Wikipedia

User talk:Seraphimblade/archive 19

< User talk:Seraphimblade
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Naypta in topic Feedback request: Biographies request for comment


The Signpost: 29 November 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Unprotection of Alyssa Bustamante

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I wanr to unsalt the page so I can create a redirect to Murder of Elizabeth Olten. Ping me if you need to ask more stuff about the unsalting --a gd fan (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

GeometryDashFan12, that is certainly an appropriate redirect target. I've unsalted and redirected it accordingly. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
@Seraphimblade: Thank you --a gd fan (talk) 22:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).

 

  Administrator changes

  Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

  Interface administrator changes

  Izno

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of DJ Heyder's article

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Colleague. I am Mammadov Vahid, a volunteer of the Azerbaijani Wikipedia.

DJ Heyder has hundreds of millions of listeners in America and Europe, and is a celebrity with all of his social media accounts approved and collaborating with major music companies.

Why was the article of such a person deleted? Under what conditions is it possible to return the article? Please inform me. Good work. --Vahid Məmmədov (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Vahid Məmmədov, an individual would not need to just be popular. There would need to be substantial coverage in reliable and independent sources about them, and without fluff like the one I deleted such as ...and is widely popular... ("widely popular" according to what reliable and independent source?), brought him to the attention of many world-renowned DJs (no "world-renowned"), Heyder released one of the auspicious remix's, (no "auspicious"), His laters remixes were signed by Universal Music , Warner Music, Atlantic Records, Big Beat Records, BMG etc. (no "etc.", enumerate or leave it out.) If you'd like to write an article about this individual, you will need to first read and address the problems that were brought forth at the deletion discussion, and demonstrate that things have substantially changed since that discussion took place in terms of how much reference information is now available about this subject. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Mary Setrakian's article

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

@Seraphimblade: Hey there! I'd just like to chat. First off, really didn't like your tone in addressing me and wanted to clarify what was happening here. There's no sockpuppetry going on and, by definition, no meatpuppetry going on either. But yes, I am collaborating with another user on this project. Both of our accounts on Wikipedia have existed and have been in use long before this project, as we have both edited a few articles before independently. All we wanted was to work together on creating this article. We are new to creating our own articles, as you could clearly tell. We are young and not nearly as informed nor as experienced as other editors here on Wikipedia, but more than willing to listen and learn to someday join that level. Everyone starts somewhere. Clearly the research we put in was not sufficient. Also, as per disclosing COI, both of us have interacted online with Mary Setrakian before, but have no direct connection to her nor have we ever met her personally face to face, we literally live thousands of miles away from her (and each other). Nonetheless, we still put the COI disclaimers on both of our pages to make it clear we're not completely random people who have never heard of her before and to let it be known that we have exchanged words on the internet before with the subject of our article. We are volunteers, "fans" if you will. Not being compensated for this nor being asked to do it by the subject. This is being done simply as a necessity due to the subject's notability in her industry. No promotion or advertisement of the individual was intended though I can see the impact may have muddied the intent. All that was intended was to document the subject and their notability in an encyclopedic way. We just need it to be as unbiased and neutral as possible, so we need some help from people here who may not know much about her, but will definitely know a thing or two about Wikipedia. Would it be best to draft the article on Articles for creation like you suggested, or to just put in a request on Articles for creation to have someone completely unaffiliated with her write the article instead of us? Which is preferable given our situation? For what little time the article was published and existing, there was never an issue with notability or a need for extra sources needed to be cited, on that front we did the best we could to show that this is a notable individual and information exists about their notability on a wide variety of reliable and independent sources, so I believe this can be salvageable. We just need to create a clear account of this individual and their notability, free from favor on either or any side and not written in a way that could come off as sounding like an ad. I know you've been doing this for a while and it can get rather repetitive, sure I get it. If this is too much for you to handle, please direct me to someone else who would be more willing to lend a helping hand. Your help so far has been appreciated, but I had to address your additional derogatory comment which really soured the way I wanted to move forward. Like I said before, I'm here to learn and grow. Help and support are much appreciated, thank you. And like you've said before, please do be nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rileymk (talk • contribs) 04:42, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Rileymk, well, you're probably correct that I have little patience for using Wikipedia as a billboard, and often the actions of a "fan" and those of a spammer are indistinguishable. You used an inappropriate photo in the article (nonfree media of living individuals is not permitted; it is expected that instead an editor should try to take a freely licensed photo of them, so such is always replaceable), and it was full of promotion like American Master Voice Teacher (inappropriately capitalized, "master voice teacher" according to whom?), She is known for her method The Revolutionary Send™️ ("is known" by whom, according to whom? And never use trademark symbols in articles), Masterclasses (completely inappropriate section title; "Classes" or "Teaching" will suffice), and on and on like that. Wikipedia articles must be written strictly neutrally and must never promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:40, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
@Seraphimblade: Duly noted, no photo will be used in the draft article until an appropriate one can be found and made available for use. I'd like to clarify that the term "master class" means something different in the vocal music sphere as opposed to what you may be thinking. I'm assuming it's not something you're really aware of, and I have no problem educating you on it as at least I have some of that "patience" you were seeming to lack! It's not a type of class that every vocal teacher does, like a one-on-one voice lesson, it's a group class where students perform and are critiqued in front of each other, but there are many other students present for the class who aren't performing and audit the class to learn from the critiques given to the students performing. Master classes exist outside of vocal music for actors, dancers, and other types of performing artists and disciplines. As an example, operatic soprano Maria Callas was known for her master classes at Juilliard, so much so that a play was created all about them. And several examples can be found on the article for "Master class" both related to vocal music and not related to vocal music. Therefore, use of the term would be appropriate as they are not the same as regular private voice lessons in studio that most voice teachers are expected to offer, it would require the teacher to be a "master" at their craft. "Master class" is a technical term within the industry the subject is in and not something unique to her, but is something that does make her unique. I can get rid of the term Master Voice Teacher (it may seem redundant with "Master class" being mentioned), as well as her vocal technique's name (I didn't know the policy about the trademark symbols, thanks for the head's up), since I can see it may be viewed as more in line with her branding and may come across as an ad. Again, I'm not here to spam/advertise nor do I aim to unnecessarily talk this individual up. I will edit a new draft more in line with these critiques and submit to Articles for creation for approval. Thanks again for your help. Rileymk (talk) 23:07, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2020

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Tako Mekvabidze

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, I appreciate your contribution in Wikipedia. I have no deep knowledge about Wikipedia article creation Policy and would be happy to read your summary about Tako Mekvabidze's article deletion. Would you be so kind to explain me how to change the content to meet the policy? What was wrong with the article you deleted? Thanks in advance! Have a great 2021! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datbatumi (talk • contribs) 08:52, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Usual exception, I hope

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Since you are the admin who declared a consensus in favor of a TBAN for me on edits relating to the Knights of Columbus, I wanted to draw your attention to this edit. I corrected an incorrect pronoun for a knight in what I assume would fall under the BLP exception. While I was at it, I corrected the tense of the verb in the sentence. That does not appear as obvious to me so, if you like, I will self-revert it. Thanks. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 14:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Slugger O'Toole, that would seem to pretty readily fall under either the exceptions for an uncontroversial vandalism reversion or BLP. So yes, I see no issue with that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Erica Nlewedim

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, I appreciate your contribution in Wikipedia. I'm not a Wiki Whiz but learnt the ropes to create a page for Erica Nlewedim. I noted that you deleted the page last year because she did not meet the notability criteria at the time. I have however updated the page and will appreciate a review. She's a Nigerian actress who gained popularity on Big Brother. She had significant work even before the page. Two of her other housemates whose portfolios are not as vast as hers both have Wiki Pages. Kindly help review. Thank you. Kemmiiii (talk) 01:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Seeing as you are an SPA for Erica Nlewedim I can’t in good faith assume you are here to build an encyclopedia. I’m not the revered Seraphimblade though and would be going on to reject the article. Celestina007 (talk) 02:31, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
I think "revered" may be a bit much; as often "reviled" perhaps. That said, Kemmiiii, since your draft has been rejected by AfC, you will need to discuss the matter with Celestina007 who was the reviewer. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, so having looked at the article, there are certainly some problems. Bachelor degree in Business Administration (Don't Capitalize Random Words. Correctly written, it would be "bachelor's degree in business administration"), bagging the... ("Winning". Don't use informal language like "bagging".) Despite her popularity, she was unceremoniously disqualified ("She lost". Not a bunch of talking up. Dump the GoFundMe stuff.) She has also been a brand influencer for... ("Has done marketing for". Don't use fluffy junk like "brand influencer".) Remove any external links within the article text; several are present. So yes, as it stands now, the article is inappropriately promotional in tone and content. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Ummm I meant revered as in “respected” I was trying to tell them that I wasn’t you. Oh well, it’s good advise you have given them. Celestina007 (talk) 08:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I will make the corrections. Kemmiiii (talk) 08:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Kemmiiii, I wouldn't want you to think what I said there was an exhaustive list. For example, you'd also need to junk the "Awards and accolades" section ("awards and accolades"? That's some godawful puff), and stuff like that. I am not by any means guaranteeing that even if you do what I said your article would be accepted, just pointing out some issues with it. At the end of the day, it really looks like UPE. That impression is used by what looks to be falsely licensed photos used in the article (there's one licensed as "own work" by an account with the subject's name when it is way too far away to be a "selfie" and appears to be a professional photo, so the licensing looks to be falsely done there and that's a hallmark of UPE). Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:54, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay. I'll look into all the issues identified and more. Thanks. Kemmiiii (talk) 10:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 42

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020

  • New EBSCO collections now available
  • 1Lib1Ref 2021 underway
  • Library Card input requested
  • Libraries love Wikimedia, too!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Inspire Programme

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

hey, this page promotion merterial already removed . but you delete this page .. why — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki97828 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Wiki97828, as this page was deleted as promotional and this is not the first time that has happened for you, you will first need to disclose whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. Once you have done that we can talk about that particular article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I do not write articles for money for anyone...I Write for pession — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki97828 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Not entirely sure I buy that. However, while you are "writing for passion", ensure not to include puffery in any articles, such as ...leading students... ("leading" will almost always be puff), ...along with global heads of science as well as Nobel Prize winners (puff), and It is done. (huh?). In addition, while not grounds for deletion, please review the manual of style on numbers. Since this is the English Wikipedia, we should use English terms such as "thousand", "million" or "billion" rather than "lakh" or "crore". Going forward, please ensure to convert numbers over to that, and to not write any more promotional articles which in any way "talk up" their subject. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:08, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:11, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Spam past final warning

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Seanleung2000 has created Draft:Orion Astropreneur Space Academy again after your final warning, and it's still spam. I've tagged for G11 but I think a block may be needed. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 09:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Yaacov Heller

Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Can you please remove create protection on Draft:Yaacov Heller so I can accept this draft? There seems to be a consensus that the subject meets WP:NARTIST and there is no solid reason to reject this draft. ~Kvng (talk) 02:07, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Kvng, no, I'm afraid not. I do not see a consensus there, and someone else has declined it since you made this request. It looks like several other editors have substantial concerns. Also please remember that it would be necessary that a mainspace article meets GNG, not just "NARTIST" or any other SNG. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, That's not how I understand these notability criteria to interact. We have notability criteria, such as WP:NCORP that are more demanding than WP:GNG and others, such as WP:NARTIST, WP:NPROF, and WP:NTV that are more lenient. If it were true that everything must meet WP:GNG we wouldn't have WP:OUTCOMES. ~Kvng (talk) 15:21, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
There is clearly not a consensus there. The answer was "no", and will remain no. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Yaacov Heller has not had an AfD, and WP:THREE has been followed. WP:G11 is now overcome without doubt. Seraphimblade Is the G11 speedy deleter and SALTer. I don’t understand his reluctance, but he is under no obligation to do anything. As the SALTing admin has declined to desalt, go to WP:RfUP, and if that fails, go to WP:DRV. Kvng —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
    I am curious about a couple of points:
    1. Am I confused about the relationship between GNG and SNGs?
    2. Consensus actually comes into play at AfD, not AfC. Reviewers like myself don't need a consensus to accept a draft. To accept this create-protected article, I do need administrator cooperation. What is the criteria for deciding whether to lift the protection?
    I'm not sure this will survive AfD if it makes it to mainspace but I do think it has a better than 50% chance and so I was prepared to accept it. ~Kvng (talk) 00:01, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Hi Kvng. The SNGs are predictors for whole swathes of topics meeting the GNG. They are particular useful for the creation of stubs. The GNG is a very good predictor of whether a topic will be kept or deleted at AfD. SNGs and the GNGs are rebutable presumptions, and guidelines only. The have an uneasy relationship, and are the subject of copious discussion at WT:N. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

 

  Administrator changes

  TJMSmith
  Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

  Interface administrator changes

  AmandaNP

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

You have deleted my page

Latest comment: 3 years ago13 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, you have deleted my page called Adams Hernandez which was meant to be a biography. I am new with editing and writing pages here in wikipedia and I do feel passionate about it. I would like to know why you have deleted my page instead of letting me know how to fix it. Also, I did get a notification that said that my page had problems with self promoting? I would like to know how is that even possible when i provided proof of my sources as well as it is a biography 'how is that self promoting?' Thank you for your time. — Preceding signed comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs)

Eliezerhg16, yes, I deleted that article, as it was promotional. Firstly, it contained several external links within the article text. Generally, one external link, to an article subject's official website, is permitted at the bottom of the article in an "External links" section. Article text should contain no other external links, and especially not to some "arts and crafts" page or to "credential" sites. That aside, the article also contained substantial promotional language: Best known for being the Vice President of Rossy’s Art and Crafts LLC, ("best known" according to what reliable and independent source?), and also for his short, growing and successful running career ("growing" and "successful" according to what reliable and independent source?), fastest 2000 meters steeplechase runner (a claim like that must be explicitly sourced), His motto is: "I run to inspire others, I run to remind myself that getting from point A to point B requires a lot of dedication, patience and trust in your plans to get where you want to be." (articles should not include something like a "motto" or slogan). That's just in the first paragraph, and the rest goes on and on like that. Wikipedia articles must never promote anything or anyone, including via "talking up". Every article must be strictly neutral in both tone and content. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh, and then from there something else that was entirely inappropriate: in case you are wondering about his mileage... Articles must never address the reader with words like "you", and should never have anything remotely like that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer, but I did later delete the external links because when I received the notification It highlighted that the external links should be deleted (It seems like you didn't even check the article completely?). I was working on it and making changes like the ones you have named, but when you deleted the entire article I then received an error message and no edits could not be done since once again you have deleted the article. Is there any other way I could get the article back so I continue making the changes? I have worked on it for weeks like I said before and I now know I have to make even more changes to it, but how if I did not have enough time '(minutes)' to even make those changes. I'm just concerned and quite mad. I apologize if my answer makes you uncomfortable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, I do have the links to show that he's know for the things I have provided I'm just now sure if I could provide the links since they are in a different language (Spanish). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

It is alright to use non-English sources. They must meet the normal standards for reliability and independence, but if they do, it is fine to use them. (It so happens that I can read Spanish sources fine, so if you'd like to run them by, you're welcome to do that.) But you still cannot use promotional language of any type, regardless of what sources you use. Is that clear enough? Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Awesome, that is all I needed and I appreciate it and I do understand and thank you for your response, but you did not answer all of my questions specially the one where I asked If I can get the article back to make those changes you have named such as "promotional language" and"non-English sources". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

No, I do not restore advertisements. You can try again. I would strongly advise that, since creating an appropriate new article is very difficult for a new editor, you create the article as a draft and use the articles for creation process rather than once again attempting to create or move an article into mainspace yourself. Mainspace articles must be correct from the very first edit, and AfC will help you ensure they are or tell you what to fix if it isn't. Also, please note that the things I listed are not an exhaustive list of problems with the article, but just examples of them. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

You've got to be kidding me, no offense. Is just that all of my time has been wasted and I don't even get the chance to fix it to provide people the right information. I do not want to use the fact that I am a new writer as an excuse, but It should also be taken under consideration, right? I am still a writer just not as experienced as you are for example. The fact that you can do this type of things and just delete other's work in just seconds and not provide any sort of back up of the article is just disappointing and it makes new writers leave this place which in my opinion is a great place to learn and help others who are curious to learn about any topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I also forgot to mention that not everyone has bad intentions, I personally did not meant to self promote the article I have written. I have a long way to learn about writing specially in my fourth language which is English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Well then, if you are stating you are inexperienced, you should have no problem using the process we have established for inexperienced new editors, which is writing as a draft and requesting AfC review rather than directly moving something to mainspace. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey, sorry to bother you about this situation once again but I have just read HERE that If I want my page back to retrieve the information on the article and make all of the changes you have pointed out about and provide a much better and well structured article I could do so my contacting you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

The answer is "no", and will remain no regardless of how many times you ask again. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you. I will reach out in a different way. I just needed you to reply to gain more information. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eliezerhg16 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Requests for undeletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hey Seraphimblade , Greetings from India. I am new with editing and writing pages here in wikipedia and I do feel passionate about it. Comes to know that you are the person who deleted the page called Arjun Sundaresan which was meant to be a biograph. If possible, please restore the page so that I can make edits to it.

