Steve42382
Welcome! edit
|
May 2020 edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page List of Ultimate teams has been reverted.
Your edit here to List of Ultimate teams was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline. The external link(s) you added or changed (https://gritultimate.wordpress.com/) is/are on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 00:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Dominique Fontenette has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Angela Lin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Anna Nazarov has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Anna Thompson (ultimate) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Ashleigh Buch has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Carolyn Finney has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
The article I need feminism because has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Barely any content, poorly referenced
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. dibbydib boop or snoop 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Without Limits Ultimate edit
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 Without Limits Ultimate, 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. Ingratis (talk) 01:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Suggestion edit
Hi there — I've recently come across several articles which you've created on 'ultimate' players, and thought I'd come and offer my (unsolicited) tuppence worth. As you can see on this page, these articles have been nominated for deletion, on the same grounds ie. no content or context, no references, no links, etc. If, as you say on a couple of the article talk pages, your intention is to continue working on the articles, then my suggestion would be to keep them in your draftspace until they are more developed and not to publish them too soon, as otherwise you just risk them being deleted, which is causing extra work for other editors and may eventually get you sanctioned. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the thought. The problem is that the original plan was to create these place holders before our wikithon starts today so newer users could edit and expand on them. But if I move them to my drafts then they can't edit only I can. We just didn't realize they'd be marked for deletion so quickly so have had to reassess our approach to creating the new articles. Steve42382 (talk) 12:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, fair enough. FWIW, the way I came across these articles is, I patrol the 'dead end' category, ie. articles that have no internal wikilinks. Other editors routinely patrol other categories, like unreferenced etc. articles. One way to reduce the likelihood of your article drafts/stubs being tagged for deletion would be to comply from the outset with as many guidelines as possible, ie. always ensure that you have at least one external reference, at least one internal link, and so on. That won't completely get around this problem for you, but may at least lessen it. Mind you, even then, if the article subject is inherently non-notable or otherwise falls foul of the 'rules', you will be fighting an uphill struggle. HTH -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help. I appreciate it! Steve42382 (talk) 13:38, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of I need feminism because for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I need feminism because is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I need feminism because until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 21:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
The article List of Ultimate Organizations has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Overly promotional page with no sourcing for vast majority of content.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 22:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
May 2020 edit
Hello, I'm Willsome429. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, I need feminism because, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 23:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Washington DC Shadow has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:GNG; no WP:SIGCOV about the team as all sources cited are league announcements.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 18:38, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Washington DC Scandal moved to draftspace edit
An article you recently created, Washington DC Scandal, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 18:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
The article Milwaukee Monarchs has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:GNG. No WP:SIGCOV about the team itself, all sources cited are league annoncements.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 18:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
A suggestion edit
Hey Steve, I've been reading around lately and have notice that you are part of the new Sports Wiki Visibility Project. I've also seen that there's been some contention over the quality of the project's output and a misunderstanding that ended up at the admin noticeboard. I recommend you and your fellow editors at this initiative seek the guidance of the members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. There are users there who are very knowledgeable about Wikipedia policies and standards, and are also very experienced in creating content along the lines of countering systemic bias. The project also does outreach, so I'm sure you'd be able to find some people there who would be happy to assist your initiative. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:20, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Echoing Indy beetle's call. While you don't need anyone's permission to edit, if you're running an editathon it generally helps a great deal if you have the guidance of someone with sufficient editing experience here and it sounds like you don't really have that at the moment. So finding someone with that experience, probably through Women in Red, but any other means that work for you should help things go better. Nil Einne (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help both of you! I really appreciate it. We have someone on our leadership group who has experience with wikipedia editing and has been guiding us through all of this as well but naturally she can't be hands on with every one of us and is mostly focused on explaining what we're doing wrong after we've done it. As for the Women in Red, I have no idea how experienced she is compared to the people with Women in Red but either way finding other like minded individuals to provide additional support and education could never hurt. I've learned a ton about what works and what doesn't already and I'm really enjoying this but I'm frustrated that even if this particular user has grounds for what he's flagging, if you look at his recent history he is intentionally focused on what we're doing after basically trolling our social media campaign for it as well. While I and everyone else in this campaign have been told through our training on how to use wikipedia that suggestions, edits, etc. are not personal this particular user is approaching it from a personal lens and it's just disheartening. We unfortunately happened to find a guy who has extensive wikipedia experience and knowledge, while also being a member of the ultimate community, and feels threatened that his heroes in the white male dominated semi-pro scene are not getting the same attention that we're choosing to put on the marginalized populations of players. This very unlikely combination has found us in the situation that we're in. The harassment we're facing from him is not based on the content of his edits but rather on his determination to solely focus on our campaign based on a personal grudge he has with us. We are trying to work with others in his community to help educate him on the harm he is causing and to help use his privilege for good instead of bringing others down. steve42382 (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- I'd appreciate it if you engaged in conversation with me personally about my actions instead of beating around the bush and calling it "harassment". And I would implore you to not bring up off-wiki matters yet again, especially with the framing wording you're using. My contributions are not through a "personal lens", it's through an encyclopedic lens. The Women in Red are a very well-respected group on the encyclopedia and they seem to fit with a lot of what your project is trying to accomplish - maybe project leadership should look at reaching out to them. