User talk:78.26/archive2018-1

Happy New Year!

	Happy New Year!
	A happy, healthy and peaceful 2018 to you! We hope (talk) 00:31, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks We hope. A happy new year to you also. Also well-wishes to all who dropped by for the holiday season. Apologies that I was mostly inactive for the latter part of December. Just busy with my many blessings, starting with my family. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

Muboshgu

Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned

None

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

• The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
• The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration

• Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Alex Shih, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, Worm That Turned.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Request on 15:37:31, 4 January 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Passportgang

• Passportgang (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:B-Nasty discography (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hey 78.26, Just in regards to the B-Nasty discography, the album on the discography contains multiple artists on wikipedia. I had a few other references other then discogs, and imdb & apple. Digital Journal seems to be a decent source, I also have found another reference. would this help? I've worked on a few discography articles before and I've seen less references this this.

What else would need to be added? I was going to create the artists wikipedia profile after his discography unsigned post by Passportgang 15:48, 4 January 2018.

Update, the artist also has Authority Control such as a VIAF ID and so forth. Passportgang (talk) 15:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC) Hi Passportgang! Thanks for writing. Usually a discography doesn't require as stringent notability requirements, but that is because the notability of the artist is firmly established. Since notability hasn't been established yet, then WP:N would be needed to support the discography. Beware of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. My recommendation would be to create the article about the artist first, and add the discography to the artist's article, unless the discography is so extensive that leaving it in the article would make the article unreadable. As it stands, I don't think it would. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for that 78.26 I have these articles. http://www.cleveland19.com/story/37184633/hip-hop-sensation-b-nasty-to-feature-in-wu-invasion-mixtape-series & http://amnplify.com.au/portfolio-items/b-nasty-the-end-of-the-beginning-album-review/ would this provide notability? for the discography and also be a good reference for the artist? i've already added them to the discography. should I resubmit?

also I have another question, so the artist has links to them from other discographies, does this help with notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passportgang (talk • contribs) 16:00, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Conrad Thibault

I appreciate your note about my contributions to Conrad Thibault. I didn't know anything about him until I ran across his name when I was doing research for The Gibson Family article. I noticed the lack of inline citations, so I made a note to go back later to try to supply some citations. Some of the sources that I added inline were already listed under "Sources", but fortunately I was able to find some additional information. I was especially glad to discover information about his first wife and add it to the article. Eddie Blick (talk) 21:56, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Teblick: Yes, I wrote that article very early in my Wikipedia "career", and I didn't know how to utilize inline citations yet. Some of the sources are no longer available to me, unfortunately. I was very glad to see the article so vastly improved. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:59, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't realize that you were the article's creator. I recently completed my fourth year of work on Wikipedia, and I have learned so much (about both Wikipedia and various subjects) over that span. Much of the credit goes to you and We hope for your help in my early days, when I often became frustrated, thinking that I would never get the knack of how this system functioned. You two were the ones who taught me and encouraged me to keep at it, and I greatly appreciate the help that both of you gave me. Eddie Blick (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Those are very kind words, thank you. Of course, it has reached the point where I should be asking you for advice. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Kind sirs-may I slide down the Wikipedia firepole to offer you some free "gifts" at no cost to you? :) PD photo of Conrad Thibault and some other cite-able information about him? Before his singing career, he was a store floorwalker. He did quite a few radio shows-Manhattan Merry Go Round was one of them, and went on to "The Tent Show" from "Gibson". he was also active in some trade organizations related to music and had taken a Hollywood screen test. No idea why he never went into film. There was a late 1940's television program he was a regular on, but this is sketchy re: details right now. Have more "freebie" photos of him and some for the Gibson show, so am not neglecting anyone. :-D We hope (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, getting around to this much later than anticipated. Apparently he wasn't just a singer, he had significant acting roles on at least two shows. Interesting. Thanks as always for your sleuthing, We hope! Should I put anything more than a PD-Pre1978 on it? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Cher

I am confused why you named me in a edit summary. Cher does have native American ancestry. I was somewhat surprised she was never categorized as such. Last time I checked the Armenians are an extinct race. Some mixed breeds such as Cher survive. Remember her song , "Half-breed"?--Wlmg (talk) 03:36, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