Thank you for you valuable time WikiShakeshere (talk) 06:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiShakeshere, since you are asking about an article that was promotional, please first confirm whether you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship. If you are, you will need to make the required disclosures before we continue. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Will Major

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! Thank you for closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Will Major. You indicated the discussion resulted in "no consensus" for whether the article should be kept or deleted, but do you believe there is a consensus from the discussion to rename the article? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Eagles247, whether to rename the article should be handled by a move request. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:13, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

AFD closures

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there. You recently closed a number of cricket related AFDs, many with a redirect. Redirecting to team articles seems questionable since such ATDs were not suggested by any in those discussions (the only suggestions were to redirect to non-existent "List of x players" articles) and the individuals concerned are highly unlikely ever to be mentioned in those articles; in addition, redirecting to a city would also seem to go against all guidelines for redirects (this close). Please can you further explain these closures and/or revisit? Thanks. wjematherplease leave a message... 19:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

wjemather, it appears I made an error in the Sheikhupura closure, and have fixed that. For the rest, it is of course possible for the team articles to be created and for the redirects to be changed to those, but there was a clear consensus in each discussion that the articles did not pass GNG and so should not be articles in their own right. "List of players for..." articles are generally the correct way to handle players who should be mentioned but are not actually notable. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. To be clear, I agree with rationale behind the closes (i.e. they shouldn't be standalone articles) and that lists are the way to deal with such things; my only query (other than the error) is that the redirect targets chosen were not suggested by anyone, and several similar AFDs have been closed as delete with option to create a redirect should a suitable list ever be created. Regards. wjematherplease leave a message... 16:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I could see someone reading the discussion as I would. I saw substantial support for redirection somewhere (and certainly get why; the suggestion of lists is a good one), but I think the team articles are a good temporary solution until the lists are created. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:46, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thanks. wjematherplease leave a message... 17:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Princess Rani Vanouska T. Modely

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I received your message and I am very surprised. My opinion is that this person should be part of Wikipedia as she does a great thing as a philanthropist. Would you be so kind to explain me why do you think that it was done as a commercial advertising? The goal was her charity work plus to explain who she is. She does not do any commercial activities. Thanks for explaining. DW — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decemberwrite20 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Decemberwrite20, as you were engaged in promotional activity, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a condition of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for reaction. I repeat that I did not do it as a promotional activity. I am not paid or compensated anyhow to write this article and have not any employment or internship relationship with this person. I wrote the article as I think it should be there as this person's projects and charity works should be known on Wikipedia, she deserve it. Thank you for understanding. What can I do to republish the article without having any problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decemberwrite20 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, thank you for clarifying that then, though it certainly did look an awful lot like it. That aside, you must first understand that we don't only prohibit, as you said, "commercial advertising". Wikipedia does not permit promotion of anything, and in addition to commercial activities, that also includes charities, causes, philanthropists, government services or initiatives, or whatever else have you. We do not permit promotion or "talking up" of anything or anyone and require all articles to be strictly neutral. So, first, you will need to read and fully understand what we mean by neutrality, as what you wrote was very far indeed from it: Princess Rani Vanouska T. Modely, original full name Her Highness (HH) Princess Rani Vanouska Rajamoutou Modely Prithviraja Tomara Chauhan de Ranthambhore Narayan Singh Devi, (a claim that someone is a "princess" or anything like that absolutely must be sourced to a high-quality reference), ...is a top model, philanthropist, entrepreneur and public figure engaged in the social, human rights and education sector. (omit "top" and any other similar fluff adjectives; each and every one of those claims otherwise must be supported by a relible and independent source), She is now the President of the [https://www.footballworldheritage.org (no external links in article text; one article to a subject's official website is generally permitted at the bottom of the article in a section entitled "External Links"), Her goal is to use the power of football for a better world and promotion of human rights, especially through sport and art worldwide. (Pure puffery and essentially unverifiable; omit anything like this).
That is by no means an exhaustive list of the problems. The article carries on and on like that. And don't do the spamming in other articles—that's not going to be permitted period. Since it is clear you are inexperienced, any new article should be created as a draft and reviewed by articles for creation, but please be aware that even in draft space, promotional material is subject to deletion on sight. Find the best available sources about this individual, and stick to only writing in a very matter-of-fact manner about factual information they actually confirm. If there's not a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material about them, then they are not an appropriate subject for an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

OK. So if I do the page again with same text and will insert resources, than it will be ok? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decemberwrite20 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Absolutely not. The promotional tone and language also must be fixed. It at the very minimum will need a fundamental rewrite from scratch, not minor tweaks or just the addition of references. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:26, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Why was my article deleted?

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, you deleted an article I wrote called Roberto Velasco Álvarez. I thought the article was relevant because he is the person in charge of the relationships of Mexico with the US and Canada. I also added links to articles from media outlets such as Bloomberg, Reuters, El Universal (one of the biggest Mexican media outlets). I would like to understand why it was deleted and if I can improve it still. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bo.260221 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Bo.260221, as the article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you'll need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:44, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, I am not being compensated to edit Wikipedia in any way and am not expected to do so as a duty of employment or an internship. I saw there was no article about it so I wrote it. I tried to write objectively and in a neutral tone and added relevant sources. Could you tell me what can I edit so it is not "promotional" and serves the community? Thanks Bo.260221 (talk) 23:39, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Basically, it reads like a CV, which is inherently promotional. As an example, take: He was Editor-in-Chief of Chicago Policy Review from 2016 to 2017, where he created a new section in Spanish and established a business partnership with Mexican digital news outlet Animal Político (don't capitalize "editor in chief", and the two references used there are written by him and his then-employer. For that to be significant enough to go in an encyclopedia article, we'd want sources not affiliated with him or the project to be discussing it. ) Roberto Velasco Álvarez has worked in the Mexican public sector for over a decade. ("over a decade" is not a time frame; when exactly did he start doing so?) From 2009 to 2012 he was chief of staff at the Committee on Rules at the Mexico City Legislative Assembly, where he helped assemblyman Guillermo Orozco (who became Speaker of the House in 2012) with all matters regarding his office. He worked with the committee's chair, Guillermo Orozco, and assemblyman David Razú to achieve the enactment of Latin America’s first equal marriage act, developing legal arguments, voting scenarios, and helping to plan political and communication strategies. (the cited reference, [1], does not even so much as use his name, let alone confirm all that about him. Also use last name only after the first mention, so just "Alvarez".), and on and on like that. Articles should stick only to facts confirmed by reliable and independent sources, and remain neutral in both tone and content. Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:32, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you this is very helpful. Bo.260221 (talk) 01:44, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Requesting Restore deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there. You recently tagged my article Natashaa Iyer as promotional and deleted it, I don't understand why ?? all the ref and cite of the page are legit and proof of an actress's biography. if you find the tone and language promotional then please advise I can fix it. My contribution is quality and I have followed the established process for new editors by writing it as a draft, then submitting an AfC review request. following which my submission at Articles for creation was accepted and moved to the mainspace by User:Kieran207 after four months. I would appreciate it if you undo the deletion and restore the page as she deserves it. Airdrago (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Airdrago, as the article was promotional, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:55, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm professionally connected to the subject of this article. I'm neither being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, nor being asked or expect to do so as a duty of employment or internship. I do this in good faith and like to contribute the right thing, be it good or bad. Airdrago (talk) 02:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. It appears the AfC reviewer in this instance may have been rather inexperienced. It happened a long time ago, else I'd probably have a word with them about being more cautious in reviewing and accepting articles.
So far as this specific instance: The article contained a bunch of puff, such as award-winning (there is pretty much never a time it would be appropriate for this term to appear in an article), ...earned recognition as a writer-director... ("recognition" from whom, according to what reliable and independent source?), became well-known in the digital world... ("digital world" is inspecific marketese, and "well-known" by whom, according to what reliable and independent source?), notably the Google Duo, TVS Jupiter ("notably" according to what reliable and independent source?), with Mr.Amitabh Bachchan (don't use "Mr.", "Mrs.", etc., in any articles), ...and many more (don't add on meaningless, inspecific junk like this). I do not restore advertisements, but if you believe you now have enough experience to write a neutral article without any of that type of "talking up" or promotional language, you can try it again. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:48, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

I understand your point dear, but don't you think these were minor errors that could be fixed if you just pointed them out? without giving a second thought you straightway took action to delete? Anyways thanks for helping me understand what promotional language is, I will try again Seraphimblade, btw do let me know if you have any suggestion. Airdrago (talk) 06:55, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

First, there are very few people on this planet who I would permit to call me "dear". To my knowledge, you are not one of them. So I'd knock that right off. The answer was "no", and will remain no regardless of how many times you repeat the question. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Dear! was an expression I used, I hardly know you. no offense yet! what I sense is I've upset you. FYI I did not repeat any question that you said no to? I just asked you a suggestion, kindly read thoroughly before giving a remark. Mistakes happen. We all make them, it is part of what makes us human. How you react and respond to mistakes is something that shows your character. Airdrago (talk) 11:27, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, but that really did not make sense. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of page Socio story

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Atleast provide me the previous url of the page so that I can make changes. --Svpnikhil (talk) 05:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Svpnikhil, do you mean the URL at which the deleted article was located, or the URL of the copyright violation which resulted in most of the revisions having to be deleted? Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
URL at which the deleted article was located now.--Svpnikhil (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
The location it was at when deleted was Socio Story. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
If want to rephrase the article, where can I find the previously written article. Please retrieve the article before deletion for improvement Svpnikhil (talk) 14:54, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
I do not restore advertisements. If there is enough reliable and independent source material published about this organization (note, that does not include material you got by directly talking to those involved with it, and that should never go in an article; sources must be published), you can try again, ensuring to use no promotional language and sticking neutrally to facts confirmed by those reliable published sources. If there is not a substantial amount of such material about the organization, we should not have an article about it at all. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:58, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of page Socio Story

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I truly appreciate your passion to build wikipedia a credible platform but you have deleted Socio Story and flagged it as advertisement by using your own methods of evaluating. Socio Story is a credible & reputed not for profit organisation of India which does advocacy on various pressing social issues like climate change, Diversity & inclusion, Firstly, its a not for profit organizations registered under Ministry of Corporate Affairs so by nature of organisation this can not be an advertisement as its purpose of existence is to promote awareness on climate change, diversity, healthcare, education for last mile. The platform recognizes social changemakers who are making an impact at grassroots level, its not a commercial entity to do any advertisement, you have to understand basics of the work which it does before marking it an advertisement. It has got widely appreciation not from india but from all across the world Lonnie Park, Grammy Nominee appreciated this platform in his address, British Dy High commissioner Dr. Andrew Fleming applauded for its work. Socio Story was awarded with scholarship from Colgate Palmolive for its social impact. Platform is working towards making a difference in Air Quality Index by organizing large tree plantation & setting up forests and it has hosted many popular people like Dr. Rajendra Singh- Ramon Magsaysay Awardee, Dr. Anil Prakash Joshi- Padma Bhushan Awardee, Mithali Raj- Captain of Women's national cricket team and many more. I am wondering to see your matrix to evaluate and marking such a credible platform as an advertisement, I can understand it may not have been drafted well but such platforms deserves to be at Wikipedia, I leave to best of your decision as you are best judge to decide how wikipedia will function as you sound like an authority to delete any page without even intimating or having discussion which is not a good practice at all. I can make request again to put it live back. Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkp1990 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I have already discussed that above. Please read that discussion if you are interested to see it. I'm very interested to know how a brand-new account comes here asking about an advertisement, though, and I will be checking into that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:32, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Ernesto Kahan

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion
Hey, i want to register a compliant Ernesto Kahan is the author of 29 books, won prizes, a peace activist etc. why did you delete it? Wikipedia must respect people like him. This is illegal and immoral 15:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל — Preceding unsigned comment added by מתיאל (talk • contribs)
מתיאל, I'll first caution you about using stuff like "illegal". That can be seen as a legal threat, which is grounds for a block from editing. I don't think it was meant in that sense here, so I'm not going to block you for it, but I advise you not do that again. That aside, since you are asking about an article which was heavily promotional and already stated you have a conflict of interest with it, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If you are, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I didn't meant to make legal threat. I just meant that he follows the criteria of Wikipedia, over then 29 books, he reputation and objective achievements. and someone brutally deleted it without seeing the content. how can somebody do this? it is heartless 18:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל — Preceding unsigned comment added by מתיאל (talk • contribs)
Please answer the above question with a "yes" or a "no" before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:37, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
no מתיאל (talk) 21:38, 8 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל
And there is nothing promotional in the article, just facts מתיאל (talk) 21:39, 8 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל
I'm afraid that's not true. poet, writer, professor, medical doctor, epidemiologist, researcher, painter, and recognized peace activist (each of those claims needs to be supported by a reference, and "recognized" according to what reliable and independent source?), The family was extremely poor but Isaac's mother, Isidora, was a fortress (don't use colloquial language; we do not refer to a person as a "fortress"), The family was extremely poor but Isaac's mother, Isidora, was a fortress, she decided that, despite the fact that a well-off lawyer uncle indicated "His son Isaac should not study because that is for the rich," his grandmother replied - My son will be a doctor (what reliable and independent source was this story published in?), the rest of the "biography" section carries on in that "heartwarming story" tone which is not appropriate, there's then a massive laundry list of books which would need extensive trimming to the ones reliable and independent sources confirm are significant, then two sections entitled DIPLOMA of "Illustrious Visitor or Visitor of Honor" "Ernesto Kahan, in the name of streets or parks" and Awards which would need to be removed entirely unless reliable sources indicate the awards were particularly noteworthy or significant. (Even if they do, do not use ALL CAPS for words.) And those are certainly not all the issues, just a sampling of them. Articles are required to be strictly neutral in tone and content, to stick only to facts verified in published reliable and independent references, and to not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:48, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
I see your point, it it only a lack of experience on my side and i do need a Tudor, but if you could give me the chance to put it back into draft and then i could fix all of those problems you have mention here above, could i have the chance to do it? 17:06, 14 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל — Preceding unsigned comment added by מתיאל (talk • contribs)
I am afraid if you want to do that, you will have to try again. I do not restore advertisements. That being said, starting an appropriate new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. If you feel you are inexperienced, I would strongly suggest you gain experience by editing existing articles instead, and only try your hand at a new one after you have a better feel for editing. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:25, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
It is not an advertisement! and morally one should have be able to edit a work he spent so many hours working on מתיאל (talk) 11:55, 16 March 2021 (UTC)מתיאל
Sorry, but the answer remains "no". Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Protected page

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi @Seraphimblade, This page (Erica Nlewedim) was deleted by you last year under G4 and G11 criteria. It also got protected from creation ( due to multiple recreations). I have made a draft here in my user space here and will like you to take a look for a possible reduction in protection. Thank you. ~~~~ The Sokks💕 (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

TheSokks, what you will need to do is put the article in as a draft, and request review by articles for creation. If and when AfC approves the article, I will be happy to unprotect the mainspace page so that they can create it for you. As this page was deleted at AfD just half a year or so ago, I am...skeptical, to put it mildly, that we should be creating it again. One thing I immediately notice needs correction in your draft is that people should be referred to by full name upon first mention, and then last name thereafter, to maintain formal tone. So after first mention, it will need to be "Nlewedim", not "Erica". Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:51, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I'll do this. The Sokks💕 (talk) 21:53, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Clarification needed about RfC that is already open

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Regarding your closing summary at the ARE, those involved in the dispute are strongly encouraged to open a formal request for comment, could you please clarify? The whole point of the proposal on ARE concerned an RfC which I already did open in a fully formal way and it is still open:

  1. 5 March 2021 formal opening of RfC by me
  2. 5 March 2021 robot adds RfC ID
  3. 5 March 2021 robot announces RfC at history and geography noticeboard
  4. 5 March 2021 robot announces RfC at society+ noticeboard
  5. 6 March 2021 announcement by me at WikiProject Africa
  6. 6 March 2021 announcement by me at WikiProject COVID-19/Sources
  7. 10 March 2021 disputed inline tag added by me to the Eritrea article so that those most likely to be motivated to participate are aware that the RfC is still open.

Boud (talk) 15:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Boud, I hadn't seen that come up in the AE thread, but yep, that's exactly the type of thing I was talking about. Glad to see that it's already underway, and hopefully that can help clarify the consensus on the matter. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:41, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Why the article about "Allan Wexler" was deleted?

