User talk:Celestina007/Archives/2022/January

Wishing you a happy new year

Obviously we are disagreeing about an article and issues around it, but I do recognise your good faith intentions towards wikipedia principles and therefore want to wish you a happy 2022 when it comes. CT55555 (talk) 12:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@CT55555, a happy new year to you too in advance. I’m removing the COI tag on the article, as you have expressly stated none exists, look, I’m not even against COI or paid editing (I’m not insinuating you are guilty of either) but my problem is when the COI or paid editing is undisclosed, creating an article on a Nigerian businessman is more often than not a red flag for me in general, having said, You are at utmost sovereignty to create any articles you wish to create but I want to see you create articles of encyclopedic value. Like I said your choice areas remains your prerogative and I definitely respect your autonomy. I want to see you flourish and achieve your potential to the fullest, but I need to know I can trust you, I need you to be honest at all times, forgive the verbose. Happy holidays to you and yours. Celestina007 (talk) 13:15, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

I write articles about a few topics. Most centre around humanitarian health and environmental/energy. I've recently written about such programs, people, and issues in Canada, UK, Ethiopia, South Sudan, Libya, Uganda, Kenya, and Syria. I'm not focussed on Nigeria, his solar energy seemed legitimatly notable to me. My intention is to get more humanitarian and environmental and arts contenton Wikipedia, that is the theme of my work. It seems very unlikely that you'll see more about Nigerian businessmen from me here, but I did also submit a draft about ColdHubs separate from the article we are discussing. I spent time wondering if it should create one or two, his farming/radio work tipped me towards two articles. Anyway, thanks for removing the tag. And with regards to your efforts to keep wikipedia "pure" (not sure if that is the right word) I commend you, it seems like a public service and I expect it is not an enjoyable experience, hopefully it is rewarding, we have a good thing here with this website. . CT55555 (talk) 13:31, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

It is in-fact an enjoyable experience for me as I work predominantly at WP:spam and new page reviewing, it is a privilege and honor for me to serve the community. I believe “Spam free” is the appropriate word. Insofar as you edit in accordance with policy, I would support you, but if not, I wouldn’t. Happy holidays. Celestina007 (talk) 21:28, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Victor Abugo

Can you advise whether the references cited for Draft:Victor Abugo are reliable enough to establish notablity ? Dan arndt (talk) 14:55, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dan arndt, ah! Thank you for the notification my dear friend I’d get right into in it by exactly 2200 hours. I’m a little preoccupied at the moment. Celestina007 (talk) 19:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dan arndt, having carefully observed all sources optimized, they are all unreliable. Celestina007 (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:MC Tagwaye

Here is another one, Draft:MC Tagwaye, that I'd appreciate you checking the references/sources on. Dan arndt (talk) 05:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

• There's also this one, Draft:Fresible, if you have time. Dan arndt (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dan arndt, I’d attend to this immediately. Celestina007 (talk) 21:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

@Dan arndt, thank you for the notification, from my own analysis or opinion, I’d say the first draft article Draft:MC Tagwaye was/is a genuine article but unfortunately our general notability criteria wasn’t met & neither was WP:ENT met either. The second draft article which has been declined by Caleb Stanford is in my honest opinion, a possible dubious article, Infact an WP:ADMASQ. Celestina007 (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Celestina007!

Happy New Year!

Celestina007,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 12:42, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe, I can only presume you reside in a country probably 6 hours ahead of the Nigerian time. Ah! In that case, you my friend are already in the future! Happy new year to you too my friend, its kind of funny how I took interest in you because your username sounded(sounds too Nigerian!) Once more, I wish you a happy new year and a prosperous one. Celestina007 (talk) 17:23, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, yeah I remember that funny banter between you and me regarding whether my username sounds similar to that of Nigerian. Anyway thank you mate for the wishes and hope for the best in the future. Its already 2022 here now and yeah we are ahead in terms of timezone and wish you a great year ahead. Cheers. Abishe (talk) 20:00, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

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

Administrator changes

Amalthea • Ihcoyc (deceased) • Kateshortforbob • Kirill Lokshin • Rifleman 82 • Ryan Norton • Wrp103

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

CheckUser changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Oversighter changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Guideline and policy news

• Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

• Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.

Arbitration

• Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.

Miscellaneous

• The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!

Dear Celestina, Thank you for your valuable oversight! I look forward to your guidance in the course of my journey as a budding wiki editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oria 6 (talk • contribs) 05:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Dont mention it, I’m happy I can be of service. Celestina007 (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

New Message

Thanks, Ive found another, Draft:Oluyemi Fasipe which looks dubious to me.Dan arndt (talk) 06:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@Dan arndt, thank you for the notification, the draft article is a strong possible ADMASQ, perhaps an autobiography even, I completely removed the External links section as they were blatant ELSPAM. I removed other promotional content there also. Honestly, I couldn’t thank you, Timtrent and DGG enough for your vigilance in monitoring possible unethical editing in Nigeria related articles. Celestina007 (talk) 14:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

