User talk:WereSpielChequers/Archive 27

Home

Bling

Content

Userboxen

Editcount

Talk

Guestbook

Email

This is my archive for threads from 2016 that mainly relate to deletion.

Zoerecords

I deleted Zoerecords as G11 spam, previously deleted by @Graeme Bartlett: as A7, G11 spam and G12 copyright. It was contested by UserZoerecords123 It is my company profile and I want people to watch our history in wikipedia. I blocked the editor under the user name policy and the creator User:Shahzadbrohi123 as a sockpuppet. I've deleted User:Dele 123/sandbox and blocked the account for the same reasons. I notice you were the last editor of the sandboxed text, so as I thought I should let you know what's happening, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:03, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I'm fairly sure Dele 123 didn't actually turn up at Sunday's London meetup - everyone there being someone I know or talked to. But if they had I would have been in a position to tell them what was wrong with their sandbox. ϢereSpielChequers 16:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Question related to revdel under RD1

Hello. I see you are willing to handle revdel requests, so I have a question for you. Under RD1, it says that the action can't be performed if it would remove a attribution to an edit by an non-infringing user. My question is whether or not this applies if deleting all the revisions would result in no difference between the ones before and after the deletion. See The One with the Thumb. After deleting all the revisions I requested, there is no change between the revisions and no way to view the infringing ones. Because there is no change, is no attribution required? And if RD1 is not valid, are instances where the only edits by non-infringing users were bot edits also invalidate RD1? -©2016 Compassionate727^{(Talk)(Contributions)} 14:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

RD1 is copyright isn't it? I'm afraid that is one area I rarely get involved in. There may for all I know be such a rule there, but my involvement is more about removing gross BLP violations. I usually leave copyright to those who specialise in the area. Sorry I can't help you. ϢereSpielChequers 15:57, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks anyway. -©2016 Compassionate727^{(Talk)(Contributions)} 13:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

NPP /' AfC

Just a reminder that in just over a week at Wikimania there's going to be a cross-Wiki discussion about the systems of control of new pages. This is a round-table rather than a presentation or a lecture. On the agenda are reforms to the new article reviewing systems and ways to help new users better understand our content policies. If you are going to Italy and would like to take part, please check out the conference schedule, and I look forward to seeing you there. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry I can't make Italy. Might be able to Skype in if that's possible. ϢereSpielChequers 18:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

A1/A3

Hi, how long should I normally wait before tagging an article for A1 or A3? I've tried to tone down the usage of it since the feedback but I'd like an estimate on how long to wait. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It depends on who you ask, but WP:NPP recommends 10 to 15 minutes. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 20:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Compassionate727, yes 10-15 minutes is a compromise figure that most people can live with. We don't know how many newbies get bitten by edit conflicts after creating their first article, but the longer we can delay the first tag the more likely we are to get that second edit saved. ϢereSpielChequers 08:19, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Waseem Tarar

I have checked the article Waseem Tarar references provided for this article. Most of the references are not valid. for example the reference provided for like the death threats is a general one. Tarar name is not mentioned in that news. Only few articles of this journalist are published but in local Urdu newspapers. His profile is present on Journalism Pakistan website. Any one can place his details on Journalism Pakistan that is not a trustworthy site. Tarar Media corporation has no website. The website provided is a type of blog having no opinion and editorial section. we never heard of this media group in Pakistan. Its Facebook and twitter accounts are not reachable. In my opinion someone has very professionally tricked with Wikipedia. Sneha Hurrain (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi Snehahurrain, It has been tagged for deletion. ϢereSpielChequers 21:23, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Carnforth

Hi Killer Moff

Ref your comment:

"Hello, Carnforth. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Elaine Kazimierczuk, for deletion because it's a biography of a living person that lacks references. If you don't want Elaine Kazimierczuk to be deleted, please add a reference to the article." The article I just created on Elaine Kazimierczuk doesn't contain references but she is a published author and the ISBN numbers are verifiable. The web is not 100% pervasive and worthwhile things exist that do not (currently) have online references to support them. Which is why I created the article!

It isn't a 'biography' page as I understand the term and there are other similar pages on Wikipedia that lack references.

So, I respectfully request that you do not delete the article.

Best

Carnforth — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carnforth (talk • contribs) 15:33, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Following up on a revdel you did earlier today

I see you were involved with Cleolinda Jones earlier today; the IP attempted to re-add the allegations and I rejected the pending change, but you may want to revdel it. I am not sure what warning to give the IP since there appears to be a "source", just an unreliable and highly subjective one. Thanks for your help and any thoughts! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 17:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Juliet, I've revdeled it again and dropped a note to the IP. If that doesn't work I can semiprotect the article. ϢereSpielChequers 20:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:WikiProject Honduras

A tag has been placed on Template:WikiProject Honduras requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page's talk page, where you can 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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 19:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Input on article

I'd be interested in your thoughts on the entry for George C. Weir. It seems notable enough to me, but it's been nominated for deletion and I would welcome your input. Thanks.--YHoshua (talk) 16:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi YHoshua, military bios are usually for people who have achieved a certain rank or won certain medals. I don't know how significant that chaps medal is, but it doesn't seem a big part of the article. Most of the current article is material that would fit in an article about the plane which may well be notable, or the general who certainly is. I've tagged the talkpage for the MILHIST wikiproject, that might attract the attention of people who specialise in that subject. ϢereSpielChequers 16:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)