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi,

My article "Allan Wexler" was deleted for being promotional. I am new to Wikipedia and after reading the talk page, I am still not clear why it is deleted. Please note that I am not hired or paid for writing this article. Allan Wexler is well-known artist and I provided many resources to prove it. Please help me to understand why my article was deleted.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Delightful void (talk • contribs) 20:07, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Delightful void, Wikipedia does not permit promotional material, including "talking up". In this case, the article even began inappropriately, with an offset pull quote in italics above everything else: "I am an architect in an artist’s body. My studio is a laboratory. I sculpt with gravity and paint with rain. The work looks at simple things: the sight lines between seated people, the way that two bricks intersect, the line between inside and outside. I invent ways to walk through walls. I build anti-gravity machines." - Allan Wexler. Don't use pull quotes or "inspirational" stuff; articles are to focus neutrally on facts. It carries on like that: and when art and design was seen as a catalyst that could affect political and social change (according to what reliable and independent source?), a pivotal time for new art movements that blurred the boundaries between disciplines (see previous), goes into another pull quote ask the unanswerable questions that motivate many cross - disciplinary careers – what is the difference between art and craft? Between sculpture and furniture? Wexler has no interest at all in the language of style. It is questions of function - and the behaviors it both follows and shapes - that absorbs him, an infectious preoccupation (paraphrase stuff like that in a neutral and factual tone, putting fluff like that in quote marks doesn't change that it's fluff), and on and on like that. You have already received a warning, so please consider this your absolute final warning that writing more promotional material of this type will lead to a block. Articles must in no way "talk up" their subject, and stick only to facts confirmed by reliable and independent published sources, not fluffy pull quotes. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Deleted Page - Nanky

Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Hello User:Seraphimblade, I just saw your deletion of an article I created on Nanky a Ghanaian musician for using promotional words. I am here to seek your assistance to restore the page to draft so I can work on it properly and make it very neutral for the Wikipedia community. Thanks --Richloveburner (talk) 05:40, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Richloveburner, as this article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

@User:Seraphimblade, I believe the language I used was what seem promotional. I am not paid to write articles on Wikipedia and do not advertise for this entities. Actually I make research and add credible sources to everything I put out there. I want to just widen the scope on known Ghanaian persons in entertainment who are not yet covered on Wikipedia as I did with KaySo (producer). --Richloveburner (talk) 07:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, that one is a little puffy, but not as bad. (Stay away from stuff like "hit" to describe something; just state facts.) That said, with the one in question: rose to fame with the hit song (once again, don't use "hit", and the cited source does not support that he "rose to fame"), His debut EP titled Remedy has surpassed 1 Million streams on Audiomack. (unless a reliable and independent source states that this is particularly significant, leave stuff like that out), "hit" again in the next section, and then a bunch of "references" which are actually just links to music videos. When writing an article, stick to facts verified by reliable and independent sources, leave off the puffy adjectives like "hit", and ensure that the article is neutral in both tone and content. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:30, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the education and advice User:Seraphimblade. I will work on that as soon as the page is restored and to all my future writings. --Richloveburner (talk) 07:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean "restored". I don't restore advertisements. If you think there's sufficient reference material to write the article, you can try it again. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:13, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
OK Richloveburner (talk) 08:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 42

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021

  • New partnerships: PNAS, De Gruyter, Nomos
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Library Card

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of David Check

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello – It seems like this account deleted the page I made about David Check due to "unambiguous advertising or promotion." That was not my intent – I'm simply a fan of baseball documentaries. If there's anything I can do to edit the page to fit the Wikipedia guidelines, please let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keepcalmandnelson (talk • contribs) 20:38, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Keepcalmandnelson, you will first need to find reliable and independent reference material about this individual. Most of the sources cited in that article are either not reliable, not independent, or both, and even at that, most just mention this individual. That is not enough; there needs to be material which covers a subject in reasonable depth. If there's no better reference material than that available, this individual is not notable and so it would not be appropriate for there to be an article about them at all.
That said, even if there were enough reference material to write an article, stick only to facts it verifies. For example, the article stated things like best-selling Faith Rewarded: The Historic Season of the 2004 Boston Red Sox, but the cited source, [2], does not verify the "best-selling" claim at all, so that is just puffery. (IMDB is not a particularly reliable source to start with, also.) Similarly, it states that Check was instrumental in the creation and execution of such programs as YES Network's Yankeeography and the reality television series The Franchise, which ran for two seasons. Neither of the cited sources ([3] and [4]) support the claim that he was "instrumental". The first just drops his name, and the second briefly quotes him. So, again, that is puffery and not at all verified by any reliable source.
Finally, while I'm amazed I have to actually say this, articles should generally contain external links in their text at all, but they certainly must not contain links to promotional material for Showtime or Starz, or sales links on Amazon. This article contained several links to those things, and that is entirely inappropriate. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:29, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Janat content deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there, grateful to meet you. I am new to Wikipedia and as I have lot of free time these days I wanted to write about a tea brand I like but not especially know. I have seen you have deleted some content and I'm not sure to know why as I based it on the articles I found online. I'd be grateful if you could help me so I can understand the principles and get to publish an article. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumea08 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Jumea08, your entire edit sounds like a sales brochure. As some examples (but by no means an exhaustive list): this family business has developed around an original story that pays tribute to French craftsmanship, traditions and entrepreneurship (puffy, promotional language that belongs in a sales brochure rather than an encyclopedia article), The legend says that once on the return... (unless this is a very notable legend, that's feel-good puff that really doesn't belong in an article; stick to facts like that the name was based on his cats), Janat has started a new mission in 2016 by launching the first caravan in the world sharing love and happiness around a cup of tea. Aiming to bring positivity and joy to every person crossing its path, the caravan also shares an empowering message to all women. Indeed, they gratefully offer a free cup of tea to every women reminding them they are the backbone of the society., (that and the entire "Women empowerment" section are also pure fluff). Wikipedia articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, and must not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up" or promotional language. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. As I understand I sticked maybe too much to the original brand story. Anyway, you did not have to block me. I'll find another time-consuming hobby for these days that will not involve article contribution on your magical platform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumea08 (talk • contribs) 08:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I didn't block you. I warned that you might be if you continued with the promotional content. You did not continue, so you were not blocked. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:36, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Allan Wexler

Latest comment: 3 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! Could you un-salt Allan Wexler please? He is notable and I have discovered a good draft that is ready to inhabit that part of mainspace. Thanks.--- Possibly (talk) 03:52, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Possibly, could you please first clarify which of the references in Draft:Allan Wexler you believe satisfy the criteria for notability? Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:03, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Really, you don't want to take my word for it? I've done literally 500+ artist articles and none have been deleted. the first source is pretty good-- Benezit Oxford dictionary of artists. That's like solid gold as far as sources go. Then he is in the collection of the Jewish museum. I could go on, but it would be highly inefficient.--- Possibly (talk)
When something has been the subject of a spamming campaign, I don't take anyone's word for it. I looked through some of the listed sources, and am really seeing only directory listings, name drops, and stuff he wrote rather than was written about him, but looking at them all would be time consuming. I figured since you were stating he was notable, you would know the particular ones I ought to look at. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:12, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
He's a Guggenheim fellow. The guy is oozing notability. I did not know he was the subject of a spam campaign, I saw it in the new pages feed. Are you going to unprotect it?--- Possibly (talk) 04:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
You could also look at the last two sources, which are long-form reviews of a book he wrote.--- Possibly (talk) 04:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Yes, I have. I think between the Guggenheim citation and the Oxford entry, that's enough reference material that it would pass AfC. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I have no idea why you would not assume good faith on my opinion. It's a bit offensive, to tell you the truth. I've got 40K + edits and have created literally 500+ articles on artists... but you imply I might be part of spamming campaign. Anyway, thanks for the unprotect.--- Possibly (talk) 04:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
No, I didn't think you might be! I apologize if you thought that; that wasn't at all what I meant. I just take extra care when that's been the case; some spammers are pretty slick and really make an effort at pushing stuff through. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
ok then, thanks. --- Possibly (talk) 04:28, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Distuptive editing

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, could you please specify any modifications that you think are malicious? You can send the e-mail in the profile or you can discuss. Thank you for your understanding. Seyit12 (talk) 10:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Seyit12 Sorry, you'll have to clarify what you're asking. Seraphimblade Talk to me 11:41, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


Seraphimblade Dear Seraphimblade, I created the translation article and English Wikipedia page of an official organization, but you closed the page for promotional purposes. Almost all of the sources are quoted from the news and archived. If there is a section about the promotion, I said let's edit it. Thank you for your understanding. Seyit12 (talk) 06:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Move "The Lab (organization)" to draft space?

Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion

Hi! I just noticed that The Lab (organization), a page I watch, got speedy-deleted as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". I don't remember the specific content of the article, but I watched it because it's a long-running nonprofit arts organization with substantial secondary coverage available (for example, in a few minutes of reviewing Google News results, I see articles from KQED 2014, SF Chronicle 2018, ArtForum 2019, and SFWeekly 2021). I'm surprised that it was speedy-deleted instead of proposed or nominated for deletion. Can you move the former content into draft space? I'd like to review it and see if the content should be merged into Redstone_Building#The Lab (and redirect the article title to that section), or whether I can find enough sources to make it stand on its own as an article. Thank you! Dreamyshade (talk) 17:38, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Dreamyshade, and it rather surprised me too. Usually in an article that's been around that long, I can find a non-promotional revision to revert to rather than having to speedy. In this case, though, that just wasn't there.
In this case, the issue leading to deletion wasn't inadequate sourcing. Now, the sourcing cited in the article is very thin, to be sure, but that isn't a speedy criterion. The primary issue was that the whole thing consists essentially of promotional fluff. Some examples: The Lab believes that if it gives artists enough time, space, and funding to realize their vision, the work they produce will change the way we experience the world. These are often small propositions that (like all great art) challenge the familiar ways we perceive value, and so it seeks out extraordinary artists who are underrepresented as a result of gender, class, race, sexuality, or geography, and whose work is not easily defined and therefore monetized. As a site of constant iteration and indeterminacy, The Lab is, above all, a catalyst for artistic experimentation. (that's straight out of a brochure), performances by luminaries ("luminaries" according to what reliable and independent source? Even if one did call them that, that'd be a bit much), With a nod to this rich history, and then a massive laundry list. So, I'm not sure there's much to do there (obviously, that type of promotional fluff can't be put into any article), but I'll stub it and put it into a draft here in case you can find anything to salvage. If there is better source material available, maybe it'll be possible to make it into a neutral article using those references. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I've chipped in some sourced material, on the draft page. I think it passes GNG. --- Possibly (talk) 19:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
OK I have cleaned it up and published it. It is short and factual but well sourced.--- Possibly (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Seraphimblade and Possibly! Yeah, it seems likely that people involved in The Lab had contributed that material to the article a while back. I believe it's appropriate to be cautious with speedy-deleting articles about long-running community non-profit organizations as spam (instead prompting for cleanup/rewrite with a prod or even AfD), compared to self-promotional company or BLP articles, because of the nature of the topic, but am just glad it's back! I'll see what I can do to expand it. Dreamyshade (talk) 22:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
That was a proper deletion, as the article was 90% promo copy without sources. The promotion-free draft stub that Serpahimblade provided was one sentence, and no sources.--- Possibly (talk) 22:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree. There's nothing in the rules preventing the re-creation of a previously deleted article if it meets the current guidlelines for the article to be created. There are absolute preservationist and absolute deletionists and all shades of grays in-between and we don't always agree. Graywalls (talk) 08:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Disputed edits

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello These are BLPs. I would like to know if these are allowed. Shouldnt they be removed ?

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Boris_Johnson#Allegations_of_racism_and_Islamophobia

https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Smriti_Irani#Controversies 07:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Nithya, if you have concerns regarding a BLP, please raise them either at the article's talk page or the BLP noticeboard. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

 

  Administrator changes

  Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

  Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Feedback on Deleted Article

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

@Seraphimblade: Hello! I would like to ask info to improve the deleted article "Jaime Arango Correa". I want to write about Colombian artists and this was my first article which I originally wrote in Spanish and was approved by es.wikipedia. The one I published here was the translation. English is not my mother-language so I understand I might have used an inappropriate or not neutral tone (I understand that's the main issue?). I wonder if I can ask you for help or advice to improve the deleted article since it is only a translation and the original passed wikipedia's guidelines in Spanish. Look forward for your advice and very much appreciate if you leave me a notice when you answer! Mariafhenao (talk) 07:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Mariafhenao, I am afraid I am not too familiar with the Spanish Wikipedia or its practices, so I do not know what you mean about it being "approved" there. Each language's Wikipedia develops its own policies and practices, so there are things which may be acceptable on the Spanish Wikipedia but not the English, or vice versa. So the fact that something appears there does not necessarily mean it is appropriate here, and you are responsible to ensure that it is acceptable according to our policies and guidelines. That said, I cannot imagine that the Spanish Wikipedia permits puff and promotion such as Has been a multifaceted artist... ("multifaceted" is meaningless marketese), describes Jaime’s work as: "The painting collaborates in a decisive way in the achievement of qualities and intonations in those who use the expressive assembly of waste materials; thus, in Carlos Rojas (1933) from the series "Umbrales" or in Jaime Arango (1953) when they worship the aesthetics of the old in their recent assemblages." ("Correa", not "Jaime", we refer to people by full name on first mention and last name only thereafter, and leave out fluffy pull quotes like that entirely), found himself involved in great international movements (don't editorialize with adjectives like "great"), He has continued to represent Colombia in Spain, USA, South Korea[22] and Italy.[16] ("represent" Colombia how? Has Colombia actually given him some official position or title, or designated him as an official representative? If not, he doesn't "represent" it), the "technique" section consists of just a pull quote centered within the section which is entirely inappropriate, and then is followed by massive laundry lists of whatever he's ever apparently done. So, I do not know how or why the Spanish Wikipedia "approved" something like that, but I can certainly tell you that's not close to okay here. We very strictly enforce the requirement of neutrality, and do not permit promotion of anyone or anything, including by any type of "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Great Seraphimblade, thank you for your explanation and specific examples! By "approved" I mean the spanish article has not been flagged in any way and it appears published in es.wiki and since last year I haven't received any corrections or suggestions for modifications and is already indexed. However, I do notice in Spanish is super neutral so my mistakes are for sure on English. About the quotes, I found them on articles investigating about him online and thought could help explain the artist's aesthetic but if these are perceived as promotional or useless I have no problem to remove them. About representing Colombia I found he officially did in Italy with the support of the Colombian embassy in a global event. I connected the articles of the embassy where I found that info. Would anything else be needed to explain that then? and ccould I proceed with the editing and corrections and let you review it again? Thank you again!Mariafhenao (talk) 09:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Mariafhenao, sorry, I'm not sure what you mean? (By the way, you don't need to ping someone when commenting on their talk page; that already generates a notification.) The things I listed were a sampling, not exhaustive listing, of the issues. If you think you can write it neutrally, you can try again, but you might want to start off with something less ambitious than a large new article. Writing an appropriate new article is one of the most difficult things to do here; might be better to edit some existing ones and gain some experience first. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:53, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Okey I'll give it a try and write it again with more concise info and "neutral" tone before quitting because I really passed a lot of time investigating to do my first article and wouldn't like to loose all the effort :) Mariafhenao (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

George Leef deletion explanation

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, you left no explanation for closing the George Leef AfD discussion in favor of deletion (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/George_Leef). It is not clear at all to me there was consensus so greatly look forward to understanding the reasoning. Thanks Nweil (talk) 22:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Nweil, the rationale for deletion was that there was not sufficient reference material about the individual to indicate notability and therefore allow an article. One "keep" argument only asserted notability but failed to provide any supporting reference material to demonstrate it, and one cited a few references which were demonstrated to be inadequate by just being passing mentions. Neither one convincingly refuted the assertion that there was insufficient reference material available on this individual from which to write an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
It seems clear you didn’t read the actual article. There was upwards of 6 reliable secondary sources including books and scholarly papers. A closing administrator is supposed to review the article not just the discussion. In addition, rough consensus specifies that opposing views should have been responded to. My opposing views were left unanswered as you see. All of this in addition to the lack of explanation in the actual closing discussion indicate to me you didn’t take the proper care in the decision Nweil (talk) 22:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
That is incorrect. The job of closing administrators is to assess the consensus in the discussion, not read the article for themselves and make a "supervote". The consensus in this discussion was clearly that deletion was warranted, and I did so accordingly. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:39, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
My comment is based on this closure guideline: 1 which says: A volunteer (the "closing admin") will review the article, carefully read the discussion, weigh all the facts, evidence and arguments presented and determine if consensus was reached on the fate of the article. What is yours based on? Nweil (talk) 01:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
It is based upon general practice for closing AfDs. In any case, you have asked your question and received your answer, so that will be the end of our conversation. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:04, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to get a second opinion on this. Thanks

Deletion review for George Leef

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An editor has asked for a deletion review of George Leef. 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. Nweil (talk) 15:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Korsch AG

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, a few days ago you deleted the Wikipedia article on Korsch AG, a mechanical engineering company from Germany that is one of the world leaders in the construction of tablet presses and tablet compression technology in general. This article was a direct translation from the German Wikipedia. The German article was discussed for 7 days and then released by a Wikipedia administrator because the company is considered a hidden champion (https://de.wiki.x.io/wiki/Diskussion:Korsch_AG). The deletion statement says that I should contact you to adjust this article accurately. What do I have to do or rewrite so that this article appears in the English Wikipedia? Thanks in advance. Hgef (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Hgef, as the article was promotional, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)


Can you please move (AJ “El Kallejero” Ramos) to draft space?