No, I can't state it there

because that wouldn't be helping either. I don't know what the point of blanking my previous comment here means, so unless you tell me otherwise, I'll assume from here on out that it means I'm not welcome on your talk page? But I'm not going to pour even more gasoline on the fire at Fram's talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Celestina007, check your email. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Floquenbeam, come on mate, you know you are always welcome here, the blanking was rather rude(on my part) & yes I do agree that the comment was inflammatory, and that wasn’t my intention. @Ritchie333, I’ve seen and replied to it. Celestina007 (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

New Year Wishes

Atibrarian (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

@Atibrarian, a happy new year to you too mate. Celestina007 (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Question re: Amanchor Cave

Hi Celestina, I just saw this new article and it took my interest because it's about a cave. I did a bit of clean up, but don't have your experience assessing Nigerian sources. I don't care one way or another if it's kept. If you have a moment to check the sources, that would be great. Netherzone (talk) 17:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Netherzone, NZ thanks for reaching out, it also took my interest because it is remotely related to the occult and I’m appreciate of anything related to mysticism because they are always of encyclopedic value, straight to your question, the first source is not reliable, absolutely no presence of an editorial oversight, the second source is still generally “considered reliable” in this collaborative project, now, although I have documented a plethora of examples on their unreliability I haven’t opened a formal discussion on if or not it should be deprecated so for we still consider it reliable (or one of those sources you use with caution) the third source is however reliable. So technically speaking, I think the only problematic source is the first one the rest are okay. Celestina007 (talk) 20:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Ah yes, I had forgotten about your interest in the occult! Thank you for your input on the citations, that is good news. I will look for some other references, to develop the article, and will look to see if I can find a free image. Netherzone (talk) 00:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

@Netherzone, thanks mate, sometime in the very distant future, several years from now, I’d probably abandon most of my day to day activities and devote my life to study of the occult. I have dabbled in it, and still do, but would want to go more in-depth. I know, I’m a weird one. Celestina007 (talk) 23:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

This one may be UPE

Special:Contributions/Gazinit shows a major interest in broadly non notable albums and artists. Already on final warning. Uploads to Commons all nominated for deletion. I don't want to be prejudiced against African material, but my antennae are twitching Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

They have been clocked on Commons as a Sockpuppet. The question is of whom? I have asked the blocking admin there. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 14:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

And now here. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:54, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Timtrent, that’s a possible sock account, I’m pretty sure it is though, of whom? I honestly can’t say. Furthermore, no, you aren’t prejudiced, regardless of wherever the article is originating from, if they don’t meet the required threshold it is behoove of you (us/any reviewer) to carry out their duties. Celestina007 (talk) 22:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Request on 19:47:54, 11 October 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by Kongi Harvest

• Kongi Harvest (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Chike Akunyili (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, There are issues I would like to address here. Dr Chike Akunyili was not a nonentity in his country Nigeria. His late wife Dora Akunyili was also not a nonentity, public office-holder of repute, and known beyond the shores of Nigeria. She has a wikipedia page along with that of their daughter who is a famous visual artist in her own right. I suggested a wikipedia page on Chike Akunyili based on recent events in the life of this family, with the brutal murder of Chike Akunyili. As the events are unfolding, and to pre-empt overburdening of both Dora Akunyili and Njideka Akunyili Crosby's pages with the stories around the man's death, currently being reported extensively in hundreds of newspaper articles and media both in Nigeria and outside. A simple Google search will attest to this. Could you kindly explain further what is considered « published, reliable, secondary sources » here. The information about Chike Akunyili noted in the article is a developing story that is building up in the country. In kind anticipation. kongi harvest (talk) 19:41 11 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kongi Harvest, why would you use the word “nonentity” ? AFAIK no one ever called him that. In-fact the article was declined without a comment I mean take a look here so if I may ask once more why did you use the word “nonentity” ?? This is rather puzzling, that comes across as though I said or implied that when I never did, do you not see how confusing to passerby editors that is? Do you see how subtly disingenuous that appears? Alright, Moving forward you said “explain further what is considered « published, reliable, secondary sources” see WP:GNG, it contains the answers to your questions. Thank you. Celestina007 (talk) 20:03, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 Thank you for your response. I am not implying that you called him a "nonentity". If it comes across like that in my note, I do apologize for that. As you rightly noted there was no reason given for declining the article, and I was only trying to stress that he is (or was now) known in his country if notoriety is a factor here. I will check the guidelines you noted again and see what else could be added. The story as I noted above is developing further. Thank you for your time and patience as well. kongi harvest (talk) 20:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

@Kongi Harvest, AFC editors aren’t mandated to write a comment, the “declining” has an automated response on why it is being declined so like I said we aren’t obliged to leave a comment & again no, see WP:BREAKING. Celestina007 (talk) 20:40, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

@Celestina007 Noted. I have checked WP:GNG and Chike Akunyili does meet the guidelines. But will continue to develop the draft further. kongi harvest (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Cool. Celestina007 (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Remember Hamis Kiggundu?

