTee32 did, which was adding the only content from the Beatriz article that wasn't already in the 2023 season article. And it's not like the article is too long. It's under 8,000 words, and Beatriz's section isn't especially long. So I don't see anything especially wrong that happened here. It's not like any useful information is missing that wasn't there before, as far as I can tell. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 05:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- No I was not. I apologize for trouble caused.
- Shmego2 (talk) 22:07, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's alright. The policy in question is whether the information exists on Wikipedia, and how it's organized. As a default, every storm exists as part of a season as one of seven major basins (all of which have yearly season articles). Unless season articles are so long (more than 8,000 words) that the sections need to be as short as possible, then there needs to be a lot of information that just can't be summarized to fit into the season article. A lot of Mexican storms are borderline, since more in-depth information might require researching in Spanish. Does that all make sense? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I see. When making Spanish articles (like Tropical Storm Pilar (2023), which I mainly made), it is quite difficult finding English sources, so the merge does make sense. Shmego2 (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- I could see Pilar being merged for that very reason, there not being much more info than the season article. The met history seems to be a direct copy, and the impact section could be used to expand the season article. I'm not saying that as a threat or as a way of diminishing your edits. You found a bit more information, which is useful. But how useful is Pilar's article if the body of the article is only 125 words more than what's in the season section? The season article isn't a GA yet, and it's not too big to handle the content. Just something to keep in mind for future article writing. I admire your editing enthusiasm, so if you need suggestions for articles to work on, I'll gladly help! ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I see. When making Spanish articles (like Tropical Storm Pilar (2023), which I mainly made), it is quite difficult finding English sources, so the merge does make sense. Shmego2 (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's alright. The policy in question is whether the information exists on Wikipedia, and how it's organized. As a default, every storm exists as part of a season as one of seven major basins (all of which have yearly season articles). Unless season articles are so long (more than 8,000 words) that the sections need to be as short as possible, then there needs to be a lot of information that just can't be summarized to fit into the season article. A lot of Mexican storms are borderline, since more in-depth information might require researching in Spanish. Does that all make sense? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)