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Can you please move AJ “El Kallejero” Ramos to draft space so I can work on it this week? It got speedy-deleted as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" and I want to keep working on it. It has many reliable independent sources and meets the notability guidelines, so I will try to re-write it until it makes it into a neutral article. I worked really hard on the article and need the references and information I got in it to continue improving it. I will make it my next challenge! Thank you, stay safe. Dominicansinhistory (talk) 02:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Dominicansinhistory, as the article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,Hi! I did not even know you could do that on Wikipedia. I just wrote the article on this topic because it is of interest to the Latin communities here in the US and all Latin America. I wrote about what he has done and who he is and the information I found on the sources, but maybe I put too much on the occupations and other things so it came across as promotion. It was a lot of work researching, I do not even know why I did it but I had a lot of free time and wanted to write about something. Maybe I should just move on and leave it but I know this article has potential and for me an article is like a baby now. Let me give it another try, I know I can do it. Thank you for your response and stay safe. Dominicansinhistory (talk) 18:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that. I am afraid that the article cannot be restored anywhere, since it contains some copyright concerns such as too-close paraphrasing (ex.: In the article, which was part of his motivation to work on a non-profit organization called “Street Motivators” to help kids with higher education and arts., in original source: I am also working on a non-profit organization called “Street Motivators” to help kids with higher education and arts. You cannot directly copy from references; you must paraphrase. Additionally, if no sources other than interviews or other cases of him talking about himself discuss his founding of that organization as significant, it should be omitted from the article entirely.) Many of the sources are interviews (which should be used with the same caution and caveats as any case of the subject talking about themself, and used very sparingly if at all), and many of the rest are of reliability that is at best questionable (ex.: One source leads off AJ “El Kallejero” Ramos is a dynamic, hard-working individual who always puts effort and enthusiasm into everything he does. I should think this would be an immediate red flag that this is not objective journalism from a reliable source, and is instead either a fluff piece or reprinted PR material, which should not be used.) The article itself also contains plenty of fluff (He was named a 2020 Billboard Latin Power Player and is currently YouTube’s Latin Artist Relations Manager and Global Lead of Culture for Google’s Latin Employee Resource (HOLA) (I don't see any sources that note the "Latin Power Player" bit as particularly significant and it looks to cover dozens of people, so putting that in the article, let alone the lead, is quite inappropriate when it's just a very brief quote from him in a blurb, and the source that discusses his employment with YouTube just refers to him as an "artist relations manager", so refer to him as that and leave out all the fluffy stuff.), AJ has hosted some of the most important events and festivals across the world (absolutely no editorializing like "most important"; and "Ramos", not "AJ", we refer to people by full name on first mention and last name thereafter), and there are many other issues like that where he is talked up based upon very thin or unreliable material, or sources like interviews where he's talking about himself.
To write an appropriate article, look for sources which meet the criteria for reliability and were written independently of the subject (so no interviews, reprinted press releases/PR, etc.), and which are substantially or entirely about the subject directly, not just mentioning or quoting them in passing in an article about something else. Stick only to facts verified by those sources, write about them in a neutral, dispassionate tone, and do not try to "spice up" those facts in any way. If substantial quantities of reliable and independent reference material about a subject that cover them in depth does not exist, it is not appropriate for us to have an article about that subject at all. While I can't restore the material due to the copyright concerns and generally do not restore promotional material regardless, I would, if you like, be happy to provide the references which were used for the article, but be aware better ones would be necessary if you intend to try it again. If the ones you used are the best available, chances are it is not acceptable to have an article about this individual at all.
I do note you're rather new, so you may want to gain some experience improving existing articles before you try your hand writing new ones direct to mainspace—that is really hard to do even for experienced editors. If you do want to write a new one, you may be better to write it as a draft and request review by articles for creation, as this will often give you the chance to fix problems rather than resulting in deletion (though do note that promotional material and copyright violations can lead to deletion even of a draft.) Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for this explanation! I appreciate you taking time to answer and your advices on this article, Noted. Yes, please send me the references so I can check them later. Take care. Dominicansinhistory (talk) 01:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Dominicansinhistory, I have placed those at User:Dominicansinhistory/Ramos sources. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Open University Business School

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, I have a question regarding the Open University Business School article. I saw that the article was deleted by you, allegedly because it contains promotional or advertising material. I am not being paid by anyone and it was my first Wikipedia article. I tried to follow all guidelines and reference all my sources properly. I'm rather surprised that the article has been deleted rather than edited. Is there any way to restore it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GerOUstud (talk • contribs)

GerOUstud, I note that the material you wrote (which was not deleted per se, though it was restored to a redirect and protected after you edit warred to attempt to include promotional content) contained the text Full-time research students are based at our Milton Keynes campus. If you are not employed by this organization, could you please explain why you used "our" in that statement? Who is "our", then? Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, Hey, my mistake, I copied this sentence from http://law-school.open.ac.uk/research/research-degrees without noticing that it contained "our". I was looking for the info about the students based at the Milton Keynes campus, and reused the same sentence. I hope it explains why it contains "our". I am generally interested in improving the quality of articles about smaller/less known UK unis but I am not affiliated with any one of them. GerOUstud (talk) 20:44, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I see that you did indeed copy text directly from a source. While I appreciate you being honest about that, please note that you absolutely must not do that, as that constitutes copyright infringement. I have accordingly revision deleted the edits which contain the infringing material. I would also ask if you have done that in any other edits you have made to date—I won't sanction you in any way for it if you have, but they will need to be handled appropriately if it's happened elsewhere. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, I don't think so, it was more of a mistake because it was a short sentence, which I forgot to rephrase to something like "Full-time research students are based at the university campus." I will try to avoid such issues in the future, for sure. As I said it was my first Wikipedia article, so I expected that the article would be edited by others to further improve it. Anyways, could you tell me if the link to the article can be restored? If not, I am fine with it, it's just that I have put a lot of effort in writing it and the Open University Business School is actually the largest business school in Europe, so it definitely deserves a Wikipedia article, in my opinion. GerOUstud (talk) 21:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
If sufficient reference material exists from which to write an article, yes. A subject's appropriateness for an article is not about any kind of "deserving". Rather, the primary question is whether there is a sufficient quantity of reliable and independent reference material about the subject from which to write one. Many of the sources used in the prior version (as some examples: [5], [6], [7]), appeared to be either written by the organization or be essentially reprinted press releases (and even contained giveaways toward that, such as use of "our" in them, indicating that the school wrote the material there.) We are looking for material from reliable sources who are not just reprinting things the organization says about itself, and have no affiliation with it or interest in promoting it. If you can find a substantial quantity of reference material like that, it certainly may be possible to write an article, but stick to facts verified by those reliable and independent sources. Leave out any puff and marketese terms, such as, for some examples: "tailor-made", "delivers flexible courses", "renowned business schools with outstanding standards", "leading academic institutions", "one of an elite group", "world’s leading international management education associations", and it goes on and on and on like that. Just stick to facts, and leave the puff adjectives out. Articles must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, not read like a brochure the school would hand out to potential students. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:56, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, Got it. I can definitely edit it, so that the article adheres to the rules and standards of Wikipedia. One question. How can I edit it now? Seems like i am not allowed to do it anymore... GerOUstud (talk) 06:10, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Probably the best thing to do would be to start it out as a draft, at Draft:Open University Business School, and then request review by articles for creation. That will often allow for problems to be corrected, rather than deletion resulting (though do note that promotional material and/or copyright infringements can result in deletion even of drafts). Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
Ok! Would it be maybe possible still to open it at least for a few minutes for me to copy the content from the editor? Otherwise I will need to create the article from scratch. The text is not a problem as I can anyways copy it from the history, but templates cannot be copied. Thx!
Especially knowing that it contained copyright problems, no, I am afraid that will not be possible. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:13, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you please move Business Systems International to draft space?

Latest comment: 3 years ago9 comments2 people in discussion

Can you please move Business Systems International to draft space so I can re-write it? I couldn't work out how to save it as a draft so I published it thinking there would be a review process, but it just got speedy-deleted as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". I'm a bit at a loss of how to make this article pass the Wiki guidelines, when other companies such as Convergys and Earle Wines have remained up, and seem to have extremely similar content! Please could you help advise me on this, as I'm finding Wikipedia a really difficult platform to understand. Thank you, much appreciated. BSIUK (talk) 14:39, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

BSIUK, before we proceed, you will need to agree to strictly follow the conflict of interest requirements for paid editors. Do not again create an article in mainspace, or move one there, for which you are being paid. If you do not know how to create a draft and request AfC review, ask for help in doing so rather than breaching those requirements, as paid editors must have edits reviewed by editors without a COI before they go to mainspace. I hope this is quite clear? Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:51, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade Very clear thank you, it's not intentional - I'm sure you can remember your early days on Wikipedia and there are a LOT of rules, and the user interface isn't exactly intuitive. It was a genuine error. How can I reinstate this article as a draft and what do I need to do to make it adhere to the guidelines? BSIUK 07:42, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I do indeed. So far as this article, I'm afraid the whole thing was pretty well inappropriate and full of marketese. In the first couple sentences, I see the buzzword "solutions" twice, and this does not appear to be a chemical company. A company might sell software or river rock or guitars or massages, but aside from a few chemical companies, they don't sell solutions. From there: along with VDI, remote workstations and high-performance severs. (What is "VDI"? Define or wikilink to the article on any terms your average joe off the street wouldn't immediately recognize. And "high-performance" according to what reliable and independent source?). Next is a citation to LinkedIn, which is not really an appropriate source as people write about themselves there, and then in the historic Michelin House commands an excellent position (leave off fluff like "historic", and "is located at" suffices fine, rather than the fluff like "commands an excellent position".), award-winning (there is really never an appropriate time to call someone or something "award-winning" in an article, but "sourcing" that to the company's own website is especially unacceptable), BSI initially focused on technology requirements for the finance sector and then grew in scope, size, capacity and capability, evolving in line with the changing forces in the marketplace and now has a broad client base, (that's a lot of words that don't really say anything, and according to what reliable and independent source?), BSI initially focused on technology requirements for the finance sector and then grew in scope, size, capacity and capability, evolving in line with the changing forces in the marketplace and now has a broad client base, encompassing major clients across sectors such as Retail, Telco, Engineering, Automotive, Media, Healthcare and Research. (Don't Capitalize Random Words; for whatever reason I find inappropriate capitalization is common in marketese stuff. None of those should be capitalized. And according to what reliable and independent source?), the company was commended (this is "sourced" to one of its sales partners; again, we are looking for source material from sources not at all affiliated with the company, as sales partners would have an interest in promoting it.) That is by no means an exhaustive list of the issues; it continues on like that, then again sources several "awards" from sales partners. Unless reliable and independent sources confirmed that the company's winning such awards was particularly significant, that's not appropriate to include in an article.
If the best available source material is the company's own website, LinkedIn, press release sites (Viz Release/PRNewswire), and their partners, then this company is not an appropriate subject for an article at all and we can't have one about it. Is there better reference material available which meets the criteria for both reliability and independence, and covers the company to a reasonable depth? Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:02, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok that's really helpful - thanks. Are you able to move this to a draft space so I can rewrite it with some new sources and without the marketing jargon? Thanks again BSIUK 12:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I do not restore advertisements, and there's not much salvageable there anyway. If you think you can find sufficient reference material, you can certainly give it another go. If you'd like, I'll provide you the sources that were used in the deleted article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok in that case how do I set up a draft of my own so I can rewrite and get someone to approve it later? BSIUK 07:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

You can do the writing at Draft:Business Systems International. I've started that off with the AfC header; there will be a button you can use on that header once you believe it's ready for review. Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks v much :) BSIUK 14:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)~

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Business Systems International

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Business Systems International, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. TheChronium (talk) 11:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Reverting Marvelous Europe

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, can I ask why you keep reverting the Marvelous Europe page? this is a different company from the parent company. If XSEED, the Sister company can have a page with similar information (or a long list of other video game publishers) can you please fill me in as to why this page can not exist? It is not advertisement, but facts about the company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KitsunerOrLater (talk • contribs)

KitsunerOrLater, the primary purpose seemed to be to provide a product list for the company. To be sufficiently notable for a standalone article, it would be necessary that there be a substantial amount of reliable and independent reference material which is substantially or entirely about the company itself. That may be true in some cases and not others, so other stuff exists is never a valid reason. Each article is either appropriate or not on its own merits, not because of what happens in other articles about other things, even if those other things seem similar. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

A speedy deletion

Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there! I hope you are having a lovely start to your week! I was curious as to why my Fur llc. page was deleted? It seems as though the issue pertained to promotional or advertising material. That was not my intention at all but rather to showcase the legitimacy of this brand with the provided notable material. I was wondering if I would be able to rework this page with your provided suggestions? My apologies for any unintentional disruption. --Bvolcy (talk) 18:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Bvolcy, as the article was promotional and it is apparently your aim to "showcase the legitimacy of this brand", please note that we require editors who are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship, to make certain mandatory disclosures. I believe you may have those to make before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi there! I am in the early stages of beginning my beauty blog where I try out different brands that align with my beliefs and expectations. I would like to stress that I have no affiliation with this brand other than being a customer who believes in these products. As I continue my beauty blog, I will share my experiences with other brands as well. I hope I have provided more clarity. Thank you for your time! --Bvolcy (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

(Once you have started a thread, please continue to use it; there is no need to insert a different header each time.) That said, what you are describing is not the purpose of Wikipedia, as this is an encyclopedia, not a blogging service. Encyclopedia articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, stick to facts supported by reliable and independent sources, and contain no personal viewpoints or thoughts from those who write them at all. If you'd like to do that then that is fine, but using Wikipedia as a blog is, I am afraid, not fine and not permitted. If you would like to start a blog, there are many free and low-cost services on which you can do so, but this is not one of them. Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! My apologies for creating another thread. I feel as though I have not provided proper clarity. I will not be using Wikipedia as my outlet for blogging but rather just a neutral source where others can reference simply information and facts about the brand. I wanted to create this page written in a neutral tone for strictly informational and factual use. --Bvolcy (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

So first, things like "brand" are themselves marketese. It generally refers to either a company or a product, and the appropriate one of those terms should be used. That aside (as an example of issues, but by no means an exhaustive listing), articles certainly may not contain promotional material such as first American body care brand dedicated to caring for one's body hair and skin from head to toe. (straight out of a sales brochure, and "first" according to what reliable and independent source?), The company’s products are sold online and in several different retailers across... (excessive listing, and this is "sourced" to the company's own website and an interview, none of which are independent), is to reframe how people feel about pubic hair and body hair. (don't include "mission" type junk), They have created an elegant solution (leave out puff adjectives like "elegant", and again interviews are not independent sources), Fur began as a conversation between Laura and Lillian (articles should use literal language, so presumably it began when it was founded or incorporated, not "as a conversation". Also should be "Tung and Schubert", we use a formal tone, so refer to people by full name on first mention and last name thereafter.), Their second most-liked Instagram image (getting "likes" on social media is a pretty irrelevant detail and should not be included.), It showed to their community that their pledge to support the comfort and protection of all bodies wasn’t just lip service, but an ongoing practice that evolved to reflect the needs of our community. (completely promotional and inappropriate, and don't use second person like "you" or "our"). Also remember that most companies and products are not appropriate subjects for articles at all, as they would not pass our requirements for notability. But even if they do, articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, and not in any way promote or talk up anyone or anything. They must stick to facts verified by reliable and independent sources.
Creating an appropriate new page is hard. It is generally very much my advice that newer editors either gain experience by editing existing articles for a while first, or create new articles as a draft and request review by articles for creation. Even as a draft, though, that would have been deleted for promotion. We really do not at all tolerate any promotional material, PR, or advertising. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this feedback! I will absolutely take your advice and edit a few more articles to truly get a better understanding and then in the future create a draft with your suggestions and submit it for a review. I really appreciate you taking the time to clarify this for me. I most certainly do not want to have a promotional tone but rather a neutral tone that is strictly informative. --Bvolcy (talk) 17:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Rumney

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hello Seraphimblade, thanks for closing this discussion. Obviously I'm a bit disappointed in the outcome but sometimes that's just how AfD goes. Having said that, would you consider re-closing it as redirect to List of St Kilda Football Club players instead of delete? It would make it easier to restart the article if new sources are found in future, it would direct readers to at least a bit of information on Rumney, and the lone engaged advocate for deletion indicated she would be satisfied with that outcome. Thanks – Teratix ₵ 00:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Teratix, if you believe that it would make a useful redirect, there's really no need to change any result. Just go ahead and create one if you think it would be of use. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Simply recreating the article loses the history (to non-admins). I am very disappointed that you even had to ask "if you think it would be of use". Why are you even editing here if you think having a single redlink amongst 13800 players isn't "of use". The person absolutely and unquestionably meets a sports notability criteria. The redirect option was mentioned in the AFD, it was in the final comment of the main deletionist cheerleader. I find the whole GNG vs NSPORT deletionism that is going on at the moment repugnant. Please undelete and turn into a redirect. The-Pope (talk) 16:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
The outcome was to delete, and remains so. If you would like to create a redirect, I have no objection to doing so. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:15, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
As The-Pope mentioned, the problem with creating a new redirect instead of restoring and then redirecting the article is that we can no longer access the article history, which means the article has to be recreated from scratch if significant new sources come to light. I'm not sure what the rationale is for outright deletion, given three out of four participants in the discussion have commented in favour of redirection. – Teratix ₵ 05:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Question/Request for Advice

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade,

I found your page through Wikipedia Editor Assistance. I am a relatively inexperienced Wikipedia editor/user who has recently come across some confusion and a question regarding the page "Padma Lakshmi". There is another user who edits this page as well who a while ago insisted that some disputed terms regarding the patient's nationality be included in the lead as well as the Nationality/Citizenship lines. I disputed this but the editor insisted that without achieving consensus, despite my Talk page efforts and sources, that the disputed content should remain in the article. I was advised at the time via Editor Assistance to refrain from editing the page any longer, but that I could continue to follow. Recently, another user also brought up the same concerns and the same aforementioned user made the same questionable edits. However, now they are claiming that the inclusion of the disputed content is part of the "stable version". I am genuinely confused about all of this and what the policy is regarding the stable version. Due to the editor in question reverting three times within 24 hours, I did bring this up on a Wikipedia edit warring noticeboard. I wanted to know your opinion and ask you what Wikipedia's policies are regarding "stable versions" as well as ask your advice on how to proceed from here with regards to editing this page "Padma Lakshmi".

Thank you, Apoorva Iyer (talk) 04:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Apoorva Iyer, as to your question regarding "stable version", generally this means that if the article has contained something for a substantial period of time, and someone objects to changing it, then the presumption is that the long-term material should remain until a consensus is developed that it should be changed or removed. You seem to be arguing on the talk page regarding Indian law on the matter, but that is not particularly relevant. What would matter most in that case is both what reliable and independent sources identify the individual's nationality as, and in addition, if they have said, what the individual themself identifies it as. If she identifies as both Indian and American, or identifies as Indian in nationality but is an American citizen, a good case could certainly be made to include both in the infobox. (I don't know if that's actually true; that's purely hypothetical.) If you cannot come to agreement with the other editor, it may be necessary to use a process like a request for comment, but edit warring is not an appropriate way of resolving the dispute. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:58, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi Seraphimblade, thank you so much for responding. I have a few follow-up questions in light of your response. The first is, how the other user is able to state that inclusion of the term "Indian" is part of the "stable version" of the article. As I am sure you noted, we had a discussion a few months ago at which time the other user had argued that inclusion of the phrase was part of the "stable version" despite it being a new edit. My next question is that I have provided a source on the Talk page regarding how the patient identifies, to which no response was given by other users. And also, how long should I wait until I bring this discussion up with WP:RFC|request for comment? So far, the other user has given no indication that they are willing to discuss further on the Talk page, which concerns me. Apoorva Iyer (talk) 08:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
There are no fixed rules about when you can put in an RfC. If you believe that discussion has reached an impasse and agreement will not be reached just by discussion, that's the time. Though do keep in mind that people have differing availability, so do leave some reasonable period of time before you presume that someone doesn't want to respond further. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Shital V Yadav

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How can unblock me id ??