Have a look at https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Hamis_Kiggundu. I am not asking you to do anything. Interesting, though, that a Ugandan IP address challenged my speedy deletion notice there! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:24, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@Timtrent, This is as strange as it is puzzling, I’m not even sure i understand their angle anymore. They successfully via brutal force bulldozed their way into en.m why then are they spamming across other sister projects? I got so irritated I was going to vote a speedy delete but I couldn’t due to the page being protected, i really do not understand the motivation for them to continue spamming. Celestina007 (talk) 23:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

To me it is simple. HK appears not to be necessarily pleasant, and I suspect they are concerned about him. I have just been chasing every angle down where I am able. I suspect HK is notable, but I detest the gangs actions Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@Timtrent, I find their actions unbecoming as well, in any case, I’m laid back because I know you are more than capable of holding your own. Celestina007 (talk) 23:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Laid back is a great state of mind for all actions here and on other platforms. Militant politeness and gentleness always leave us with the moral high ground Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:46, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

@Timtrent, Beyond apt! My friend, very true. Celestina007 (talk) 23:50, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

It also has a habit of winning the battle and then the war. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

I think that topic ban discussion for another just illustrated the absolute need to be completely serene, even when handling the most challenging problems Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 10:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Timtrent, honestly, I’ve adopted a laid back approach to most things since July 2021. I believe as editors we should put in the best we can and let the system do the rest, what would be would be. Celestina007 (talk) 13:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Sigh

Hello, Celestina007,

Did you have any clue that User:Annie_Kingdom was a sockpuppet? I have interacted with her a lot lately in the speedy deletion categories and articles that were draftified and even though I had to correct some of her zealous patrolling, I was completely shocked to see that she was blocked.

Since she was sockpuppet of a sockmaster you seem familiar with (Ugbedeg), I thought I'd ask you what you thought and if you saw any red flags. Looking through her contributions, she wrote about Argentine politicians so I don't really see any similarity in article creation. Any way. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Liz, At this point I think Ugbedeg should be officially be documented as an LTA. Jeez, I mean, take a look at this Ironically, i don’t believe I have ever interacted with Annie_Kingdom nor ever even encountered their edits, so as to the question of if I had a clue they were socking, I dont believe I even knew they existed, the truth is, even if I knew them, I probably wouldn’t even have guessed they were a sock of Ugbedeg, because I can’t even see an edit pattern nor similarities in choice of topic areas, but it isn’t uncommon that a serial abuser would know to consciously edit inversely as they did in a previous account. Generally my thinking is I do not need to do much (or any) confrontation at an editor that I suspect of engaging in unethical practices. I firmly believe in the ideology that anyone engaging in unethical practices would eventually be nabbed irrespective of time or knowledge of skills in evading scrutiny, I mean, I didn’t even know about this editor and somehow they got nabbed and were linked to Ugbedeg(who usually edited in Nigeria related articles) Usedtobecool mentioned something about e-mails, and yes they are correct in the sense that I would give explicit details to only sysops(like yourself) functionaries and very trusted anti spam editors in a mail as opposed to stating them on mainspace as I used to do in the past. Celestina007 (talk) 03:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

PropertyPro.ng

Hey, you asked me to let you know if the prod on that article was contested last year, and it was, but I forgot about it completely. So here's Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/PropertyPro.ng. FalconK (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Falcon Kirtaran, thank you for bringing this to my notice. The article creator was clearly an SPA for the sole purpose of bringing that article to mainspace. I find it somewhat cringeworthy that the article has remained on mainspace for so long, 5 years now I believe, despite it being non notable and an WP:ADMASQ if I’m not mistaken 331dot was the first editor to correctly note something off about the article. Something you might also find interesting is an editor named Kolapoimam was a major contributor to that article, of course then we weren’t aware they would eventually become a serial abuser and sock master. Falcon, I can’t thank you enough for bringing this to my notice, please if you are looking at a Nigeria related article and are not sure of its integrity or having problem with source analysis, please do not hesitate to leave me a message as you just did. Celestina007 (talk) 09:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Nafiu Bala Rabiu Article

Hello, thank you very much for your review and correction on Nafiu Bala Rabiu's article. However, if there is anyway you can help me improve this article or guide me on how to improve it, I will be much grateful but if it is necessary for deletion then there is no problem but please I will like your tips in creating more articles to better myself in the future so as to avoid issues of deletion. Have a nice day. Moshswacide (talk) 11:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Harold Lawrence Katcher

I just notice you added tags to the article on Harold Lawrence Katcher. I am still trying to figure out why an article claiming the subject was born in 2034, on January 38th no less, was able to sit around to get multiple tags, instead of someone saying "Wait a moment, this information here is impossible." And reacting to it in a way that more clearly indicates it can not be facutally correct. It is articles like this that make me thing we need to go to making all articles go through the AfC process. We should not have a system that allows articles to be created claiming that their subject will not be born for 12 years. It does appear that Katcher is in fact a real person, although my preliminary studies suggest he probably is excluded from inclusion based on fringe rules. He does seem to be working on some sort of anti-aging process, but there does not seem to be peer review of his work, and he clearly fails any existing criteria for academic inclusion, and the coverage I can see does not look to be from sources that would fulfill the criteria for reliable, or at least not both reliable and in-depth about him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