@Wlmg:, my edit summary is because I reverted to your version. And I'm confused by your question. She has Armenian ancestry through her father, but Armenians are not an extinct race, you might ask the people living in Armenia. It is not a Native American tribe. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:51, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Please do not patronize me. Not a native American tribe lol. The remaining armenians of the diaspora are of mixed blood (such as Cher) synonymous with an extinct nation to be more accurate. The so-called Armenian state was a Soviet invention to annoy the Turks. We are done here. And on a personal note ur ok as an admin. Wlmg (talk) 11:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

My intent was not at all to patronize, and I deeply regret I communicated in such a way it could be construed as such. The short of it is that I reverted what I perceived to be an ethnic-warrior, your edit was great, and Twinkle includes, in the edit summary, the name of the editor whose version of the article was restored. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Past deleted article was recreated

This article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himalayan_Meditation_and_Yoga_Sadhana_Mandir was deleted very recently, see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rishu_Shukla#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_Himalayan_Meditation_and_Yoga_Sadhana_Mandir and here: https://xtools.wmflabs.org/pages/en.wikipedia.org/Rishu%20Shukla and the user recreated the article again right away the next day. What is the point of deleting articles if they are recreated right away?

Response at User talk:Jimfbleak. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:28, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hello, 78.26 Jonhmethar (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jonhmethar: How very kind, thank you!

NPP Backlog Drive Appreciation

		Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		For completing at least 100 reviews during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive please accept this Special Edition Barnstar. Thank you for helping out at New Page Patrol! There is still work to do to meet our long term goals, so I hope you will continue your great work. Cheers! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

		Rack and pinion
		For maintaining a streak of at least 25 reviews per week during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog drive, you are awarded the rack and pinion. Thanks for your contributions and keep up the good work! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

B-Nasty article

Hey 78.26, I heeded your advice, would you be able to go through and check out the article for Draft:B-Nasty, I believe all the references are correct, in terms of notability he had an article with themusic.com.au that is one of the most popular magazines in australia. Just looking for your blessings before send it off for a submission. Thank You! Passportgang (talk) 05:57, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't submit this yet. Please read WP:RELIABLE and WP:INDEPENDENT. It's not my job to go through every one of these sources, but there are some issues. Yes, the "theMusic" source looks good, to a limited extent because the source contains so little information. However, the next sources are problematical. TripleJ is user generated, I could go there and leave a review. It is not a reliable source. The RTRFM site looks like it was generated by the artist's public relations people. It also looks like a directory listing, which does not provide in-depth coverage about the subject. Even more of a problem are sources #4 and #5, which don't support the claims at all. #4 says nothing about meeting Bangs, and #5 has nothing at all to do with Barnes. When an experienced editor sees this, they will think "This subject is not notable, because the submitter is using links to reliable sources, but the sources don't back up the claims and don't mention the subject. The submitter must be desperate." The WENY link is very obviously a PR release, so it is not independent of the subject. If it wasn't obvious enough from the content, the disclaimer at the bottom "Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider" is proof. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 07:51, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Request for deleted page copy - Siteimprove

Hi 78.26,

I recently updated Siteimprove's Wiki page, but all changes were rejected because I am from the organization. I was unaware of the rule that usernames associated with an organization are blocked from editing, unfortunately. Is there any way you can help me recover the updates I made? All updates were informational, and I did my best to steer clear of anything promotional or "sales-y". I spent several hours on these updates (i.e. gathering citations, listing awards). It would be much appreciated if I can recover that work, at the very least for other content uses.

Thank you in advance! SiteimproveWW (talk) 16:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

You changes were not deleted, they were reverted. If you click on the articles "View history" tab, you can see any previous version. That said, please do pay attention to the conflict of intest guidelines. My recommendation is that you not directly edit this article, but make edit suggestions on the talk page, so that uninvolved editors can review them for neutrality. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:46, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
• Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

• A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardized editnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

model united nations

i would like you to suggest me how not get my work declined ??Dhvan (talk) 18:06, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Albert Methfessel

Hello! Your submission of Albert Methfessel at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Zaid Ali

Re: Draft:Zaid Ali. This person is not notable. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zaid Ali (2nd nomination), which is mentioned on my comment at the draft. I don't believe giving false hope to a user is beneficial to anyone. Nihlus 20:49, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I reviewed that AfD before I reviewed the AfC submission, and I'm not sure the person is non-notable. Yes, I am also aware of the lengthy deletion log, and that it is currently salted (which I agree with). On the other hand, that is an awful lot of you-tube followers. I have a feeling there may be good non-English sources. Nonetheless the sources used must be better than those provided, I hope I was unambiguous about that. Thank you for your input. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Close as "no consensus" at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Jacob

You have to provide far more detail to justify a "no consensus" at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Jacob, if indeed a "no consensus" can be justified. All of the keep votes directly addressed the sourcing as passing WP:GNG or referenced other votes that directly supported the claim. Votes such as "Delete: failed politician bio", "Delete The people voting keep have confused widespread coverage of the election including incidental coverage of the candidates with actual widespread coverage of the individual." and "Delete - no notability outside the election... which he lost. Fails npol." all fail to address WP:GNG. The article had been expanded after the nomination, and the shift in voting after the article was relisted on February 17 and its expansion was overwhelmingly in favor of retention.