May I know the reason why are you block my id ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.57.10.49 (talk) 03:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

First, you will need to stop the sock puppeting, including editing like this, while you are blocked. You may not edit at all when any account of yours is blocked. You may want to review our standard offer, but that is not a guarantee. Regardless, if you continue to operate sock puppets, they will continue to be blocked. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Heba Aisha

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
    • See the below message how both are working smoothly with own caste kushwaha or Luv-Kush equation related and I have so many example , targeted the Yadav page and so many page deleted by Heba Aisha but opposed by me then you blocked me without any warning or reason ??
    • I have studied more then 2000 contributions of Heba Aisha after that I know his mentality about Yadav related article.


========= below message taken from Heba Aisha talk page================

Thank you Your fabulous work on kushwaha related articles has encouraged me to join Wikipedia I thank you for for you work here especially in kushwaha articles I wish I someday I can also become like you and by the way I am also doing Ma from History from Patna University Himanshu Kushwaha 01 (talk) 05:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't feel need to defend myself, but editing is not so easy as u think. Please see, WP:OR, WP:SPS, WP:CIR, WP:NPA. The pages u created were not notable as they lacked sources and they were delete only by consensus of other editors. Also, plz don't abuse me on my talk page.Heba Aisha (talk) 09:14, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

FYI

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

You might be interested in this as the blocking admin. TAXIDICAE💰 12:48, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Praxidicae, thanks for letting me know. I'll certainly be interested to see what the SPI turns up, but I think that's very much sufficient cause for a check to be run. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Disruptive users at various pages

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Plz see this too Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kroshta, even after giving a lot of warning the user is involved in same type of vandalism I.e replacement of Yadav by Yadava. Both are different thing, one is a caste, other is an ancient dynasty. The WP:ANI discussion was also removed, I don't know why?. Btw, I have working in this area for long and administrator like Bishonen are acquainted with my work. Thanks Heba Aisha (talk) 09:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Also see this version to guess, how these users are destroying complete article by their disruptive edit. [8],Heba Aisha (talk) 09:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I know that Bishonen has done some excellent work with the disruption that often plagues these topics. Since the checkuser results there were inconclusive, you would need to provide enough behavioral evidence to justify a block based upon that alone, if such exists. I don't know enough about the subject to have an opinion regarding the content questions, but I'm certainly happy to help when disruption arises. Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced section (Fongyee Walker)

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments1 person in discussion

Hello, hope you're well - my page on Fongyee Walker was deleted because of promotional or advertising material, I wonder if you could point out where those were so that I can delete them, and I can have the page back? Any promotional activity was completely unintentional. Thank you -Shaftesbury15

Shaftesbury15, as the content was promotional, please clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship, or have another conflict of interest with regards to this individual. Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade, I can confirm that I am not being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia and this is not a duty of employment or internship, and I don't have a conflict of interest regarding this individual. Thank you for checking, let me know if there's any further information I can provide, and what you'd like me to edit on the page in order to republish. Thank you, Shaftesbury15

Then do you mind explaining how it is that you were the photographer of this close-up, clearly posed image, if what you just told me is the truth? Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade, yes that photo is part of the same collection of photos from Fongyee's page on masterofwine.org site (https://www.mastersofwine.org/fongyee-walker-mw), I asked for some more photos of her as I thought the one on the MW site was too informal for Wikipedia. I was not the photographer I just asked for the photo and downloaded it onto my computer to upload for the page. Is that ok? Sorry if not, I can find a different photo! Thanks, Shaftesbury15

Well, no, it is not okay to say that something was your own work when it was not, or that it's released under a free license if the photographer hasn't agreed to do that. That can be taken care of separately. So far as the article itself, it was full of inappropriate puffery and marketese. As some examples (not by any means an exhaustive list): Combining her passion for food and wine (fluff), leading the Cambridge team to victory ("leading" according to what reliable and independent source?), developed Dragon Phoenix into the leading WSET provider in China (see previous, and even if some source calls it "leading", that's the type of fluff articles shouldn't contain), specialized in teaching the WSET's flagship qualification ("flagship" is marketese), Walker's captivating teaching and presentational style (leave out any adjectives like "captivating"; that's pure fluff). Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade, thank you for the feedback, I didn't realise about the photo, so sorry. Would I be able to have a copy of the page in order to edit all of your suggestions and remove the fluff, the photo, and other leading adjectives? This is my first article so I'm really grateful for your feedback and I hope to learn from this. Thanks, Shaftesbury15

No, I do not restore advertisements, as generally they require a fundamental rewrite (and as I said, what I gave there were examples of issues, not an exhaustive list). If you think you can write it neutrally, you can try it again, though it is not my recommendation for newer editors to try directly creating articles in mainspace, as that is quite difficult to do correctly. It is better to use the draft and articles for creation process, or get some experience editing existing articles first. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Article Creation Advice

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade!

You recently deleted the first article I had written on a mix engineer named Kevin McCloskey. Although I understand that there might not have been enough direct mention of him in primary sources, the other editors were generally unresponsive in my multiple requests for the specific things that I had gotten wrong as I wanted it to make it a learning experience and not repeat in the future. Just trying to learn here... I did not intend to promote the individual in any way so I am a little confused. Any feedback or guidance would be much appreciated. Thank you! Falvitesse (talk) 05:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Falvitesse, as the content there was promotional, please clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, I've mentioned before in other talk pages that I do not know the individual in any capacity, otherwise I would have disclosed COI as per Wiki guidelines. My writing style may not be fully encyclopedic yet but I don't think something I did in good faith should be immediately characterized as such. I merely feel like I did my best with the sources available and the knowledge I had of his work.
I always ask, because frequently enough the answer is yes. Regardless, the article was full of promotional material, such as (as some examples, but by no means an exhaustive listing): award-winning, RIAA certified multi-platinum (pure puffery, there is essentially no circumstance under which someone or something should be described as "award-winning"), He is known as a influential figure on the sound of the greater Carolinas music scene ("known" by whom? And that is "sourced" to this [9], which is clearly on even a cursory reading a fluff piece, not a reliable and independent reference), He continues to work with rising talents and major label stars ("with musicians"; leave the fluff out and stick to facts), and that's just in the lead section; the body is more of the same. Articles must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, stick only to facts actually verified by reliable and independent sources, and be free of any puffy adjectives or other forms of "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade Ah okay, so tone was the problem, glad that's finally clear. Took a long time to get to that swimming through the community, but appreciate your help.

The Signpost: 25 April 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Gaon Dastak

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hey, how are you? Kichu and I have been working Draft:Gaon Dastak. Kichu had declined it several times and asked for the article to be improved. Since I am new to AFC, they had asked me to look at it (See here [10]) I removed some more information that I think should have reliable sources to vouch for (particularly data on visitors etc) and improved the language. Please check and let us know if you think it is alright. If yes, please remove the protection to creation. Otherwise, please guide us where we are lacking in our judgment. Thanks! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 05:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Nomadicghumakkad, and I certainly hope you've gained some experience from that one. Dealing with potential COI is certainly a good skill for an AfC reviewer to have. In that vein, I do see some things that may be in need of some more scrutiny:
  • Gaon Dastak was founded by Aashish on 2 January 2018. (Who is "Aashish"? This individual isn't mentioned previously in the article; maybe there were before but it's probably necessary to identify who they are and why that's significant here. Of course, that significance needs to be confirmed by a reliable source.)
  • Aashish is follower of Jat religion. (This is a biographies of living persons issue. As religion is a sensitive subject to some individuals, someone's religion should not be discussed in an article at all without being confirmed by a reliable source, and even then should only be discussed if those sources flag it as something of particular significance about them. There are no cited sources for this claim, so as a BLP matter that must be removed absent that. As you see here, even articles which are not biographies can contain BLP issues, so always keep an eye out for those.)
  • Over the years, it became a leading national daily. (Over what year to what year? And "leading" is a puff term, so the article should just include the factual data from the source about circulation and the like, and leave it up to the reader whether they would consider that "leading".)
  • The rumour claimed that birds were being killed due to Jio's 5G internet testing, Gaon Dastak reported this and stopped it with the support of ALT News of India for Fact Check. (The cited source only briefly mentions Gaon Dastak, and certainly does not support the assertion that they "stopped it (the rumor)". So that's a much-inflated claim, and needs to be removed. I'm also not sure what "Fact Check" is supposed to refer to here, is that some other organization?)
  • In India, the Twitter account of the people who raised their voice against the government for the peasant movement was shut by the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs. Against this, the Gaon Dastak had run a hashtag, due to which all the closed accounts were restored by Twitter. (The cited source again only briefly mentions that Gaon Dastak objected. It does not even confirm that Twitter did reverse its decision, let alone verify that Gaon Dastak's hashtag campaign was the reason why. So again, this claim is not supported by the cited source and needs to go.)
  • Youth Ki Awaaz (this is dishonestly listed with just "Youth Ki Awaaz" as the author in the citation. Actually, if you check the reference ([11]), that was written by Mahendra Gudiya, who is Gaon Dastak's editor. So that source is not independent and needs to go; that was just the organization referring to itself. The other references will need to be checked for similar types of dishonesty or circularity as well.)
  • The "TwoCircles" piece seems to be an interview, and that may be true of others as well. Interviews are not independent, since they are basically the subject being prompted to discuss itself, and don't help toward notability.
So, with the stuff not verified by the sources, such as the entire "Notable events" section, removed, and the other unreliable or non-independent sources taken out, I think you need to take another very careful look at whether this organization passes the general notability and organization notability requirements. I'm very skeptical that it does (otherwise, why not use good sources instead of poor ones to begin with?), but always could be. Seraphimblade Talk to me 10:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello and hi, I declined this draft like multiple number of times. An IP came to my talk page and even ordered me to not review this article. In the past versions, it did not had any sufficient context. So they added some puffpieces now along with something which is a violation of BLP. Anyway, these are some excellent findings by you. Regards Kichu🐘 Need any help? 14:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, Thanks for the detailed notes! Definitely needs another careful look. Very glad we came to you first. Also, I was thinking to evaluate it from WP:NMEDIA and not NCORP point of view. Is that the correct approach? Please suggest and help. Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 08:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

"NMEDIA" is a notability essay, so while it may contain some useful advice, it is not a policy or guideline, and states as much. The actual relevant guidelines are NCORP and GNG. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Delete Page EMUI 11

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi and greetings I have created a page in English Wikipedia titled EMUI 11 Please do not delete this page is a useful article and I am expandikg it Tank youHossein norouzi 306 (talk) 15:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I have not deleted it. However, as it was not notable, it was redirected to a parent article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:32, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Johnny Depp on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

TrottieTrue

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I don't know if this calls for a rethink of the close, but at ANI they are saying "The article isn't doing any harm" in relation to this version of an article which contains 800+ unrefernced dates of birth of living people. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 21:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm only concerned if it actually happens again. People griping about AE results is pretty normal, and I don't tend to pay it much mind. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:42, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I don't feel I should have been given a logged warning, given that I agreed not to violate BLP policy again. The warning was a unilateral decision, and the case was closed swiftly, so I am appealing against the decision. I kindly request that you retract it. User:FDW777 appears to have an axe to grind on this subject, borne out by the fact they have already been complaining about me (see above).--TrottieTrue (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I disagree that a warning was unwarranted, as you still argue about the very thing the warning was meant to clarify: "'Or just ignore it and let it be?' Ideally, yes. The article isn't doing any harm." This reasoning is incompatible with the fundamental point of the WP:BLP policy. This even explicitly extends to page deletion before discussion in extreme cases (WP:BLPDEL); perhaps that (agreedly extreme) example is helpful for understanding what kind of policy you're attempting to renegotiate. It is not going to happen. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
I largely agree with ToBeFree. As long as you aren't planning to do it again, the warning will have no effect on you at all. If you are, then it is very much necessary. So, it will remain. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Well, why don't we have warnings for uncivil behaviour? The way that FDW777 and the IP editor I've complained about have been dealt with is sorely lacking, IMO. What about the other lists of living people with DOBs which aren't referenced? FDW777 is focusing on particular areas of interest which violate BLP policy - they aren't being consistent (they didn't remove the unreferenced DOBs from their "random sample"). "Biographical material about a living individual that is not compliant with this policy should be improved and rectified" - this article could have been improved and rectified. Instead, FDW777 has scared off the article's creator into removing the DOBs completely. "perhaps that (agreedly extreme) example is helpful for understanding what kind of policy you're attempting to renegotiate" - ironically, I can't really understand this overly complex wording. You're focusing on the fact that I would "ideally" like the page ignored. Were FDW777 to have reasonably proposed that the list contain referenced DOBs, perhaps that could have been worked upon. Instead, their language amounted to a threat to have it removed. FYI, I'm not planning to do it again, but I feel that in the real world, these violations would be less of a big deal.--TrottieTrue (talk) 22:41, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
(just in response to the quoted policy sentence: That specific sentence appears in the aforementioned "BLPDEL" section, and as it describes alternatives to page deletion, "improvement" can be reasonably interpreted to refer to text removal (a less extreme measure than page deletion) as well. Your main point, if I understand it correctly, is described better and in much more detail in the editing policy, at WP:PRESERVE. It is not surprising that this section contains a sub-section called "Problems that may justify removal" that explicitly refers to WP:BLP. So no, that quote is not as applicable as it may seem to be when taken out of context.) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:54, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the lack of consistency, this is "WP:POINT" as a thought experiment instead of by editing, but the same considerations apply. As Wikipedia is a volunteer community and not a reliable source, we can neither force other editors to "be consistent" about their policy application, nor can we use the quality of other Wikipedia articles to justify decisions in any other article. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Mykola Udianskyi

Latest comment: 3 years ago10 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! You have deleted Mykola Udianskyi. There are more sources about him. The most recent one — he was included by Forbes to the list of 100 richest Ukrainians https://forbes.ua/profile/mikola-udyanskiy-475 59th position, USD 180 000 000. There are another important new publications as well.

Can you help me to restore the article? --Perohanych (talk) 11:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Perohanych, as you are asking about an article which was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit about this subject, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If you are, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
It was me, who created the article. I never considered it as promotional, because Udiansky is notable enough and do not need any promotion. No, I am not. I am a volunteer editor with 3200+ articles created and 100 000+ edits made in Ukrainian Wikipedia. My compensation is satisfaction and pride for outstanding Ukrainians on the worldwide international level. --Perohanych (talk) 12:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
That article was created by Theluzgang. Do you mean that you also operate that account? Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I am sorry, it looks I forgot. I was sure it was me. I did it in Ukrainian Wikipedia uk:Удянський Микола Олександрович. Never heard of the Theluzgang. --Perohanych (talk) 14:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I believe I see what it is. Your creation was at Nikolai Udianskyi. That was deleted at an Articles for Deletion discussion by consensus of the community. Appearing on a Forbes list does not change the fact that the community has been asked whether this individual is an appropriate subject for an article, and has given a pretty firm "no" relatively recently. At this point, best to find something else to write about. I will not be restoring the article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
What does "relatively recently" mean? How many days, weeks, months must pass before a new discussion of the topic can begin? Nikolai Udianskyi was deleted on 19 May 2020 by Yunshui almost a year ago! --Perohanych (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

When there has been a substantial change in circumstances; in this case, more and better coverage in reliable and independent sources. You cited only a Forbes blurb, which would not be sufficient to demonstrate notability. It's conceivably possible that could happen in a year, but you would need to demonstrate that it actually has. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Do you think that being on "Forbes list of 100 richest Ukrainians" does not demonstrate notability? We currently have in Ukraine 450 members of parliament, and all of them are notable, and only 100 richest people, who are much more talented and active, and they are not notable? --Perohanych (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I linked to our guidelines on notability. You can see there what makes a subject notable, at least so far as we use the term on the English Wikipedia. Being on a "top 100" list is not something which would. Only substantial, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources achieves that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

 

  Administrator changes

  Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

  Interface administrator changes

  Ragesoss

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Article: Debra J Skene

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade,

You recently deleted my article "Debra J Skene" under the justification that it was "unambiguous advertising". All content of the article was sited form reputable and verifiable source. Me and the other editors have no personal relationship with Dr. Skene or stake in her researched. We were tasked with creating an article outlining her education, employment, and contributions to the field of chronobiology. I would really appreciate it if the deletion could be reconsidered or if we could have a discussion, as the other editors and I feel we went out of our way to ensure the article was free from any bias or advertisement.

Thank you in advance, Kellencking (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Kellencking, you were "tasked" by whom? If you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

We're not being compensated in any way. This is for a project whose guidelines very explicitly state that we must create a Wikipedia article following all guidelines put in place by Wikipedia. Kellencking (talk) 16:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean, in that case. In any case, articles on Wikipedia must be neutral in tone and content. In this case, the "article" was actually a CV, and those are inherently promotional. In addition, it contained a fair bit of puffy language and unsupported or inadequately supported claims, such as Skene and her team have embarked on a journey ("have researched", skip the fluff), In the early 2000s, her team discovered that administering melatonin... (The only source for that is one written by her, so not independent. Do any independent sources confirm that she and her team were the ones to discover it?), her team also discovered that the sympathetic regulation of melatonin synthesis... (this is written independently, but only cites her paper as a reference briefly; it does not confirm that she or her team "discovered" anything), These discoveries led to increased attention to study and use melatonin synthesis... (neither cited source there confirms that this study led to any such result), and those are just a sample of the issues; there are many more similar. Articles must not make puffed-up claims that references do not explicitly verify, and an article about an individual should be a biography, not a CV. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:35, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the response; I see what you're saying. If possible, could I have access to the most previous version of the article so we can revise it so it's not quite as fluffy? I've read through Wikipedias guides for recovering a deleted article and haven't been able to re-access it. The article is the culmination of a semester long class on chronobiology and is a graded final project. Our instructor has been in contact with Wikipedia and gotten clearance for us to create/edit a number of articles. I hope that sheds a bit of light on why we're writing this; it is in our best interest for this article to follow all Wikipedia guidelines. Once again, thank you very much.Kellencking (talk) 16:57, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Alright, now I understand what you meant! A school project is not considered paid editing, so you're fine there. I'll restore it and stub it in your userspace to User:Kellencking/Debra J. Skene. While it will be stubbed (since if it remained the way it were, it would be subject to deletion again), you can see the previous revisions in the article history. When you think it's ready, you might consider seeking feedback from articles for creation rather than putting it directly to mainspace, as creating an appropriate new article is one of the more difficult things to do on Wikipedia. Do note, though, that it will be treated the same as any other article; there is no "clearance" because an article is being written for a school project, and that doesn't change anything about what happens with it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of the article iNERDE

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. Recently you marked the article iNERDE for speedy deletion, under the justification that it was "unambiguous advertising." If anything in the article was "advertising," it was only insomuch as it was a reflection of verifiable facts as well as reporting done in several media outlets. Conflict of interest or no, I don't stand to gain any benefit from the article other than its existence itself, and I've no reason to distort the facts of the article or write anything untrue simply because. The facts are the facts, regardless of the author, and nowhere in the article was (in my honest opinion) the opinion of the author or the group in question inserted into the text. If I had been drafting an article on any other non-profit organization I would have done so in the exact same way. If any individual statement in the article was not verifiably true, or written in a non-neutral point of view, that's something that could be remedied easily through less extreme means other than wholesale, irrevocable deletion. Criterion G11 of the speedy deletion criteria states that "excessive promotion" is required for a page's deletion, which I would contest is not the case given the presence of several independent sources and the lack of anything in the way of endorsement or salesmanship, implicit or otherwise. I would be grateful to have a bit of elucidation on what is considered "excessive promotion" in this case. Thank you for listening.