• • The article has been nominated for BLP procedural deletion, which seems to be the right course, even if the article text itself claims he is not yet alive, which is of course just not accurate.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@Johnpacklambert, my thinking is the editor made a honest mistake there, the individual is a real person, John B123 prodded the article which was the right course of action and self de-prodded it after sources were added to the article, which is also in accordance with conventional NPP, I’m also not seeing WP:NACADEMIC met, but I honestly don’t really review nor nominate for deletion articles on academics, I leave that to DGG & Rosguill who are grand masters in that field. I also note that John did not nominate it for deletion and they have explained to me in the past as to why they are conservative about nominating articles for deletion, which i found very informative and thought provoking, this philosophy, consciously or unconsciously has being practiced by other veteran reviewers such as Scope_creep, onel5969, and a host of other NPP veteran reviewers. The truth is AFD is no longer as effective as it once was, a quintessential example would be you JPL, you were to a large extent one of the most prolific (if not the most prolific) participant in AFD's and helped remove non notable articles off mainspace but we all bore witness to the “hot water” that got you in, when you mention that all articles ought to be passed through AFC, I support this, but Im also very pragmatic and I know that isn’t ever happening (or at least anytime soon) Celestina007 (talk) 21:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

See [1] re the impossible dob. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 21:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

@John B123 What in the world??? And to think I was actually giving them the benefit of doubt. Celestina007 (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I have moved that article to draft. It is was insufficiently sourced and already had a tag on it. It has no place on mainspace. That is the ideal place for the editor to work on it. No wonder Cullen328 got mad. What a ridiculous state of affairs. scope_creep^Talk 22:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

In actuality what GoingBatty, myself and any other editor who cleaned up the article optimized was probably a semi automated tool, or perhaps, saw it and said “this must be a honest mistake and I’d help them do a google search and correct it on their behalf” and forgot altogether to do so because to be honest, the academic was actually a real person. This is as bizarre as they come, up until today, I wouldn’t have ever believed an editor would add blatant falsehood and say “yeah I did that on purpose” this is indeed puzzling, what put me off is the fact that the editor was getting salty with Cullen328 as though CU328 didn’t have a legitimate reason to be annoyed with them. Celestina007 (talk) 23:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-02

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

• A oauth_consumer variable has been added to the AbuseFilter to enable identifying changes made by specific tools. [2]
• Gadgets are now able to directly include JSON pages. This means some gadgets can now be configured by administrators without needing the interface administrator permission, such as with the Geonotice gadget. [3]
• Gadgets can now specify page actions on which they are available. For example, |actions=edit,history will load a gadget only while editing and on history pages. [4]
• Gadgets can now be loaded on demand with the withgadget URL parameter. This can be used to replace an earlier snippet that typically looks like withJS or withCSS. [5]
• At wikis where the Mentorship system is configured, you can now use the Action API to get a list of a mentor's mentees. [6]
• The heading on the main page can now be configured using MediaWiki:Mainpage-title-loggedin for logged-in users and MediaWiki:Mainpage-title for logged-out users. Any CSS that was previously used to hide the heading should be removed. [7] [8]
• Four special pages (and their API counterparts) now have a maximum database query execution time of 30 seconds. These special pages are: RecentChanges, Watchlist, Contributions, and Log. This change will help with site performance and stability. You can read more details about this change including some possible solutions if this affects your workflows. [9]
• The sticky header has been deployed for 50% of logged-in users on more than 10 wikis. This is part of the Desktop Improvements. See how to take part in the project.

Changes later this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 11 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 12 January. It will be on all wikis from 13 January (calendar).

Events

• Community Wishlist Survey 2022 begins. All contributors to the Wikimedia projects can propose for tools and platform improvements. The proposal phase takes place from 10 January 18:00 UTC to 23 January 18:00 UTC. Learn more.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

01:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Omo Iya

I really liked your edit on Reformed Ogboni Fraternity. It seemed much more balanced than it was previously, in line with what is found in the Anti-Masonry section of the article on Freemasonry. I made some cosmetic changes, but generally it was all good. Well done, my sister. O.ominirabluejack (talk) 00:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Omo iya, you are very correct and I’m really grateful you appreciate the new changes. I believe, Generally, Most people (unfortunately including myself) are too quick to promote foreign ideologies whilst we forget to promote that which is ours, once again I’m happy you are happy with the changes i made. Celestina007 (talk) 00:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Nigerian artists