Your "no consensus" close seems to contradict the consensus reached at the discussion. Alansohn (talk) 16:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

@Alansohn: Three points first. 1: you're right, I owe more detail. 2: Judging consensus is just that, a judgement. I can, have been, and will be wrong on occasion. That said, re-reading the discussion I come to the same conclusion, which is "no consensus" resulting in a de-facto "keep". There isn't a "Week keep" or "60% keep" such that the article renders itself in a shade of gray to the reader. 3. If I had "!voted", I would have voted "keep" because I do believe it satisfies GNG, and that the losing major-party candidate for a national seat is probably inherently encyclopedic. Now, for my reasoning: The discussion involves much more than a mere "GNG", the discussion also involves "what is appropriate for an encyclopedia". Those who said "Meets GNG" have a strong case, but didn't clearly indicate the coverage was more than local. (Yes, I saw the local interest piece from India). On the other hand, neither did I see Bearcat's arguments completely refuted, and here it becomes an interpretation of what is appropriate for this encyclopedia. I discounted arguments that coverage for a politician must transcend his political activities. (I write articles about musicians, and coverage often almost solely on their musical activities, that's what they do and what makes them notable.) However, if all coverage is about a single election, it was argued that the topic is not notable outside that election. It was also suggested that many of the sources were not independent of the candidate, but instead were mere spins of the candidate's message. These points were not refuted, although in my opinion they probably could have been, and there had been no further discussion for nearly a whole day. Therefore I have come to the "no consensus" conclusion. Thank you for your input, it is always welcome here. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:51, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

Lourdes†

AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V

† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

• The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
• Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
• A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
• A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

• CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
• The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.

Obituaries

• Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. With 53 contestants qualifying, the groups for round 2 are slightly smaller than usual, with the two leaders from each group due to qualify for round 3 as well as the top sixteen remaining users.

Our top scorers in round 1 were:

• Aoba47 led the field with a featured article, 8 good articles and 42 GARs, giving a total of 666 points.
• FrB.TG , a WikiCup newcomer, came next with 600 points, gained from a featured article and masses of bonus points.
• Ssven2, another WikiCup newcomer, was in third place with 403 points, garnered from a featured article, a featured list, a good article and twelve GARs.
• Ceranthor, Numerounovedant, Carbrera, Farang Rak Tham and Cartoon network freak all had over 200 points, but like all the other contestants, now have to start again from scratch. A good achievement was the 193 GARs performed by WikiCup contestants, comparing very favourably with the 54 GAs they achieved.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Vanamonde (talk) 15:27, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Re: Draft:Nestor Mesta Chayres - Biography of a noted Mexican Romantic Tenor who recorded for Decca and RCA Victor

Ciao 78.26 I have enjoyed learning of your editorial efforts as a Master Editor for Wikipedia and your interest in the Wikiproject Articles for Creation. Perhaps if you have some free time you might assist in the process of moving Draft:Nestor Mesta Chayres from draft space to the main page space in the days ahead? The article appears to be ready for a final review by an experienced Master Editor such as yourself. It might also be possible to link the article on Wikidata to es:Nestor Mesta Chayreson the Spanish Wikipedia (See Wikidata Q50293161) and it:Néstor Mesta Chaires on the Italian Wikipeda (See Wikidata Q20006068). Many thanks in advance for your thoughtful consideration and best wishes for your continued Editorial Success in the future. With best regards-- PS This noted romantic singer recorded extensively for Decca Records and RCA Victor-- you can sample some of his outstanding performances on Archive.org here Nestor Mesta Chayres on Archive.org Enjoy!! 104.207.219.150 (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Oh wow, what a delightful surprise! This is clearly a notable topic, as demonstrated by the references. I'd suggest you re-format the discography to distinguish between albums and singles. It is also not clear how they are organized, as it is neither alphabetical nor chronological. That is a small nitpick. I'm moving this beauty to mainspace, since I've checked it for copyright violations. There are none, just song titles match. I encourage you to register an account, and hope to see many more contributions for you going forward! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 22:40, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Ciao 78.26 Many thanks for your prompt reply and thoughtful comments. As per your insightful suggestion, I shall alphabetize the Discography section of this article since it is currently presented in the reverse order of the known recording date posted for each 78 ROM - a somewhat cumbersome formulation. During the course of the last 12 years I have contributed to the development of various articles for Wikipedia predominately in the areas of Musical artists and Ballet. I hope to draft several new articles about leading vocalists from the 1940s who also recorded for RCA Victor and Decca in the USA but are also now largely ignored. I shall attempt to forward them to you for a final review in the days ahead. In the meantime you might also enjoy listening to the music of that era as conducted by Alfredo Antonini and his CBS Orchestra on Archive.org here Alfredo Antonini performes on Archive.org Once again many thanks for your kind assistance. I shall keep in touch - With best regards 104.207.219.150 (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC)PS