Best, CMP (talk) 05:02, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Addendum: I just wanted to clarify that I would not object to rewriting or reframing any portion of the article that you or other administrators might consider biased; in fact, I would be glad to do so if needed.

Best, CMP (talk) 05:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

CoffeeMonitorPhone, the very reason for our conflict of interest guidelines are that it is extremely difficult to remain neutral on a subject one is close to or has an interest in promoting. One primary point in these guidelines is that COI editors should not be directly editing or creating articles in mainspace on subjects for which they have a COI, and should instead have edits reviewed by editors who do not. For an article creation, this would be creating the article as a draft, and then requesting review by articles for creation. If you want to try again, please ensure that you do it that way and do not attempt to directly create it in mainspace again. When you do, avoid stuff like iNERDE has been dedicated... ("dedicated" is junk brochure material), iNERDE's goal is to provide education and after-school programs for one million children in Africa by the end of 2030. (don't include "mission statement" type stuff), The organization operates under the philosophy that "only Africans can solve Africa's problems", (see previous), and there are quite a few other examples. Articles must be strictly neutral in tone (even if sources are not!) and content, and must not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Seraphimblade. Thanks for your prompt reply. As to the problem of latent COI, I don't have a rebuttal, but I would like to reiterate that I have no interest in "talking up" the organization beyond noting facts and statements reinforcing and explaining the organization's fundamental purpose to readers looking to learn about and better understand the organization (I do agree with your assessment of terms such as "dedicated..." et.al. as loaded words.) For example, the line stating iNERDE's goal of children educated is only promotion insomuch as it reflects the actual goals of the organization, not necessarily my or their value judgments on the "goodness" or "feasibility" of the statement. I'd compare it to a statement like Tom Brady saying "I'd like to play football until I'm 50" as a statement reinforcing his longevity (perhaps a quote like that would still run afoul of WP:MISSION or similar guideline, in which case please disregard this.) I would like to equate these "mission statements" with a line in the first paragraph on UNICEF stating, "The agency is among the most widespread and recognizable social welfare organizations in the world, with a presence in 192 countries and territories." To my eyes, these statements only differ in that the line from the iNERDE article reflects a future goal, and the line in the UNICEF article adding a bit of subjectivity (...most widespread and recognizable...") to its statement. Although, given the notice at the top of the article, maybe that line is already in question, in which case, again, please disregard this.

I'm not entirely aware of how many of Wikipedia's rules on speedy deletion are truly ironclad or whether there's a little "wiggle room" in their interpretation--excepting potentially libelous or hateful statements/articles, which are obviously not tolerated. If I were to re-upload the article as a draft, is there any amount of simple description of iNERDE's accomplishments and current plans of action that would NOT be considered aggrandizing. Finally, would you be able to salvage the page as it was when it was deleted? Unfortunately, I only have a very early draft of the page at my disposal currently. Even if the page would require a "complete rewrite," as I've stated I did write the article in good faith with my only intent being to upload an article that simply and honestly reflected the organization and their activities, while providing as many relevant citations as possible. If I were to do a rewrite, I would literally write it exactly the same before I put it up as a draft (with the knowledge that certain sections would need to be rewritten as a matter of course). Sending me the latest revision only saves me the difficulty rewriting it.

Apologies for such a long response, and thanks for your time.

Best, CMP (talk) 22:07, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I do not restore advertisements, to draft or otherwise. However, if you would like, I would be happy to get you a list of the references you used for the article from the deleted version. From there, it will be a question of writing neutrally, and either one can do that or not. On subjects for which one has a COI, it is really tough to do (not just for you; I doubt I could do it either). So chances are, your first attempt at it will not be accepted, and it would require some reworking. What that would look like depends on the AfC feedback. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. The list of references would be appreciated. I did have one more question as to how statements such as "iNERDE's goal is to provide education and after-school programs for one million children in Africa by the end of 2030." runs afoul of WP:MISSION whereas statements such as "[...]To that end, the organisation emphasises "independence and impartiality", and explicitly precludes political, economic, or religious factors in its decision making. For these reasons, it limits the amount of funding received from governments or intergovernmental organisations." (c.f.) Médecins Sans Frontières or (emphasis mine) "The mission statement of Habitat for Humanity is "Seeking to put God's love into action, Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope". (c.f.)Habitat for Humanity. I'm not trying to come off as pedantic or confrontational; I legitimately don't understand how one statement could be unacceptable when the others are acceptable. In each case the lines are just factual statements relaying to the reader the organization's stated purpose.
Best, CMP (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
The honest answer to that is—probably, no one's noticed yet. If those are in there, I'll take care of them too. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
As to the references, they're the same ones used at User:CoffeeMonitorPhone/inerdepage. There weren't any in the deleted article that aren't already there. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 43

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

  • New Library Card designs
  • 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Colorado Zoom meeting 05/12/2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
WikiProject Colorado

WikiProject Colorado will hold a Zoom meeting at 7:30 PM MDT on Wednesday, May 12, 2021, for those interested in working on Colorado Wikipedia articles. Your suggestions and comments are appreciated. Information about some of the things we need to do is located at Colorado things to do and Requested Colorado articles.

Topic: WikiProject Colorado May 2021
Time: May 12, 2021 07:30 PM MDT

Join Zoom Meeting https://us04web.zoom.us/j/78055623422?pwd=VUtPQVZrZzU1ZWVhZ0F1MExIeUQ2UT09

Meeting ID: 780 5562 3422
Passcode: WP:CO MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Extreme Fighting Championship

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page has been deleted several times, but it seems it have recently reappeared as Extreme Fighting Championship (EFC). I don't have any opinion on this, but as I have reached the page from a link on the french version of Wikipedia, I just want to know if it is something to be fixed. Jgui (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

It's been around a while and edited by several people, so probably too late to do anything about it now. I may warn the editor about dodging around protection like that, but nothing else much to be done for it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:49, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

PangolinPedia

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi, I see that you gave PangolinPedia a final warning a week ago, for creating inappropriate articles ([12]), so you might be interested to know that they created the blatantly inappropriate Prashant Bajaj yesterday. I have draftified it, but this is what it looked like before draftification. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi You just deleted page Namrata Sapkota, any reason for it, could you restore it and let me know where the fix needs to happen Summitalways (talk) 04:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC) Summitalways

Namrata_Sapkota

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I just published the page about an hour ago and it was deleted within 10 min. I don’t know what’s the problem, if it has been vandalized in the past then I would like to protect the page. Could you please revert the content I updated on the page and protect it. If possible allow me edit access since I’ll be managing that page for Namrata Sapkota Summitalways (talk) 05:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Summitalways, what you have said here clearly indicates that you are editing for pay. That is not forbidden, but doing so without disclosure is. Before we proceed, please place the mandatory disclosure on your user page. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:19, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, Namrata Sapkota is a very genuine, Model/Actress of Nepal and it's really unfair for her to have her wiki page abandoned like this. I don't get paid for contribution, I'm just her sibling who currently reside in US and trying raise voice on behalf of her. I don't have much details to what happened in the past but I want to take care of things from here on. Any help/guidance from your side would be much appreciated for us. Thank you. Summitalways (talk) 06:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

If it's your sibling, you still have a conflict of interest, and that is clearly the case given how promotional your writing was. First, review our guidelines and policies on neutrality, notability, and what constitutes a reliable and independent source. If after reviewing those you believe that there is a sufficient quantity of reliable and independent source material to demonstrate notability, and believe you can write in a neutral way, you may create a draft at Draft:Namrata Sapkota and request review by articles for creation. If and only if an AfC reviewer approves the article, I will then unprotect the mainspace page for them to move it there. Even then, note that you will absolutely not be "managing" the article; other editors can and will edit it and no one is ever permitted to try to own an article. It is also not the purpose of Wikipedia to "raise voice on behalf of" anyone or anything; only to present facts in a neutral way. If your objective is to promote your sibling, you may want to consider a personal website or social media; you're not going to be permitted to do that here. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of "Spare Parts: Four Undocumented Teenagers, One Ugly Robot, and the Battle for the American Dream"

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi there-- you recently deleted the article I created for the book page for Spare Parts. I am relatively new to wikipedia editing, but from doing more reading in the cited violations I understand why you deleted it. That being said, I think the book is part of the public record (the feature film adaptation of the book has its own page, and I believe the book has been more widely disseminated than the film), and I would like to develop the page from the ground up and do so in a way that avoids conflicts of interests and that has input and verification from neutral parties. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artooseethree (talk • contribs)

Artooseethree, as the article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Willing to create an article which was deleted by you!!

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello there Seraphimblade hope everyhthing is good at your end!! I am willing to re-create Anurag Batra a page which was deleted under G11 and G12 by you. I found that he is the elected board member of Management Development Institute and the Chairman of Businessworld and have enough coverage to pass a standalone article. Thanks Suryabeej (talk) 07:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Suryabeej, if you have found sufficient reference material now to sustain an appropriate article, then you can do that. There was only one previously deleted page speedied at that location four years ago; it wasn't create protected or anything like that. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Okay sure I'll Create it Thanks!! Suryabeej (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Article: Probe Group

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Seraphimblade:

You recently deleted an article that I posted about Probe Group, with the following explanation: "Unambiguous advertising or promotion." When creating the article, I used a significant number of independent sources, including ones from major new outlets (ABC News, Yahoo Finance, Deal Street Asia, Australian Financial Review). I have been contributing to Wikipedia for quite some time so I was surprised to see that the page was removed.

I do not believe that this page should be deleted because Probe Group is a significant Australian company (14,000+ employees) with global operations that have rapidly expanded because of the COVID-19 pandemic (as reported by ABC News). At least one of the company's subdivisions has a Wikipedia page, so I believe the corporation itself should also have a Wikipedia page. Other major customer management companies like Salesforce have Wikipedia pages as well. Of course, I am willing to fundamentally rewrite the page to alter anything that you believe is not written from a neutral point of view, but I do not see what about the original article is unambiguous advertising or promotion.

To clarify (based on the question you raised in other sections of your Talk page), I was not paid by Probe Group to create the page nor am I affiliated with the company.

Thank you for your time. Buzzers1 (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Buzzers1, it is entirely possible that the company is indeed notable and therefore an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article. The question with G11 is only if the article is written promotionally, and such articles are subject to deletion even if the subject which they cover is unquestionably notable. In this case, as some examples of the issues: Kagan maintains a shareholding in the organisation, which has grown into a leading full-service customer experience provider that services many of Australia’s leading companies. (This one actually uses "leading" twice. The number of appropriate times to use a puff term like that in an article is zero; we leave such determinations to the reader.), Upon joining Probe as CEO in 2015, Andrew Hume expanded the operations of Probe to a customer experience service provider with global delivery capability (straight out of a sales brochure), Probe has diversified to offer a range of human-led advisory and intelligent technology solutions including customer experience consulting, business process reengineering, user experience design and journey mapping, workforce optimisation, front office automation including virtual agents and chatbots, natural language processing and biometric verification through to back office automation. (Aside from literal chemical companies, companies don't sell "solutions". The rest is a bunch of unreferenced buzzwords.) Then it goes on to a laundry list of non-notable awards, and while that needs to go entirely, even that has marketese in it have won a number of industry awards (Don't say "a number", say, well, the number.) Those are only a sample of the issues; the article mostly carries on like that. Articles must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, and not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up". Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade I appreciate your thorough and prompt response! I now understand why those examples read way too promotional although that was not my intention. I will significantly rewrite those and other sentences that are not in the appropriate tone. Thank you again for your time and for providing specific examples. Buzzers1 (talk) 16:47, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

DS 2021 Review Update

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Dear Seraphimblade,

Thank you for participating in the recent discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name here.
--Barkeep49 & KevinL (aka L235) 21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Sock for you

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

One sock. Thanks.--- Possibly (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully the point gets across this time. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Mitt Romney on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

New Wikipedian (relatively: disappointed to have page removed and to be cursorily accused of disruption/promotion etc)

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I am responding to having my page Michelle Baharier taken down and am seeking help from the community. I am not attempting to promote Michelle Baharier: I am an independent author, writer and publisher and also a scholar. I am not contributing to the community for monetary gain. I seek advice as to the page being left - I understand the the tone is seen as promotional but there are other pages on Wikipedia which are similar? Not that I am defending them, my interest in Michelle is scholarly and the work was not plagiaristic. I am interested in the medium to longer term to become an administrator in the community. Kind regards, Clumie aka Lucy S Johnson author/publisher 

Clumie (talk) 10:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
  • (talk page stalker) I have salted the page as repeatedly recreated. Bishonen | tålk 11:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC).
    Clumie, I took a look at the one deleted in August. Note that we are not talking about plagiarism in particular (though of course we also frown on that), we are specifically talking about copyright infringement. Something might be properly cited, and therefore not be plagiarism, but still be copyright infringement. In the case of the August deletion, several parts were indeed copied wholesale from other material on the Internet, and you can't do that. So far as promotion, the more recent version contained a bunch of puffery such as She came to prominence... (this was sourced to something she wrote herself; of course she's going to talk herself up), ...now marks her out as one of an 'exceptional' group of artists. (Puffery doesn't cease to be puffery because quote marks are put around it. If something is puffy, don't quote it, paraphrase it neutrally.) It also contains some biographies of living persons issues, such as discussing her religious views while citing a source that does not confirm them. Articles are required to be strictly neutral in both tone and content, and not promote anyone or anything, including by any kind of puffery or "talking up". Most of the sources cited were also not reliable and independent. Stick only to facts confirmed by reliable and independent sources when writing an article. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice and for taking the time to respond to my query in such depth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clumie (talk • contribs)


Hindu phobic

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

who gave u the authority to comment on ram setu wiki page? dont interfere in our matters if u are ignorant on that topic GauravMaP (talk) 10:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

GauravMaP, I presume you are referring to the RM discussion I closed at Talk:Adam's Bridge. If you would like to have a conversation about that, I'm happy to do so, but I will ask that you be civil, and not deliberately make what you have to say difficult to read by not capitalizing anything or using lulztxtspk such as "u", which is not a word. If you're willing to do that, ask whatever you have to ask about it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 15:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

who allowed u to write about our ram setu? GauravMaP (talk) 19:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Use jbrolland1980 and pages deleted. Why?

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

hello you deleted my profile jrolland1980 and various academic-oriented articles I wrote about electronic invoicing in France, Latin America or Italy. There was nothing promotional about those pages. Is the removal really justified? What is the rational? Jbrolland1980 (talk) 16:18, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Jbrolland1980, so far as your user page, it is for information about your activities editing Wikipedia, not for you to provide a gratuitous link to various sites about you such as LinkedIn. So far as the articles moved to draft, please read the note I left on your user talk page, and let me know if you still have any questions after you have done so. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

hello. The linkedin reference was to not be anonymous. Maybe letting me know instead of bluntly removing the page would have me a more courteous thing to do, but I guess you wanted to make your point. I don't understand your guidelines on my articles. They are factual and are sequential. There is nothing on electronic invoicing and it is becoming an emerging topic. That being said, I will do my best to rework them and comply. Thanks for the warm welcome anyway.

Cool language use

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Just wanted to say I found this comment of yours really exciting. It's not often that I see positive anymore in the wild, so thanks for adding to the diversity of language used around here! I'm looking forward to seeing it anymore — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! For my own part, I had no idea that we actually had an article on that, but it was quite interesting. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me with redirect context

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

There is an actor whose link was re-directed to his one the notable project, now the person in itself is fulfilling the notability criteria. I am having issue in creating his personal article biography. Actor name Sunny Hinduja. Can you guide me?? PangolinPedia 14:16, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

PangolinPedia, the condition you agreed to in order to be unblocked is that you would cease attempting to create articles directly in mainspace, and instead create the article as a draft and request articles for creation review. So, use that process. If your draft is approved, the reviewer will take care of the technical parts of putting it into mainspace, but if this is a problem again I'm just going to reinstate the block. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:56, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
I am not creating the article. The problem i am asking is different and you are just stuck with your old opinion sir. I am asking i tried creating it but its getting automatically redirected to the same old article. And the actor is notable. Is there any hashtag which can be used to prevent automatic redirect. PangolinPedia 15:03, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
If you are making a redirect into an article, you are creating an article, which you agreed not to do again. The answer is "Use a draft and AfC, or the block is put back." That is not a topic for discussion, it is a notice of what will happen if you continue. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:09, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:In the news on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hunnies Cheerleaders

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I greatly appreciate your advice. I checked out teahouse and got a better idea of how to write the article. I applied all of the suggestions you gave and completely rewrote the article in the format you gave using citations, added credible sources for verification, removed external links, removed talk up, gave credible sources for awards, etc. My new article is pending and the draft is located in my User Page content. Thank you again for being so informative.