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 13:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- You have shown through multiple off-wikipedia matters that you are uninterested in learning how your personal bias is affecting your approach. Your entire recent edit history is 100% only things that have come up through our campaign. I'd love to legitimately discuss the issues of bias, privilege, and white male supremacy with you but as friends have tried to do you continue to focus on the content of your edits instead of the negative energy behind them. If you'd like to have a discussion for real and be open to hearing how your actions affect others I'm all for it but I'm not going to get into it anymore with you directly unless it's a real conversation as I wasn't happy with the way it went down the first time on instagram both with how I responded and with how you reacted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve42382 (talk • contribs)
- I have moved relevant discussion to WP:ANI. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 13:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Steve, please be patient with things. And may I also suggest that your read Wikipedia:Advocacy. Seeking to "discuss the issues of bias, privilege, and white male supremacy" with someone in the manner which you imply is going to come across as incredibly patronizing (and if you imply that someone is personally exhibiting issues of "white male supremacy" without providing solid evidence, that's going to be interpreted as a WP:PersonalAttack and you may very well be banned for it). Speaking in a broad sense (I'm not trying to address the specifics of your above dispute), most everyone on Wikipedia is aware of the fact that we have content gaps that affect certain people and places, some of which we can fix (through intentional editing efforts) and some of which we cannot (e.g. there is a lack of sources from which to generate content). While users on Wikipedia are obligated to be civil, respectful, and offer sound reasoning for their edits, users can usually choose to edit about whatever topics they wish. Someone who spends their entire time writing about, say, European politicians of the 19th century, is probably doing very little in the way of countering systemic bias. But the act of writing articles on powerful European white guys is not in and of itself wrong or condemnable, and is simply a part of the encyclopedia being improved. Lecturing someone for doing such because you think they could devote more time to other things is going to get you nowhere. The beauty of that is that if you want to spend all your time writing about notable minority ultimate players, you are free to do so. If someone questions an article you write on a minority person for lacking notability, you can quickly resolve their concerns by giving them reliable sources about the person that demonstrates their notability (saying you are countering systemic bias is not enough).
- I spend most of my time on African topics, which are pitifully under-covered on Wikipedia. I've been able to be productive in this area by sticking to reliable sources and focusing on the content. I'd like it if more people wrote about African stuff, but it's not my job to goad them into doing so and accusing others of having bad motives would only distract me from my own work. I say this to demonstrate that it is very much possible to write about the content of which one cares without much trouble. Once you and your fellow project mates get a better handle of our technical processes and things like sourcing I'm sure things will smooth out. But please, PLEASE do not insinuate people who disagree with you are doing so because they have a white supremacy problem. Best of luck. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Dominique Fontenette moved to draftspace edit
An article you recently created, Dominique Fontenette, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Please note 100% of the sources are "in-universe" publications about Ultimate. There is nothing resembling a presumption of notability for either the sport or people who play it. John from Idegon (talk) 02:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
SWVP ANI closure follow-up edit
Hello. You are receiving this message because you are listed as a project facilitator for The Sports Wiki Visibility Project, as per the Wikimedia Foundation project page. The following message has been sent to all Visibility Project facilitators.
In light of the recent closure of an administrators noticeboard thread regarding my actions in relation to the Visibility Project, I wanted to make a further effort to bridge any questions that anybody may have regarding my Wikipedia actions. I have an interest in helping ultimate's presence grow on Wikipedia by adding more notable, well-sourced content, and it seems like that intersects a fair amount with the goals of the Visibility Project. In a little time, I will resume working in the ultimate topic area, some of which may include activity on pages that the Visibility Project has claimed. If you have any questions about my editing, the reasoning behind it, or any questions about Wikipedia in general, you can reply below or leave a message at my user talk page. My user talk page is open for any members of the Visibility Project to ask questions about Wikipedia-related topics. Again, I want to state my commitment to bridging any perceived gaps that may remain between Visibility Project members and myself, so please take this message as a genuine offer to try and mend what may seem right now is a broken fence.
Thank you, Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 19:36, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Washington DC Scandal edit
Hello, Steve42382. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Washington DC Scandal".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Dominique Fontenette edit
Hello, Steve42382. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dominique Fontenette".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Dominique Fontenette edit
Hello, Steve42382. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dominique Fontenette".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:46, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Category:Western Ultimate League Teams has been nominated for merging edit
Category:Western Ultimate League Teams has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)