If you have the time can you check out, Draft:Makayla Malaka, and let me know what you think of the referencing. Thanks Dan arndt (talk) 03:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt, thank you Dan for the notification, I’m at work so my network is crap but I did have a wonderful time analyzing the sources, it’s nothing like I’ve seen before, so, the first is a guest editor (unreliable piece), The second is pre packaged Pr sponsored material, The third source is yet another pre packaged pr sponsored material (the fact that this generally accepted reliable source is trying to pass this off as a legitimate article is quite alarming) The fourth source is a re-echo of the third source (which is an unreliable pr sponsored piece) The fifth source has a byline that reads “agency report” this is a quintessential example of an op-ed source (piece). The Sixth source is quite sketchy but “decent” all the same, overtly promotional as you or anyone can observe but It meets the conventional tenets of WP:RS, The seventh source clearly falls short of WP:SIGCOV. The eight source has no reputation for fact checking, none whatsoever. The ninth and final source is a written by a guest editor, obviously isn’t reliable as it bypasses the “Editorial”. So in all we have one decent source, and one borderline good source (the sixth source and seventh source respectively). To be honest I don’t think I have ever seen so much effort put into PR like I’m seeing here, there’s no way this wouldn’t utterly confuse someone who isn’t familiar with Nigerian sources. There’s also another issue about the article Creation. That’s an entirely different discussion for another time but look at the three significant contributors and what do you see? This is a good WP:ADMASQ i should also add, I’m going ahead to decline it. Thanks once more Dan. Celestina007 (talk) 11:40, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Scaramanga Silk

Hello there.

You made a suggestion on my Scaramanga Silk page. You stated that my page was an 'Orphan', and advised me to link it to another page.

I'm not sure how to link my page to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_valuable_records where Scaramanga Silk's name is mentioned in the 16th bullet point from the top.

Many thanks,

Polly Kiersten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polly Kiersten (talk • contribs) 15:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello there, Celestina007.

You may ignore my previous message, as I've made a link to Scaramanga Silk's name from the 'List of most valuable records' Wikipedia page.

Thanks,

Polly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polly Kiersten (talk • contribs) 16:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

@Polly Kiersten, hello, sorry for the late response, I see you have stated that the issue has been resolved. Alright then. Celestina007 (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

For future purposes, you may use Edward betts to de-orphan articles. Celestina007 (talk) 02:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

TY

Thanks for looking out on my TP, i'm significantly less active now and don't have the necessary patience, so I appreciate it. Hope you're doing well. SANTADICAE🎅 18:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Praxidicae, I’m doing well Praxi and I hope you are too, no worries, it’s an honor. Celestina007 (talk) 19:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Definitely been a trying few months and being away from WP has been better for me, so not sure I'll ever come back in the same capacity but I appreciate dedicated editors like you. Thanks for all you do. ♥ SANTADICAE🎅 19:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Praxidicae, that’s sad to hear as no one can replicate your body of work, and I mean this literally, if editing sparingly or taking a break is what is best for you, then please by all means I support you as your life choice(s) takes preeminence over WP. Thank you for the kind words I’m very grateful for them. Celestina007 (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Invisible Flock

Celestina007,

I've now added categories to the Invisible Flock page.

Many thanks,

Polly Polly Kiersten (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Glad to know. Celestina007 (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Goran Anastasovski

I think it now meets the conditions for the page not to be deleted--Dalco26 (talk) 21:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I’d leave that for a competent sysop to evaluate and decide. Celestina007 (talk) 22:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

ok thank you--Dalco26 (talk) 22:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

AWB is confused by Interlingue

Hi! Just thought I'd let you know that the suggestions made by AWB on Interlingue grammar are incorrect as it is another language. Interlingue indeed looks close to English in places which is what is setting it off. The ie part is also the code for the language so those don't need to be changed to i.e. either. Mithridates (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

That makes sense. Celestina007 (talk) 12:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Skepticism and coordinated editing arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Evidence. Please note: per Arbitration Policy, ArbCom is accepting private evidence by email. If in doubt, please email and ArbCom can advise you whether evidence should be public or private. Please add your evidence by January 31, 2022, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Skepticism and coordinated editing/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You may unsubscribe from further updates by removing your name from the case notification list.

For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

More Progress

This SPA has now been blocked Celestina007 (talk) 04:37, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Nigerian Artists (2)

When you have the time can you check out Draft:Blacksatino and Draft:Titi Kuti. There is also an AfD discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kris-Zaga) that could use your expertise as well. Dan arndt (talk) 02:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt, I’m sorry for cutting your entry and making it a “new entry” I do this because it helps for easier navigation and referencing and I’m sorry for just replying, I’m only just seeing it now. As usual thanks for notifying me on this topic areas. On Draft:Blacksatino it seems the draft has been moved (/deleted), On Draft:Titi Kuti, I moved the article to Draftspace yesterday due to a possible COI & mainspace worthiness (Notability) it was resubmitted by the creator and it was accepted by Greenman to whom I left this message (whilst I await their response) I do note they appear to have both AFC and Autopatrol, the problem with that combination is that articles accepted by editors wielding both are indexed by google almost instantaneously, thus the argument raised wherein it is was proposed that it is behoove of editors wielding both to manually uncheck as “reviewed” any article they have accepted at AFC, there is however no consensus as to how that should be handled. I have however marked the article as unreviewed and would wait for an uninvolved NPR to vet it (Objectively speaking and FWIW that article should be sent to AFD) Now as for this, I believe I’m in support with the rationale of the editor who nominated the article for deletion and have cast my !vote accordingly. Celestina007 (talk) 01:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