Thanks for letting me know. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


National processing, llc

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page has been taken down numerous times for being "promotional." I have taken out every element that I think can be considered promotional. This is a business that has existed for 14 years. It has ratings with organizations like the BBB. I have asked before and I will ask again; what part of the article is promotional? I see pages on Wikipedia for many companies large and small. Is the article about Microsoft promotional? How about Twitter? Are only large companies allowed to be on Wikipedia? Why are small businesses not allowed to be included on this online encyclopedia? National Processing, LLC — Preceding undated comment added 14:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

NPshall, firstly, you have declared some type of undefined COI with National Processing, but it rather appears that you are editing for pay, which includes but is not limited to being asked or expected to edit Wikipedia as a duty of employment or internship. If that is so, which it appears it is, you will need to make the required paid editing disclosures before we continue. (Just a COI disclosure is not sufficient if you are editing for pay; you must say who is paying.) Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Request for clarification

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, Your recent closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underwater diving in popular culture stated that Ultimately, consensus is that this article is not suitable, and suggests the option of draftifying for improvement which implies that the topic is within the scope of Wikipedia, but the deleted article was not. Could you clarify how consensus to delete (within policy) is compatible with scope for improvement, and how one could improve the article given these constraints, based on the consensus you perceived. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 17:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Pbsouthwood, I don't want to presume to speak for those who argued for deletion, but it looks like the most common arguments were, firstly, that the article was fundamentally based upon original research, and secondly that it was too indiscriminate. But you may wish to ask some who argued to delete and/or draftify for their particular thoughts. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:39, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
An inspection of the article will show that there is very little identifiable original research, and none of those claiming original research were willing to point out what they considered original research, making it difficult to remove. When I last looked, there were no inline original research tags in the article. Articles should not be deleted because some of the content is bad. If that was an acceptable reason we would delete half the encyclopedia. Those arguing "indiscriminate" were also not forthcoming in suggesting better inclusion criteria, without which there is no way to know whether an attempt to tighten it up would be actually an improvement from their point of view, making that argument fundamentally weak. You may notice that I did ask those who argued to delete for their particular thoughts, but they did not choose to explain in actionable detail. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 05:15, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
I understand some of those in the discussion thought that. However, that was not the consensus ultimately reached. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Response to your reversion to Jusdafax's version

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Seraphimblade,

I notice you reverted to Jusdafax's version of a page. Please see the note below, to Jusdafax, which will help to explain why I made changes: to correct numerous inaccuracies, to respect privacy, and to complete a 'stub'.

Please don't threaten to block people but instead keep up the Wikipedia support for improvements to accuracy on a page, and please also support the Biography of Living Persons guidelines.

I have asked Jusdafax, and I ask you, please to make no further changes until a Wikipedia administrator has time to oversee them.

TO JUSDAFAX:

I believe that you are in breach of Wikipedia's BLP guidelines. Please immediately restore the page as I wrote it and make no further changes until we have referred these matters to Wikipedia administrators.

Lisa Gorton's secondary schooling is not on topic, and private information.

It is also incomplete information: Lisa attended Preshil for longer than she attended St Catherine's. Your Wikipedia version relies on an interview with St Catherine's school which is littered with inaccuracies.

Lisa did not study poetry under Chris Wallace-Crabbe; or, only with him among many other professors of literature at the University: she did not complete a creative writing degree.

You have also incorrectly named Lisa's undergraduate degree, which is a BA (Hons). The 'Hons' is a year-long addition to the Arts degree.

You have also incorrectly named Lisa's graduate degree. Lisa did not complete a Master of Arts at Oxford. That is a different kind of degree. She completed an MPhil in Renaissance Literature.

Lisa did not win the John Donne Society Award for Distinguished Publication in Donne Studies for her doctorate. She received it for an essay.

Lisa did not work for Scaffidi Hugh-Jones. She was an independent, freelance communication consultant. However, the information is private, and not on topic; and, if career information is to be included, your version is skewed and unrepresentative. Lisa has undertaken many other jobs at various times.

Lisa has never been a full-time writer.

The rest of your article is a stub, and, as such, misrepresents Lisa's writing life. It does not include anthologies that she has edited and been published in; it does not include public events in which she has participated; it does not include all her publications.

Lisa's grandparents are not on-topic.

https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jusdafax&action=edit&section=new

Livingpersonedits (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Seraphimblade&action=edit&section=new

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Livingpersonedits (talk • contribs) 02:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Livingpersonedits, I am an admin (though when it comes to content, that's really not important anyway.) I will check to see if the text of the article matched the sources. Please keep in mind that if the sources are reliable, the article will say what they do, even if you personally believe that to be incorrect. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:50, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
I have taken a look at what you have said. You are correct that the cited source did not say that the award was for the doctorate, just during it, so I have changed that. The information about her education is already available to the public in reliable published sources, so it is not private. The cited reference confirms that she worked for Scaffidi Hugh-Jones; that may or may not have been as a consultant, but consultants still work for someone. If you have additional reliable sources about her career, please by all means bring them to our attention so that they can be included as well. Since again this information is already available to the public, it is not private. Her grandfather's identity is confirmed by The Sydney Morning Herald, a reliable source, and we often list notable ancestors of an individual in an article, so that is "on-topic". As to the rest, please note that we often do not "laundry list" every work someone has done or appeared in, nor do we wish to do so. Rather, we will list and discuss what reliable sources confirm is most significant. So while a bit of what you said is valid, I am afraid the rest is rather off base. The article is a bit short, but again, if you know of more reliable source material we can use to add more details, please do bring those to our attention. That will work a great deal better than edit warring. Note that an article's subject does not own an article or have veto authority over what goes in it; that is not what BLP means. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:19, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:George Washington on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Advice on dealing with an abusive rant from an anonymous user

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'd like to get input on how best to respond to an anonymous user who has posted a meandering and abusive complaint on the talk page for Francis Drake. The first paragraph raises substantive issues about presentation that I believe I addressed in my own commentary under the Slavery section of the talk page. The rest is a rant that does not deserve a direct response, but does seem worth flagging as uncivil. Any suggestions? My instinct is to ignore it, but would like a second opinion. Ynizcw (talk) 23:24, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Ynizcw, I think your initial instinct there, to ignore it, is correct. While it's certainly uncivil and rather vulgar, it's not aimed at any particular editor, so I'd just leave it be. If that individual at some point wants to have a more civil conversation about their concerns, of course we can address them then. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:27, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Seraphimblade! Ynizcw (talk) 23:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

closing at AE

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

Okay, I'll try to close that AE discussion for Ameer, if you'll make sure I'm doing what I need to. I would like to close it with allowing them to for the time being continue to edit in the area, but restrict them to using sources in English in that area, indefinitely. I assume that in addition to closing, I need to notify the editor of any restrictions (and appeals process?), plus probably log it somewhere (and with certain things included or certain sanctions cited?) Thank you for any help, I do try to find instructions for these kinds of things but sometimes there's so much instruction in so many places that even if it's there, I can't find it! :D Please ping on reply, I'm crazy busy IRL and have completely lost control of my watchlist. —valereee (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Valereee, it sounds like you've got the general idea quite right (though you do have a point with things being scattered; maybe I'll try to knock together a guide for it). For closing on AE, use the regular {{hat|Result of discussion}} right under the main discussion header (and make sure to double check the corresponding {{hab}}; I've fat-fingered that myself a couple times...). If you impose a sanction, as in this one, you can use {{AE sanction}} with the appropriate parameters on their talk page; that template will notify the editor of which case the sanction is authorized under, the appeals process, and all of that required stuff, so you don't have to worry about remembering it all. Finally, if the discussion resulted in a sanction or logged warning, log it under the appropriate case at WP:AC/DSL. (Logging is not necessary if the discussion resulted in no action or only an informal warning.) So that should take care of it, but feel free to ask if you have trouble with any of it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Well, I've already f'd up the template. Care to school me? —valereee (talk) 19:08, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I think I've done everything, though I don't know why I wasn't able to ping them in the closing statement. The closure below it worked with a ping inside the template. I'm stupid with templates. Check my work? —valereee (talk) 19:24, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
  • On a related question...the article in question at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arminden, Horbat 'Uza, has no tp headers at all. I see at...oh, damn, somewhere...now I can't find it again, but I copied: When disruptive edits are being made to such content, any editor may invoke ARBPIA General Sanctions for that content. They must place {{ArbCom Arab-Israeli enforcement}} on the talk page and {{ArbCom Arab-Israeli editnotice}} in the editnotice to do so. Should I be telling the reporting editor they need to do that before making an AE request? Also where did I find that? I've been clicking around trying to figure this stuff out. —valereee (talk) 23:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
    Valereee, so far as your first close, template parameters are case sensitive. When you used "Result=" rather than "result=", it considered that an invalid parameter and so ignored it. I wish that it displayed an error rather than just silently ignoring invalid ones, but then I didn't design MediaWiki. Your sanction notice uses the template correctly, the sanction is described clearly, and the correct case is cited, so all looks well there, and you logged it where it belongs, so looks like everything is wrapped up there. So far as the Arminden case, it is necessary that the reported editor be somehow aware of the restrictions before being sanctioned for breaching them, but if they have been made aware of them some other way (e.g., a message on their talk page, or they have in the past requested enforcement against other editors who breached them), they can still be sanctioned even if the edit notice is not there. While the report is withdrawn, the way I would have seen that particular one, had it gone to actual disposition, is that Arminden was made aware generally of the existence of DS in the ARBPIA area, but not of any specific restrictions that would apply to the Horbat 'Uza article (including via editnotice), so I would have closed the report by making them more specifically aware of the restrictions that apply across the ARBPIA topic (meaning now they know, and wouldn't have an excuse next time), but with no other action due to that lack of specific awareness. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
    Thanks for the help! I'm sure I'll be back! :) —valereee (talk) 15:51, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
    Feel free any time. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:48, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Aaron Golbin

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Howdy. You previously deleted Draft:Aaron Golbin, or a variant of that, so I wonder if you see anything fishy going on here? It strikes me as a serial promotional attempt. --- Possibly (talk) 17:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Possibly, yeah, I certainly think it is. Several accounts have been involved in that (it was also deleted twice in mainspace, once as G11 and once as A7), and one of those account names pretty clearly shows a connection to the subject. I would suspect very likely UPE. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:32, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks!--- Possibly (talk) 17:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

 

  Administrator changes

  Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
  Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Removal of Hacker Noon Page due to G11

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Greetings Seraphimblade,

Thank you for your long-term service to the Wikipedia community. Also, thank you also for upholding community standards and not allowing needless promotional content.

With that being said (or written), the team at Hacker Noon was quite happy to have a page up on Wikipedia, and they were also quite heartbroken when it was taken down.

I was hoping you could clarify a number of things for me/provide me with some examples.

1. I’m currently working as a self-employed independent contractor, however, one of my clients is Hacker Noon. I was interested in fixing up/writing up a new Wikipedia page about them because as a global community member, I genuinely believe they deserve to be here. (Also it seems there are about 418 pages of search results of other Wikipedia-using humans who have listed HN as a source, so it’s likely they’d agree as well.)

I’m perfectly fine to disclose my contract with HN as a conflict- real or perceived- however, I pursued this assignment on my own accord and would like to do this on my own time. It states in your profile that you are willing to work with editors, would you be willing to do that with me?

I was hoping I could send you preliminary drafts and you could give me your input on it, giving me notes on if you still find it to be too promotional etc, and any other advice you may have. I figured this would be a good example of conflict management.

2. If you are available to help, which is the best contact method for that? Is there an email I could contact you at? Should I provide my email? What would that process look like?

3. Could you please link for me an example of a Wikipedia page you personally find to be ideal? Could you also send me an example of a page that might belong to an org roughly of HN's size that you personally find to be a quality page?

I’m aware of the following instruction page: [13] but I was hoping you could provide me with some of your favourite samples- hopefully, ones in a similar category of topic.

4. Do you have access to the deleted content of our page [14]? Is there any way to send us a copy?

5. Is there any way to provide a bit more detail on what you thought was wrong with it (I’ve reviewed what G11 means,) but anything else I should be aware of, and how we can improve? Any input would be wonderful.

6. Is there any other advice you may have?

Thank you so much, hope to hear from you soon. Ellen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Escvca (talk • contribs) 00:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Escvca, probably bombardment of questions is not the best approach if you want someone to help you. To generally answer them, I do not restore or send the text of advertisements, but if you would like I will give you a list of the references that were used there. The text would need a complete rewrite; that's what G11 means. I do not handle on-wiki business in any other way but publicly on-wiki, so if you should need to contact me, this talk page is the place to do it. If you would like to see "ideal" articles, go to the main page and check out the featured article for the day, or find a list of them here. (Of course, an article need not be up to those standards when it it first put in, but those are the "ideal" ones.) Each article should be written individually, based upon what reliable and independent sources say about that particular subject, so I will decline to link to any other articles which might be used as a "template" as that generally has very poor results.
So far as this particular article, I want to make 100% clear that it is not "our (your) article", and those heavily involved with the organization have a conflict of interest and should not make major edits directly, but rather should put them up for review by editors who do not have a COI. It is extremely difficult to maintain neutrality on a subject one is very close to or has a substantial interest in, so that is a best practice for any editor when editing about a family member, employer/client, etc. In this case, for that review, what you would do is create the article as a draft and request review by articles for creation. It may or may not be me who ends up reviewing it there (and probably not), but of course I am hardly the only one capable of doing so. The particular issue here was puffery, such as (as examples, but not an exhaustive list) focuses on reporting the latest news ("latest" according to what reliable and independent source?), where they amassed over 450k followers. (according to what reliable and independent source was this both true and important?), garnered coverage from...and other top tech sites. ("garnered" is a bit fluffy, and "top" purely so; leave out any kind of fluff term like that. Also, describe what those sources said, and cite them, not just "Look, a whole bunch of people talked about it!"), Actor and Activist Alyssa Milano used it as evidence for why FCC Chairman Ajit Pai should not repeal Net Neutrality. (this is "sourced" only to a blog and something written by Milano. Did any reliable, independent source discuss this? If not, it's not important enough to go in the article either), and one of the sources cited may be found here ([15]); that source stating Hacker Noon partners with companies that build cool products and employ people worth publishing.), which should make it quite obvious to anyone that it is a reprinted press release, not an independently written, neutral piece about the company.
So, that's how you improve. I'm not quite sure that the organization is notable to start with (the actual reliable and independent sources cited were generally about just one thing, and don't show the type of sustained coverage that generally indicates notability), but even if it is, all articles must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, not "talk up" anyone or anything in any way, and strictly avoid any use of puff/marketese terms or unneeded adjectives. If you think you can do better, try out writing a draft (at Draft:Hacker Noon), and see what AfC has to say. (Of course if AfC approves the draft, I will then unprotect the mainspace name so that it can be moved there by them.) Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade

Greetings Seraphimblade,

Thank you so much for your response! There is some excellent information in here and it will be a big help for me.

I apologize for my list of questions, asking lots of questions is simply a function of my personality, especially as far as knowledgeable people are concerned.

I don’t mean anything inconsiderate by it, I’ve just found it to be efficient in the long term because the more info I have to work with, the less I have to bother people. Going forward is there a limit of questions you’re ok with responding to in any one update?

I’m really grateful for everything you wrote out, I will review everything in detail and start the process.

The reason I was hoping you’d personally take a look at a draft is it seems like you have a very seasoned experience with all of this and will catch things really quickly. But I acknowledge and respect the process overall.

Thank you so much! Ellen

Deletion of B-Goss

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade,

I was wondering why was the page I wrote about 'B-Goss' was deleted? I didn't even got a chance to contest it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by D3FAULTX8 (talk • contribs) 09:04, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

D3FAULTX8, I see that Praxidicae has already given you some very good advice on these issues which you generally ignore or argue with, so I have no reason to believe advice from me would be any more productive. I agree with the advice she has given you already, and would encourage you to review it and actually take it on board. If you continue to create inappropriate articles, you will be blocked from editing altogether. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Editwiki777

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've opened a report on the NOR noticeboard. It's at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Editwiki777 if you'd care to contribute to the discussion. Skyerise (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

oh my...