@104.207.219.150: Keep in mind my user name, I am VERY interested in the topics you propose. Let me know how I can help. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 00:38, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Re: Wiki-stress

Thanks for your kind words and your concern in the message you posted on my talk page today. The warning that caused me to worry was in the reply to this post at the Teahouse, specifically, "Stop reverting, since you could be blocked for edit warring." I don't want to risk losing my privileges on Wikipedia just because of a disagreement over the use of the word "The".

I probably should not have raised the question on the Teahouse anyway. Eddie Blick (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

I appreciate your follow-up reply on my talk page and the comment you posted on the article's talk page. Having your support and that of another editor there means a lot. Thank you! Eddie Blick (talk) 16:39, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Albert Methfessel

On 7 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Albert Methfessel, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while his parents wanted him to serve in the church, Albert Methfessel pursued his interest in music, becoming a key figure in German folk and male voice singing in the 19th century? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Albert Methfessel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Albert Methfessel), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Neutrality

• [1]

Please look at wiki data who edit it to link to something else .Did you have a chance to look at in while it was link to the wrong version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk) 17:01, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

• Thita_Manitkul

English? Sry85 deleted her Thai Wikipedia And Using the Wrong English Version intentionally.How can the person who is not neutrality in politic be writing Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk)

I'm afraid you'll have to be more clear. I don't see where the Thai article was deleted, nor do I see that the English version is non-neutral. The tags added by Sry85 in October 2017 are no longer on the article, but spot-checking Sry85's edits I don't see a particular political bias. What is the problem that you want assistance with? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 11:47, 7 March 2018

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/805876910

http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Plenary_Highlights_APPAN.pdf

http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/copy = UNDP4/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Plenary_Highlights_APPAN.pdf

Copy from front pages of google =UNDP-APPAN Workshop on - Office of the Ombudsman PDF www.ombudsman.gov.ph › 2013/01 › Pl... (Member of the National Assembly, Lao PDR), Congresswoman Cynthia A. Villar. (Member of the House of Representatives, Philippines' Lone District of Las Piñas. City), Lt. Col. Thitiya Rangsitpol (Member of ... 1][dead link] ^ [2][dead link] ^ http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/we-content/upload/2013/01/Plenary Highlights APPAN.pdf[dead link]

[1][dead link] ^ [2][dead link] ^ http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/we-content/upload/2013/01/Plenary Highlights APPAN.pdf[dead link] ^ [3][dead link]

The link from Wikipedia What he did was they change url and put the page of the politians for deletion because they did not have authorized in English. If they can not delete it they try to unlink from English language or put something else into the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk) 16:51, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

I am still not entirely sure what point you're trying to make. What action do you want taken? The copied speech has already been removed. I have no ability to change what goes on at the Thai edition wikipedia. The topic is notable, but copyright violations are not allowed here. Regarding bias, it is coming on strong from all sides. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:23, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Same Person

The article with dead link would not be approved in the beginning .

Then a person said the link is dead and a page should be deleted .