I have prodded the article as a precursor to any potential AfD. Dan arndt (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt, they have expressly denied any COI thus I have removed the COI tag even though I remain skeptical. Furthermore, their reasons for creating the article (as seen in the diff above) is in itself in variance and not in accordance with policy on notability. If the prod is challenged please take it to AFD where I’d draw up a table & would be dissecting each source. To be honest, I’m rather liberal with topics of encyclopedic value but are lacking in sources or have borderline sources, and very much stern on topic areas which are prone to promotionalism (in the famous words of DGG) and are lacking in sources, I’m rather meticulous about those sort of articles. Celestina007 (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, this was my response to Greenman here, they seem to be struggling with analyzing Nigerian sources which indeed is a herculean task and I don’t blame them as Nigerian sources are beyond tricky, thus the reason to reach out to experienced editors who are experts in that topic area to do a source analysis for you. Celestina007 (talk) 22:50, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Laborans de Pontormo

We were working on the same article at the same time, and I fear my publication of my additions wiped out your changes. I would appreciate it if you did not try to do a rollback, since that might remove some of my substantial additions in favor of your typographical changes. Instead, please visit the page again, and do your changes again. Sorry about the trouble. Thanks.

--Vicedomino (talk) 02:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

No worries. Celestina007 (talk) 02:46, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Ryan Poles

I just created the Ryan Poles page and am still collecting sources and references for the page. AbelAndCain (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Precisely why it wasn’t moved to draft but merely tagged as {{unreferenced}}, you are welcome to add a source and remove the tag. However, for future sake, it is good practice to always include a source in a biographical article before moving it to mainspace. Celestina007 (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Katie Sturino

Hello Celestina007 -- I'm not sure moving this to draft was the correct solution; it was fully sourced to reasonably reliable magazines/newspapers with no glaring problems. Having done so, when the creator tried to submit it, I think it was wrong to review and decline it; it would have been well advised to await another opinion and possibly more helpful advice to the creator, Saramannheimer, who appears a good-faith Women in Red contributor. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 03:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, Espresso thanks for stopping by, I agree with you, I hadn’t realized it was I who moved the article to draft prior reviewing at AFC, an oversight I am totally responsible for. Celestina007 (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

No worries! It's good to get into the habit of always looking at the edit history before doing review-type actions, but it's easy to forget. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 21:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

true, it’s easy to forget, but yes, it definitely is a habit that ought to be embedded in our minds. Oh and lest I forget, thanks for not making me pay. Cheers mate. Celestina007 (talk) 21:13, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

References

Hello Celestina007! I got your comment on Makayla Malaka draft and I appreciate your review of the draft as it is a learning process for me, I will try and more references that doesn't look like a PR sponsored post, thank you. Karissa 247 (talk) 08:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Karissa 247, I have done a source analysis and explained (in response) to Dan ardnt (who by the way does a brilliant work in NPP) see here how Draft:Makayla Malaka has only one decent source and one good source, Although I have my reservations they however do not impair nor interfere with my duties, come up with at least 2 more sources that are not Pre packaged material and generally meet the conventional tenets of RS and I’d be willing to have a second look at the article. If you have any conflict of interest, now would be a good time to expressly state so and you wouldn’t be violating policy neither would you face any punitive actions, failure to do so, and in due time a COI is established is what may put you in unnecessary and avoidable “trouble” Celestina007 (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Celestina, Thank you for the transparency, I will work on getting more reliable sources. I will like to ask a question, when I get more sources can I take out the previous references which doesn't fit the article or can I go ahead and include them in the previous references? Karissa 247 (talk) 21:13, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Tech News: 2022-04

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

• The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 25 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 26 January. It will be on all wikis from 27 January (calendar).
• The following languages can now be used with syntax highlighting: BDD, Elpi, LilyPond, Maxima, Rita, Savi, Sed, Sophia, Spice, .SRCINFO.
• You can now access your watchlist from outside of the user menu in the new Vector skin. The watchlist link appears next to the notification icons if you are at the top of the page. [10]

Events

• You can see the results of the Coolest Tool Award 2021 and learn more about 14 tools which were selected this year.
• You can translate, promote, or comment on the proposals in the Community Wishlist Survey. Voting will begin on 28 January.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

List of cinemas in Pune

Hello Mam, Check this article List of cinemas in Pune once again. In article I have added some news links Cinzia007 (talk) 10:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Glad to know. Celestina007 (talk) 23:10, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Olatunji Ariyomo

Hello, Omo Iya Mi.

I was wondering if you could help me with something. Do you happen to know why the Wiki page for the Isinkan prince Olatunji Ariyomo was deleted? He was a politician of some note up in Akure, and the article apparently had a number of references included in it.

My attention has just been drawn to its deletion, so I wanted to know the rationale before deciding whether to start another page about him.