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

at the exact same moment you were rejecting Ruwaym's request, I was accepting it -- and had unblocked... --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 20:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Jpgordon, well, should seem we rather crossed wires! I certainly would not want to reblock someone who has already been unblocked, so feel free to change my decline to an accept, and let's hope things go better this time around. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:30, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
OK! Thanks. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 20:34, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Laugharne on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:30, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

RFC Addition to History Section Laugharne

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Apologies, your comments were very helpful and produced a fundamental change in what I originally proposed. The more I thought about the addition, the more it needed to changed to meet the objections you set out. I quite agree I should have waited longer for Talkpage feedback before submitting a RFC (my first! & probably last!) Thank you for your help and again sorry about the impression created. Horatius At The Bridge (talk) 14:20, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Radial immunodiffusion on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Sock

Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Howdy. Would you be willing to block Munna Vijay, obvious sock here, or would it require an SPI? Their edits duplicate the earlier account you blocked, for example they also add the bio image at 250px width and as a file.--- Possibly (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Possibly, I see some very clear tells there, though I won't say exactly what they are. So yes, I think that's clear enough and have blocked accordingly, though if this continues it might be beneficial to have it recorded at an SPI in any case. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:12, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
I came to the right place, thanks for taking care of that. If it continues I will go to SPI.--- Possibly (talk) 22:55, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Publishing Content for Page KGK Group

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As i checked the KGK Group page marked deleted from your side. I am writing this to you as i will be posting new informative article for KGK Group with the links which I've researched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prashank321 (talk • contribs)

Prashank321, uh, okay? Remember that all article content must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, and should be based upon sources that are reliable and independent and not stuff like press releases. Seraphimblade Talk to me 11:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Jessica Yaniv on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Commercetools

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Been working on the headless commerce and CMS space and launched a page for Commercetools. Mind checking it out? I see you speedily deleted the last one a few years ago. Thanks! --FeldBum (talk) 03:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Canvassing

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

My sincere apologies...I hadn't realised that asking for input on a deletion was disallowed. Thank you for removing my messages...I am now aware of that rule. Just a question though...how does one make other editors aware of an AfD notice? Would it be ok if it were just a neutral "Can you look at this..." ? Jamesmcardle(talk) 05:00, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Jamesmcardle, if you would like to increase participation in an AfD without violating the canvassing rule, the best way to do so is to add the AfD to the appropriate deletion sorting categories. If that's already been done, then just wait for people to participate. You are, of course, welcome to yourself participate as well. Seraphimblade Talk to me 06:53, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:DRASTIC on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Royal Navy on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Linking on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:31, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Wuhan Institute of Virology on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:31, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Stub Deletion Contesting

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade,

The article stub, modern day missions I recently created was marked for speedy deletion due to a G11 tag and I submitted a contest to it earlier, but just noticed that you deleted it. Could you please provide me some clairty to how the stub violated that tag and deserved immediate deletion? The article was written from an unbiased, neutral opinion. It is almost identical to countless other Christian organization stubs similar to it, SEND International & Pioneers. I kindly ask you to retract your deletion because I don't feel it meets the criteria of G11 tag since I wrote it form a neutral prospective. Can you please provide me? I greatly appreciate. your feedback! Kstorts11 (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Kstorts11, since the material was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Also, it appears that you are also operating the account Duhonc9, and since you were using it to edit the same article that is also not permitted. So you'll need to choose one account from which to operate going forward, is this one it? Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:17, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
seraphimblade Thank you for your help! I can verify that I am not being paid to edit wikipedia. In regards to the second account you mentioned, I am aware of the person who operates the account but I do not own or have access to it personally. If it has created confusion or a roadblock, I can make request for them to never again make contributions or edits to any articles of mine again. I apologize for that. Kstorts11 is account and the only one I own. Kstorts11 (talk)
I'll take your word for that, but yes, if two editors are coordinating in such a way as to be effectively indistinguishable from one operating two accounts, it is generally considered the same. So far as what you're saying, firstly, please note that other stuff is like that is not, and will never be, considered a valid argument, so I will disregard that. Each article is looked at separately. For this particular one, it contained material such as mobilizing more Christians to the mission field (puff and brochure material, do you mean "getting more Christians to go on missions"?), with a burden for missionary outreach (again seems some kind of slang or lingo, is that supposed to mean "with a goal of?" If so, then say that), As a global missions agency (what does that mean?), has partnered with more than 1000 missionaries in over 70 countries (the first cited source doesn't confirm that, and the second is published by the organization itself so is not independent), and it rather goes on in that brochure/"About Us" style. Encyclopedia articles must be strictly neutral in tone, wording, and content, and never promote or "talk up" anyone or anything. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh, and to address your above question. I do not restore advertisements, but I will if you'd like give you a list of the references that were used in the deleted article. As with any newer editor, I strongly advise that you first try creating new articles as a draft and seek feedback from articles for creation rather than attempting direct creation in mainspace. Creating an appropriate new article is a pretty difficult thing to do, and if creating directly in mainspace it needs to be there from the first edit onward. The draft process gives you the chance to correct any issues if initially the draft is declined. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:32, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Rasha Page

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, I want to create a page for Rasha Kelej but it seems I should ask you first and request to unblock. From my research, Rasha Kelej was appointed as one of the senators of Egypt by President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi (Egypt Parliament has 200 elected senators and remaining 100 are appointed by president from various fields). Hence, it should pass WP:NPOL It found it announced at this source. I have also found other sources that talks about her. Like [16], [17], [18], [19]. I also found many sources in local languages and I will go through them and add them too when I make the page. Can you please unblock the page based on the sources. Thank you.Fishandnotchips (talk) 17:47, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Fishandnotchips, that page has been repeatedly created inappropriately, and was found to be an inappropriate subject by community discussion, though sometimes that changes over time. So, please feel free to create a draft version of the article at Draft:Rasha Kelej, and request review by articles for creation. If AfC approves the article, I will be happy to unprotect the mainspace title so they can get it moved there. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

  Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

  Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Requests for reduction in protection level

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Seraphimblade, would you be willing to consider a reduction in the protection level for E-flux? I have offered to to accept the [current version] of the draft, Draft:E-flux. It obviously has a problematic history, but I think we've now got a version of the article that has overcome much of the promotionalism. I'm not in any way affiliated with e-flux, and have no particularly favorable view of their activities (not a fan), but I do think that we ought to have an article about them. Thank you, Vexations (talk) 20:03, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Vexations, I am certainly always willing to do that for an AfC approved draft. I've unprotected the target to allow the creation. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:48, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Deletion review for Patapon

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Patapon. 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. Haleth (talk) 02:41, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Jadé Fadojutimi

Latest comment: 3 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion

Hi, the British artist Fadojutimi meets the notability requirement for an artist and her page should not have been deleted. She has paintings in 15 permanent collections, including significant collections such as the Tate (London) and ICA Miami and has been asked to appear in the Liverpool Bienniele. She has a unique technique of using oil painting sticks and pastels mixed with oil painting to create a graphic effect. She has been described as one of the most exciting UK artists by Hepworth Wakefield which is an award winning gallery in the UK. Considering she meets the notability criteria, I'm not sure what more you are looking for. Please provide additional information regarding why this article was deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fr33labour (talk • contribs)

Fr33labour, as the material was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
@Seraphimblade: the above user asked me basically the same thing. I am happy to help to clean up any promotional versions of the article, as it seem she would meet NARTIST by virtue of the collections (e.g. Tate and ICA Miami). However I await your thoughts and clarity on Fr33labour's possible COI disclosure. --- Possibly ☎ 22:40, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
@Seraphimblade: I am not being paid or compensated to edit wiki and am not expected to as part of any employment or internship. I am interested in increasing the number of women artists in wiki. I do not know Jade, have never met her, and live on another continent. She has amazing work and is receiving a lot of attention for her work.Fr33labour (talk) 23:08, 29 June 2021 (UTC)Fr33labour
I have published Jadé Fadojutimi based on one of Fr33labour's sandbox drafts. Fr33labour, please leave a message on Talk:Jadé Fadojutimi if you have questions. Your Sandbox draft had multiple inaccuracies, which accounts for the difference between it and the published page. Thanks. --- Possibly ☎ 23:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
That's much better, thanks. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:55, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Yea, I am a specialist at boring, sensible and neutral. If I were a sweater I would be a brown cardigan for sure. --- Possibly ☎ 23:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Fr33labour, to still answer your question to help going forward, even in your initial comment here, you provided some examples: significant collections, unique technique, award winning. Don't use puffery like that. From the article itself, we have similar issues: Using loose expressive brushstrokes and a bright dynamic palette, Fadojutimi's abstract paintings take inspiration from a breadth of source material (straight out of a brochure), lending an original graphic quality to her work (according to what reliable and independent source? The only source cited here is a gallery which was displaying her work, so not independent), Her work captures fleeting impressions and memories of a moment, a place, an interaction or emotion. She also explores identity and a quest for self-knowledge (brochure material again), and then on to a long laundry list of exhibitions and such which are, again, sourced to non-independent sources such as galleries which display her work and therefore have an interest in promoting her. G11 has nothing to do with notability; it has to do with promotion. Articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, avoid any type of puffery or "talking up", and stick to facts verified by reliable and independent sources. Seraphimblade Talk to me 23:58, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
thanks Seraphimblade and Possibly for helping me with this article and for the advice for future pages. Fr33labour (talk) 01:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)Fr33labour
Also note: described as one of the most exciting UK artists by... an award winning gallery is not a good thing to see in an article. Galleries are commercial operations, flogging their wares. Naturally they will not describe an artist they are pushing as a boring and derivative incompetent; but so what? --Orange Mike | Talk 20:53, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Reason for deleting kompany?

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, Seraphimblade. I noticed that you deleted kompany without a notice/reason. There was an ongoing discussion in which no consensus was reached because one user made assumptions about the used sources and alleged that those were not independent; which is definitely NOT true. However, I am considering to ask for a deletion review, but I wanted to ask you first if this was by accident or what the particular reasons are. I am very interested in your opinion, as I have seen that you have always provided good reason for deletion. Looking forward to hearing from you! Frottdog (talk) 20:15, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Frottdog, this was not even an unusual case; the normal threshold at AfD for consensus is a 2/3 majority one way or the other, and that was the case here (six arguments to delete, three to keep). That can be outweighed if one side's arguments are significantly stronger than the other; AfD is certainly not a simple vote, but in this case the deletion arguments were clearly policy based. A few editors disagreed, but I'm afraid they didn't carry the day here. Seraphimblade Talk to me 20:31, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade; got it! I assumed that AfD was not a vote. So, I would ask for a review as those used arguments are and the used sources are strong. I read the criticism in the deletion discussion over and over to check about those mentioned problems about WP:ORGIND. Did you have a closer look at the discussion before deleting and want to let me know? Don´t get me wrong, meanwhile it´s for me also about learning why this was deleted, although WP:NCORP seems to be met; I am also confused if I have a look at other companies in this sector, like Recommind, kyckr, Reflektion, Dieselpoint,_Inc. etc... from the list of enterprise search vendors. Would be really thankful if you could share your thoughts with me how the article can be improved to stay! Thank you! Frottdog (talk) 20:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
I just closed the discussion. If you're interested in why those who argued to delete thought the article should be deleted, it might be beneficial to read what they said, and ask them if you should need clarification. Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:11, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok, they did not say much and thats is somehow bothering me. However, will give it a thought tomorrow as it is getting late here. Thank you! Frottdog (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Attention

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello User:Seraphimblade, How are you? I would like to draw your attention to the page Nanky you deleted not too long ago. The entity is a Ghanaian musician who recently won the Vodafone Ghana Music Awards as seen here Vodafone Ghana Music Awards of 2021 which makes him pass criteria 8 of WP:MUSIC. Can we revert this delection? Richloveburner (talk) 17:58, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Richloveburner, no. That was deleted by the consensus of the community, and then protected because of repeated inappropriate recreations, which often indicates an undisclosed paid editing campaign. If you believe you can create an appropriate article, please create a draft at Draft:Nanky and request review by articles for creation. Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:02, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Seraphimblade, thanks. I will do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richloveburner (talk • contribs)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Hello Seraphimblade:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 1800 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:54, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Draft:LEADTOOLS

Latest comment: 3 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I am possibly concerned with matters about your good faith G11 of Techgirl49's Draft:LEADTOOLS from the CSD by Hayleez which was removed from draftspace, pleae note again draftspace. I am minded the potential fork from the previous G13 in draftspace if a problem and there may be other issues. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 03:33, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Djm-leighpark, I'm sorry, but I am not certain what you are trying to say. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Please check you are prepared to fully justify your good faith G11, as I am considering calling a DRV. After reviewing Hayleez talk page, (since 03:33 UTC) I am especially concerned about at least some of their CSD tagging especially following commitments in mid June to cease CSD tagging until more experience gained. It doesn't mean this G11 was wrong, though as in draftspace (and I'd assume in the AfC process) but I'd expect it will be the final nail in hounding newbie Techgirl49 of wikipedia editing. So I'd ask you to in good faith to review it. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
I already reviewed it. It was promotional; else I would not have deleted it. If the editor in question has general issues with CSD tagging, that may still need to be addressed, but I'm afraid they got this one right. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
That said, I'll offer you the same as I've offered in other such cases. If you have good reason to believe the subject is suitable for an article, and are willing to assist the new editor with doing better, you appear to have sufficient experience to do that. If that's the case, I will restore it and stub it out for you, if you like. Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
I'd like to accept that offer of a stubification to my user space. I'm to a degree waiting the result of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LEAD Technologies (2nd nomination), a redirect of LEADTOOLS, (which has history), before determining a way forward. I am minded LEADTOOLS is likely notable, but including an unrecovered G13 there's now four versions that could be worked forward into an article; and this is not likely the one that I would choose to bring forward. Please REFUND any associated talk page if present as well. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk)
Thank you for bringing my attention to that AfD. It is clearly tainted by SPAs, and there is very clearly undisclosed paid promotional editing going on here. Given that, I'm sorry, but I am withdrawing my offer. I'm also more than a bit curious why you are so interested in this, and if there is some motivation other than improving the encyclopedia at play for you. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Britain's Got Talent on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Nalanda Nritya Kala Mahavidyalaya

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I had created the aforementioned article, however, it was deleted by you. I tried to contest the decision but did not find option. Can you please advise how to recreate the page? LTbharat (talk) 14:00, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

LTbharat, as the material was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:12, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

- No, I neither have any connection with the said organisation nor I am promised or expect any compensation to edit wikipedia. There is no commercial or any other type of relation. LTbharat (talk) 14:11, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, I'll take your word for it. Given that, the article was full of puffery: Padma Shri Dr. Kanak Rele (don't use titles or "Dr.", just "Kanak Rele" on first mention and "Rele" thereafter), The college offers Certificate, Diploma, Graduate, Post Graduate and PhD programmes in Indian Classical Dance (Don't Capitalize Random Words, this is a more minor point but for whatever reason I note that to be very common in advertisement articles; "certificate" and the like should not be capitalized, nor should "classical dance"), Its parent trust Nalanda Dance Research Centre is an officially recognised research institute by the ministry of science and technology, Government of India, the only dance institution to get this recognition (this is "sourced" here [20], and the use of terms such as "wholesome", "renowned", "highly talented", "premier", etc., should quickly identify this as a fluff piece, not a reliable source engaged in neutral and objective journalism), Knowledge Resource Centre of the institute is specially conceptualized and established with great insight into the phenomenon (that's puffery, we don't say something has "great insight" or is a "phenomenon"), Knowledge Resource Centre is well-stocked with Books, Periodicals, CDs and DVDs. (Don't Capitalize Random Words again, and "well stocked" according to what reliable and independent source?), It operates from 9.30 am to 5.00 pm from Monday to Friday and on Saturdays, 9.30 am to 1.00 pm. The Fee is Rs.500/- for 3 months (Nalanda Alumni) and Rs.1000/- for 1 month (Non-Alumni) (do not include hours or pricing; this is not a brochure.) Articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, and not promote anyone or anything, including via any type of "talking up". For newer editors, I strongly recommend creating new articles as a draft and requesting feedback from articles for creation rather than attempting to directly create in mainspace. Creating an appropriate new article is a difficult thing to do, and when creating in mainspace it's necessary to get it right from the first edit onward. Drafts give some more breathing room if there's initially a problem. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:01, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

- Thank you for your advice and support. I will try to re-draft it as per your guidance. Thanks again LTbharat (talk) 14:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Page I Made

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The page that I made shouldn't be deleted. I made it because the series will become a real thing. I'm seriously planning to submit the idea to FOX, so I can become famous & stuff for my ideas being out in the real world.

Here is a wiki that I made (using FANDOM) for the spinoff of The Simpsons: https://the-simpsons-the-next-generation.fandom.com/wiki/The_Simpsons:_The_Next_Generation_Wiki BartRulez666 (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

BartRulez666, while I wish you the best of luck with your project, Wikipedia is not for articles about your personal project ideas. Fandom is probably a much better place for it. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Rasha Page

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

As per the past discussion, I submitted the Draft:Rasha Kelej for AFC Request but a user said that this needs to get unblocked first before accepting. Can you please have a look?Fishandnotchips (talk) 08:49, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

That looks like more like a comment than an actual review. Once someone actually reviews it, and the reviewer makes that request, I will do so if they approve it. Patience, please. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:25, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi Seraphimblade: Darn it, "Rasha Kelej" is create-protected. You will need to request unprotection before accepting. I'd complete the review, but the process requires unblocking before accepting. Just to be clear, I'm the reviewer that would like to approve it. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 15:11, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Goldsztajn, I've unprotected the target to allow the creation. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:01, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14 § File:Jo Grimond.jpg

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 July 14 § File:Jo Grimond.jpg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Just for reference, File:Hugh Gaitskell 1958.jpg might be another example of this type of thing and might partially explain why the Grimond photo was converted to "PD-Pre1978" since both images are being used in 1959 United Kingdom general election and the Grimond image was removed from that article a number of times (including a few times by me) for WP:NFCCP reasons prior to it being converted to PD. There might be more of these as well uploaded locally to Wikipedia or on Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:30, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Aquatic Ambiance

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi. Just letting you know that Aquatic Ambiance has breached their gender issues topic ban by reverting an edit on Men Going Their Own Way. Thank you. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:47, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, who cares about male suicides and black men right? SMH. Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 08:49, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Sangdeboeuf, in the future I would prefer you bring up issues like this at the arbitration enforcement noticeboard rather than notifying me directly, as I may or may not be available to deal with it or some edge cases may need to be discussed as to how to handle them. That said, this was pretty clear cut, so I've taken care of it this time. Seraphimblade Talk to me 12:33, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 15:12, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Maalan Narayanan

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, As per Deletion discussion, this article has been deleted. can you please move this to Draft? Once I have more Notability, I will update and move this to main space in future. -Neechalkaran (talk) 16:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Neechalkaran, that article was deleted by community consensus. If your intent is to unilaterally override that consensus and just put it back to mainspace, I absolutely will not. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:22, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
No, I won't have idea to override it. I collected the data from various source just want to retrieve it. I am okay, If you email those. I would like to improve Tamil article using the references.-Neechalkaran (talk) 16:42, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Certainly I'll provide the sources from it. I've placed them at User:Neechalkaran/Maalan Narayanan references. Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:58, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Assassination of Jovenel Moïse on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Alex Jones on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:30, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Seraphimblade/archive_19&oldid=1140541982"