Nobody found the evidence the culprit must have known how to do it.

https://th.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B4%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A8%E0%B8%A9:%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%A1&type=delete&page=%3A%E0%B8%90%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%8F%E0%B8%B2_%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%A5

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/805876910 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk) 16:12, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Please Connect English and Thai Version it has been disconnected again

Would you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nafeby633 (talk • contribs) 12:22, 5 May 2018 (UTC) Thita_Manitkul https://th.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%9C%E0%B8%B9%E0%B9%89%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%8A%E0%B9%89:22sep/%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2 https://th.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B4%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A8%E0%B8%A9:ZeroRatedMobileAccess&from=%E0%B8%9C%E0%B8%B9%E0%B9%89%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%8A%E0%B9%89:22sep/%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B0%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2&to=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thita_Manitkul Thita Manitkul

https://th.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%82%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%8A_%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%A5 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sukavich_Rangsitpol

How to do multiple languages and upload photo https://www.flickr.com/photos/148083379@N08/sets/72157683102323300/

The Link

The link on your page is still ok ,please go to this page the link are all dead . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.171.97.171 (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Re - Draft:Juan Arvizu - noted Lyrica Tenor from Mexico and accomplished recording artist for RCA Victor

Ciao 78.26- As promised I'm sending along another draft article of a highly acclaimed Mexican Lyric Tenor who recorded extensively for RCA Victor in both North and South America. Whenever you have some free time in the weeks ahead, I would welcome your expert editorial insight as well as any assitance which you could provide in moving the page from the draft space into the main page space on English Wikipedia (in so far as most of the primary source material is derived from the Spanish Wikipedia at es:Juan Arvizu. Many thanks once again for your kind assistance and I hope that you enjoy this musician's recording legacy on Archive.org. I'll keep in touch with an additional draft article in the weeks ahead. Ciao104.207.219.150 (talk) 01:39, 9 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Ciao 78.26 Many thanks for your prompt reply. I am deeply grateful for your thoughtful and timely editorial insights. I am in complete agreement with each of your editorial suggestions and insights! The The text references to "From that moment on Juan Arvizu knew only great success" and references to "moving composition" are derived exclusively from the translated text found on the article es:Juan Arvizu. I was also somewhat reluctant to incorporate these passages into the draft article during the course of translating it. With your permission, I shall eliminate those passages entirely from the draft. As for the reference to "Albums" as opposed to 78rpm records-- kindly excuse the blunder -- I shall correct that reference as well, As for your suggestion to include the article in the WP:DYK|Do You Know... process, I shall be happy to leave that matter entirely in your expert editorial hands in the hope that this artist's obvious and profound musical gifts are shared with our fellow readers and researchers around the world. Feel free to keep me posted on an additional modifications which you might wish me to execute prior to nominating the article for inclusion on the main page and thanks once again for your thoughtful assistance. As always With best regards 104.207.219.150 (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2018 (UTC)PS

104.207.219.150 (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Ciao 78.26 -- I've completed the implementation of your suggested corrections. I've also inserted a filmography section for ease of reference. Good luck with the final review! With best regards 104.207.219.150 (talk) 17:20, 9 March 2018 (UTC)PS104.207.219.150 (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Re:Filmography: Great idea! I may not get around to "officially" reviewing this for a couple of days, but I'll be shocked if I don't move this to mainspace within a week. Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:49, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Ciao 78.26 -- No problem -- take as much time as required-- I'll keep in touch in a few weeks with another potential biography about a leading Latin vocalist from Puerto Rico -- In the meantime stay well104.207.219.150 (talk) 01:15, 10 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Replying on 104's talk page 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Ciao 78.26 Many thanks once again for your editorial suggestions. I've implemented them and hope that they are acceptable. Keep me posted with any additional recommendations. With bet regards 104.207.219.150 (talk) 00:33, 15 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Ciao 78.26 Many thanks once again for your prompt reply--I've included the External Link to "the Strachwitz Frontera Collection in the draft as per your recommendations. Thanks for the tip! I've also cleaned up a few odds and ends in the reference links which are now imbedded throughout the draft. I hope this helps. Let me know if I may be of any additional assistance and thanks again for your suggestions. With best wishes 104.207.219.150 (talk) 16:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Ciao 78.26 --Thanks again for the reply. As per your question regarding the dates presented in the discography section - I'm not quite certain how to reply in so far as the dates are largely derived from references found on Archive.org which presents them as "Publication Dates". That is the only additional information that I can find due no doubt to the age of the recordings. I hoe that helps. Ciao104.207.219.150 (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)PS

@104.207.219.150: OK. Archive.org uses dates from the discography sites "Discography of American Historical Recordings" and the "Online Discographical Project" (78discography.com). Those two sites give recording dates (in general). It appears the dates found on Biblioteca Nacional de España are issue dates, but I'm not sure. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Re: Draft:Elsa Miranda - noted Puerto Rican vocalist from the Golden Age of Radio who recorded for RCA Victor and Columbia