Here's hoping that you're well.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 12:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

O.ominirabluejack, Omo iya, I believe it was deleted because it was G11 eligible and was speedied under that criterion, see here, I believe if NPOL is met you can re-create the article. Notability was definitely not the deciding factor here, so I see no reason why it can’t be created by an established editor like yourself who knows how to create neutral (tone) well worded amazing articles. Celestina007 (talk) 18:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Celestina007... I knew that you would be helpful.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 19:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

O.ominirabluejack, no worries I’m always available, I did find it weird that I couldn’t find the rationale nor anything related to the article's deletion under “what links here” that usually works, quite strange I had to use one of my “external anti spam tools” to locate the (history) of the article, which is strange. In any case I’m grateful you found my input helpful. Celestina007 (talk) 19:52, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Sanjeev Kumar Yadav Orphan Tag?

Why you put orphan tag? Already mentioned two articles related to this article in See also section. Mukesh.kfc (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

{{Orphan}} tag, because at the time the tag was affixed there were no links from other pages in the main article namespace. To de-orphan use Edward betts. If you are still confused please let me know. Celestina007 (talk) 00:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Links were already there, see edit summary n history. You tag despite the link are there. Mukesh.kfc (talk) 00:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Edward betts??? What Mukesh.kfc (talk) 00:48, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Now help me to de orphan Mukesh.kfc (talk) 00:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

No, not quite, Hyperlinking to an article with no incoming links from other pages doesn’t de-orphan an article, neither does a WP:SEEALSO in the article you created, it is a common mistake made by newer editors, Furthermore this comment here; “Now help me to de orphan” comes off as rather passive aggressive, next time please use the word (please) the burden of creating a decent article is on you, keep this is mind moving forward. Edward betts is used for de-orphaning, give me a second to do this for you. Celestina007 (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Mukesh.kfc,  Done successfully, I’m going ahead to remove the tag. I note also that there may be possible notability concerns which I haven’t looked into, I’d leave that for another npr to determine. Celestina007 (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok thank you. But still tag is there Mukesh.kfc (talk) 01:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

And what is Edward betts? Please explain Mukesh.kfc (talk) 01:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Mukesh.kfc, you are welcome, check again now. Edward Betts is used for de-orphaning, I believe you may need to read WP:ORPHAN and understand that as a prerequisite for optimizing Edward Betts, in any case this here is EB. Celestina007 (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok Thanks Mukesh.kfc (talk) 01:40, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Please see WP:INDENT also. Celestina007 (talk) 01:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok--Mukesh.kfc (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Ok, dear. I read about INDENT --Mukesh.kfc (talk) 02:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Jasnath Temple Orphan tag

Article is added to See also section.

Please look and remove the tag Mukesh.kfc (talk) 01:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Mukesh.kfc, I believe I just told you above that inputing a “see also” (in the article you created) isn’t a method used in de-orphaning. If you aren’t going to read what I’ve been telling you I’m afraid I might not be of much help. Celestina007 (talk) 01:42, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Need a link from other wikipedia pages ? (Which have information regarding this) Right? Please my doubt Mukesh.kfc (talk) 02:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

I’m sorry I didn’t catch that. I suggest you read WP:O it answers your question to the letter, This is likely my last reply to you. Celestina007 (talk) 02:08, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

OK --Mukesh.kfc (talk) 02:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Nigerian artists (3)

I had a look at Draft:Ikechukwu Sunday Cross Okonkwo (1) and it would appear that only significant thing he has done is appear in the Nigerian show, Big Brother - it does have what appears to be reference bombing to try and establish notability - if you have the time can you check it out. I have also put Titi Kuti up for an AfD as the article's creator removed the PROD notice, stating WP:NACTOR is met. Dan arndt (talk) 02:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt, always a pleasure to interact with you, I see that Rusalkii declined the submission yesterday(25) and it was re-submitted, I have also declined. If it is aggressively resubmitted then it should be rejected, I believe that is a quintessential example of 1E. As for the Titi Kuti article I believe a possible COI exists, but the creator denied this thus I removed the COI tag I put on the article even though I was skeptical. I’d be interested in that AFD as I’d like to hear the rationale giving by the article creator as to how NACTOR is met, I’m going to glance through the AFD & weigh in, thanks for the notifications. Celestina007 (talk) 02:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Can you also check Draft:Isoko Boy if you have the time. Thanks Dan arndt (talk) 02:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan arndt, Praxidicae noticed him last year and draftified the article, I believe he may be erroneously thinking LinkedIn and Wikipedia work alike, because he is advertising himself. That should be outrightly rejected in my honest opinion. Celestina007 (talk) 03:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Dan ardnt, which I have just done. Celestina007 (talk) 03:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Aspersions in AfD

Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titi Kuti, my intention was not to cast aspersions, but just to lower the intensity of the conversation, and I'm dismayed to see that has intensified instead. I was in no way aware of any prior communication between you and any other editor, and was basing my statement solely on what I read there. It still looks a little (and I do mean just a little) hostile to me. In general, I know any deletion vote is by necessity going to be slightly on the aggressive side, as we are asking to destroy someone's work... but personally, I view the rhetorical phrase, (paraphrased) "I'd love to see/hear you {do something}", with the implication and belief that the {something} in question is impossible, as quite sarcastic and attacking. I know that this was not your intent, but it still feels like an unwarrantedly aggressive thing to say to me, and I think it's good to be extra polite in potentially emotionally charged areas such as AfD. Fieari (talk) 03:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for expressly stating it wasn’t your intention to cast aspersions, I put in very conscious efforts in communicating with my colleagues (especially at contentious) areas in a polite manner yet precise without being disrespectful or sarcastic, thus I am easily saddened when I’m accused of such. Like I stated there, tone can’t be interpreted over text, I sincerely asked them a question in good faith which you erroneously thought I was being sarcastic, I wasn’t, reminding us once again why WP:AGF is the one of the imperative foundation blocks of this collaborative project. As is customary with my editing philosophy, I don’t see myself commenting there anymore except sources are presented & I am pinged to do a source analysis, if not, I wouldn’t be commenting there, I know better than to bludgeon. A good morning to you. Celestina007 (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I reneged, as I have made a comment there. Celestina007 (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Servare et Manere

Dear Celestina007, thank you for the warning. Sorry, I'm not interested in continuing editing. I'm really tired of it. In my opinion, the Draft:Servare et Manere site is in order, written in a comprehensible way and contains true information. I discussed it with the editor who flagged the page as inappropriate. I have edited all the details, but it has been re-tagged. So when I told the editor who marked the page as "an adept to deleting" to edit what needed, he told me it wasn't his job. His job was only marking the site for deletion. It is very unfair and I am really tired of it. It is very easy to mark and damage. That is why I refuse to return to this subject. Do what you want with the Draft:Servare et Manere site. I've had a lot of work with it and it's useless. I lost interest. Best wishes, Marek

I’m not sure why you are leaving me this message, i wasn’t the one who left the tag as you stated above, the draft seems to have been deleted by a sysop, so let’s do a recap, it wasn’t I who tagged the article, it definitely wasn’t I who deleted the draft, I do not have the ability to do so, so why exactly are you leaving me this message? Or did you erroneously do so? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Celestina007 (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

One to keep an eye on

I smell a UPE farm. Also Sockery. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kiambu1 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 19:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Timtrent, I have added them to my watchlist, the duck quack is extremely deafening. Celestina007 (talk) 20:04, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Timtrent, and as usual anti spam / upe has triumphed over unethical practices, thanks to you and every other editor out there ensuring only credible and honest articles are retained on mainspace. @Bbb23, a big thank you to you as well. Celestina007 (talk) 22:52, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Indeed it has, and always will, though we are under increasing pressure.

You will likely wish to make an assessment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solomon Kinuthia of whether I am correct or incorrect in my deletion rationale. I am, of course, content with either or neither. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

I have weighed in on the AFD and !voted a Delete accordingly, as I can’t see NPOL met. Regarding your first comment, I have a saying, that no matter how sophisticated an editor is in evading scrutiny, in due time they would get the appropriate sanction invariably coming their way. I am yet to see where dubious editing triumphs over good/Truth. Furthermore kudos to sysops such as Blablubbs, TheresNoTime, MER-C, DGG, Rosguill, Drmies & a host of others I cant seem to remember right now, Also, a major thank you to prestigious & special editors like Kudpung who basically is the original anti UPE editor & Praxidicae who is beyond special & extremely intelligent. I’m very much appreciative of their efforts in tackling UPE, it is indeed a strenuous place to work in, but a very necessary sacrifice if we desire to keep the integrity of the collaborative project. Celestina007 (talk) 23:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Bless them, a new head has sprung up. I do hope we are not going to see a sudden surge of socks. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:26, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

• Special report: WikiEd course leads to Twitter harassment

• News and notes: Feedback for Board of Trustees election

• Interview: CEO Maryana Iskander "four weeks in"

• Black History Month: What are you doing for Black History Month?

• Deletion report: Ringing in the new year: Subject notability guideline under discussion

• WikiProject report: The Forgotten Featured

• Arbitration report: New arbitrators look at new case and antediluvian sanctions

• Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2021

• Gallery: No Spanish municipality without a photograph

• Obituary: Twofingered Typist

• Op-Ed: Identifying and rooting out climate change denial

• Essay: The prime directive

• Opinion: Should the Wikimedia Foundation continue to accept cryptocurrency donations?

• In the media: Fuzzy-headed government editing

• Recent research: Articles with higher quality ratings have fewer "knowledge gaps"

• Serendipity: Pooh entered the Public Domain – but Tigger has to wait two more years

• Crossword: Cross swords with a crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Request to move Sreeleela page to main space

Hi, Thanks for your suggestions/ guidance for the betterment of Wikipedia platform.

Sreeleela is an Indian actress working in Telugu and Kannada language films here in india with huge notability. I have written this Wikipedia article with all reliable sources and i have just updated the draft file and submitted based on your suggestions now.

I would like to address here if there is any further things that need to updated.

Thank you. Thedonthireddy (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Request to move Sreeleela Page to mainspace

Hi, Thanks for your suggestions/ guidance for the betterment of Wikipedia platform.

Sreeleela is an Indian actress working in Telugu and Kannada language films here in india with huge notability. I have written this Wikipedia article with all reliable sources and i have just updated the draft file and submitted based on your suggestions now.

I would like to address here if there is any further things that need to updated. Thank you. Donddyster (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)