Ciao 78.26 - Just a quick note to express my gratitude for your inspirational and outstanding editorial assistance with the article Juan Arvizu. I sincerely appreciate your thoughtful and timely recommendations for improving the article and including it within Wikipedia mainpage space with such professionalism! Many Thanks. When you have some extra time in the weeks ahead you might also take a look at Draft:Elsa Miranda - While she was not nearly as prolific as Juan Arvizu, she did perform with several leading orchestra/band conductors (such as Alfredo Antonini, Xavier Cugat and Desi Arnaz). In addition, she also appeared in several films as well as television promotions. I hope that you find the draft to be interesting. Naturally, I shall be happy to implement any modifications which you might recommend in the event that the subject material is suitable. THanks once again for your kind and thoughtful assistance. With best wishes 104.207.219.150 (talk) 00:28, 17 March 2018 (UTC)PS

Thanks for friends

I am happy for you Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by True009 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Request on 02:27:15, 27 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Lilsuzie211

• Lilsuzie211 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Jacob Meyers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear , I am not so sure why this is going on because that was just a preview of what i submitted to show what its going to be like. P.S. you have a billion article with one sentence and I am very disappointed in Wikipedia and I would like my draft submmited

Lilsuzie211 (talk) 02:27, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lilsuzie211: You did submit your draft. It is not an encyclopedia article. This is an encyclopedia. It is not Facebook, Linkedin, MySpace, or Twitter. Can you be more specific about what your topic is about, and why it should have an encyclopedia article? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:57, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Anthony Acevedo

On 29 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anthony Acevedo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mexican-American Holocaust survivor Anthony Acevedo mixed snow and urine with the ink of his pen to ensure he could maintain his concentration-camp diary? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anthony Acevedo. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Anthony Acevedo), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marko_Milutinovi%C4%87

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marko_Milutinovi%C4%87

I believe that this article should be reinstated.

OFK BEOGRAD is a professional football club — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelMimi (talk • contribs) 03:21, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marko Milutinović, consensus was clear that the article should be deleted. If you think I have mis-judged consensus at the discussion, you may file a report at Wikipedia:Deletion review. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

• Op-ed: Death knell for The Signpost?

• News and notes: Wiki Conference roundup and new appointments.

• Arbitration report: Ironing out issues in infoboxes; not sure yet about New Jersey; and an administrator who probably wasn't uncivil to a sockpuppet.

• In the media: The media on Wikipedia's workings: the good and not-so-good

• Traffic report: Real sports, real women and an imaginary country: what's on top for Wikipedia readers

• Featured content: Animals, Ships, and Songs

• Technology report: Timeless skin review by Force Radical.

• Special report: ACTRIAL wrap-up.

• Humour: WikiWorld Reruns

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Sheik Ali

I don't understand your decision. The sources are casual mentions which don't establish notability. There's nothing substantive, and one source is noted as having a major COI issue. Could you explain further please? 101.189.113.1 (talk) 23:49, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

That was your argument, yes, but it wasn't consensus. There were several sources given which contained substantial coverage. The book was written by someone with close relation, yes, but the magazine does not have a COI, and that magazine called the topic a major figure. Overall the strength of the "keep" arguments was stronger. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:49, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

If he was a major figure where was the substantive coverage? None of the sources were substantive. Prove that they were. The strength of the "Keep" arguments was weak and I still don't get why you called them what they aren't. No consistency between the claims and the actual coverage. 101.189.113.1 (talk) 04:23, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry but your decision was wrong. If anything it was "no consensus". The IP is correct and unless I am missing something it is my intention to nominate this again. The sources noted are extraordinarily weak and frankly look rather unreliable, and I am not referring to the conflict of interest source, which is totally unreliable as it is a vanity publication by the subject's son. In fact I suggest that his kayfabe identity appears to have garnered something of a mythical legend nature, to which professional wrestling is subject from the time this person wrestled. This person is not notable and I realise I need to wait but unless something changes I will be nominating this again for deletion. Addicted4517 (talk) 10:00, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

It should be noted that my decision is based on consensus of the discussion, I did not go through each source myself and then decide to keep, because that would have been a Wikipedia:Supervote. But since I'm getting so much grief over it OK, let's go through the sources and see how I would have !voted if I had done so. The very first one is published by a governmental source in Australia. While this does not give hugely detailed information, it does say he became a popular figure across Australia. It then references a 1998 publication to support this claim. It is presumable that this 1998 book, which is not available online, contains significant coverage of Sheik Ali. This is a very strong indication of notability, but not proof. The second source is indeed unreliable, as it is user generated. This source (onlineworldofwrestling.com) should probably be removed. The third source (alhs.org.au) is a historical society. They are reviewing a book made by Ali's son, yes, but they use more than his book to write the profile of Ali. Again, this is a 1997 book (by Smith, York, Milano) that is not available online, but is clearly a reliable source (the Australian Broadcasting Company). Another strong indication of notability. I am unsure of the fourth citation (ABC blogs). If the blog is written by Australian Broadcasting Company staff, and not users, then it would be another indication of notability. Since I can't see the content, I will ignore it. The next source (manspacemagazine.com.au) is indeed a casual mention, although it is clearly independent, it seems to indicate that most (Australian) readers would recognize the name as one of the top wrestlers of the era. There is a half page on Ali in Hornbaker's book. This is independent and reliable. I'm not even through the references on the page, and this person has at this point clearly met the notability standards. But I shall continue. The next source (wrestlingdata.com) is to be ignored, it is a directory listing, and I'm not going to bother to see if it is reliable. I don't think there's anything here that can't be found elsewhere. The Easton book further establishes notability. The Sen book is a casual mention and does not strengthen the already-established notability per WP:GNG. Same for Berry's book. I'm not sure exactly where the Johnson/Oliver/Mooneyham book mentions him, so this is discounted regarding notability. Now moving on to the sources in the deletion discussion. The first specifically mentioned by FloridaArmy is already in the article. The second (Arab Observer) is not, gives significant information, and there is a fourth source that establishes notability. Given the pre-internet time period, the level of notability stated by reliable sources, it seems extremely likely that most of the sources for this person exist offline. So, if I had !voted, I would have voted keep without any qualms. Thank you for your concern, and happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:42, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

I am going to respond to this in full on the talk page of the article and I think it would be inappropriate to do so here. Addicted4517 (talk) 13:39, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Request on 15:28:49, 30 March 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by MT wKaplan

• MT wKaplan (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Kaplan Test Prep (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello! You recently reviewed my submission for a new article for Kaplan Test Prep at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kaplan_Test_Prep

You comment was "Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Kaplan, Inc. instead."

I wanted to clarify that Kaplan Test Prep is actually a subdivision of Kaplan, Inc. All of Kaplan, Inc.'s subdivisions have their own Wikipedia pages, so I'd like to bring Kaplan Test Prep into alignment with that. (As seen in the Graham Holdings Company infobox at

MT wKaplan (talk) 15:28, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

• Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
• Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
• The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
• The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

• A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Cetra redux

I looked last night...I don't think my father has any of the Cetra Verdis after all. Not on LP, at any rate - he might have a couple of them remastered on CD. A lot of the more obscure stuff he has, including a number of the more off-the-wall Donizetti scores (hey, check out Il duca d'Alba, or whatever it is), is on MRF. Looks like they were released from the 50s on. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:40, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: Any Pre-1949 release would have to be on 78rpm (my specialty), of course. I'm afraid I'm not familiar with MRF Records (or precisely what that abbreviation stands for), although I could be having a slow day. All my Cetra discs are 78rpm, and were probably imported to the US by the Sorias (except for a pop disc, which came to the US by who-knows-what means), before they started the Cetra-Soria label. I have Cetra-Soria discs in both 78rpm and LP format. The LPs were pressed by Columbia. I received these when given a large operatic/classical record collection which was assembled by a vocal coach over a period of thirty years. I adore obscure material, and know I would thoroughly enjoy listening to your father's collection. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I couldn't find much about MRF with a cursory Google search. My sense is that it was one of a number of labels that repackaged obscure material from the European market for distribution to Americans. There were others - I've seen mention of a label called "Voce", for instance, that released some of the same performances for sale. (Another one of which my father owns a few.) They were fairly no-frills; the libretto booklets, though reasonably extensive (they have plot information, some background, and a text, as well as performer bios) look privately made, as if they involved a typewriter and a home press. It's possible that they were high-end pirate recordings, though I'm not sure. I know a lot of them involve well-regarded performers (Virginia Zeani and Nicola Rossi-Lemini figure in a few, as I recall). It seems that many were issued to capitalize on the resurgence of interest in Donizetti in the 50s, and for a long while some were the only available recordings of some of his really obscure stuff.

As for Dad's collection...it's quite extensive, and really quite interesting. A lot of the more notable recordings of things, yes, but he has a lot of Soviet stuff, including some fascinating reissues from a couple of the republics. And quite a few European-only releases of off-the-wall material. I grew up poring over it - explains a lot, really. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:05, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Is "Voce" perhaps "La Voce Del Padrone", the Italian branch of HMV/EMI? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:35, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I doubt it, given the stature of the performances it was releasing. Stuff from the Italian provinces, mostly, with second-string casts. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:13, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Ooh, even better! Anyway, don't let anyone donate it to charity by accident. Very few recordings of classical music have any monetary value at all, but pre-stereo European pressings can fetch hundreds, if in an acceptable condition. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:19, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, no...these puppies are staying with me when it comes time. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:41, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the very best possible outcome. Whenever someone asks my what they should do with their parents/grandparents records, my answer is "get a decent (i.e. one that won't harm the records) turntable and listen to them!" 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:44, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely. I mean, I may need to winnow. I probably will - there's a lot of stuff there that's been reissued on CD, and there are a lot of major-label recordings of standard rep, which don't interest me that much - but I'd much prefer to keep any and all of the more interesting/obscure material. If nothing else, it dovetails nicely with some of the oddities in my own CD collection.

To give you some idea of the stature of the performers on some of those Italian releases, incidentally: I'd never heard of Angeles Gulin before, and yet I found her as lead soprano on three recordings I pulled off the shelf, all obscure Verdi. (Stiffelio was one; Aroldo was another. Don't remember the third offhand.) Seems like she had a decent career singing in Trieste, if nowhere else in Italy. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 16:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Sounds wonderful. The collection I "inherited" was about 20,000 items. I had to get rid of at least half of them when I moved 1500 miles. Like you, I culled the common material (lots of pop songs sung by operatic stars from between 1915 - 1940 and similar "light classical" material). On a completely unrelated note, I just changed an edit you did at Heritage Singers because the group started in Portland, Oregon not in California. They moved their base of operations there 1-2 years after starting, something I happen to know from personal knowledge, but since the article is poorly sourced and this isn't stated (and I don't have independent, reliable sources unfortunately), I might as well make it accurate. Cheers! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:23, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. I wasn't certain, so I took a crapshoot on what I was seeing. It fell flat, as is often the case. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 18:04, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

No, I understand completely. It's not like the article is clear about that in any way. As I said, my own edit violates all kinds of WP:V, but made in an WP:IAR manner. No way I'm adding it to the prose of the article unless I run into a source. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:07, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I have a feeling that's something we've all had to contend with at some point or another. If I started trying to source every fact in every article I look at I don't think I'd ever get anything else done. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 20:45, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey im new here

im pongd or travis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pongd1000 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi pongd/travis, I've replied at your talk page. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:09, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Vevo

Hi there 78.26, I was wondering if you could apply a semi-block on the Vevo page like with Taylor Swift and Katy Perry. I found myself in an "editing war" with other users. Everyone keeps changing the Vevo Certified section and it is a mess, because some users use the views on YouTube and some use the views on the Vevo site, since the Vevo site is not available in every country. I would appreciate it very much if you applied a block that doesn't allow anonymous users to edit that page. Thanks in advance! MrLeopold (talk) 15:12, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@MrLeopold: thanks for writing! I'm afraid I can't do that, as it is a content dispute, not disruptive editing. It should be discussed at the Vevo talk page, where hopefully a consensus can be reached, instead of edit warring through edit summaries. Perry and Swift were protected because of vandalism and WP:BLP violations, not because content disputes were taking place there. I'm afraid enforcing your preferred version of the article would be an unacceptable action to the community, even if you are in the right. I would perhaps perform a Wikipedia:Requests for comment at the page, outlining your concerns. I do hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:01, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

SDAs and vegetarianism

Hi, thanks for the message. I didn't realise that source directly referenced the SDA church. In any case, IMHO more reliable to have something from the horse's mouth - eg. something from an SDA church themselves saying that they believe in vegetarianism. Would you agree? Tonicthebrown (talk) 13:45, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

@Tonicthebrown: I think it is best to have a mix of sources. The horse's mouth is great, but it isn't independent of the subject. Best to show that "outsiders" have taken notice that a group (or.... many of them) practices what it preaches. So having both sources is better, in my opinion, although it isn't a big deal. Thanks for all your hard work! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:17, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Look at "Blue Zones" and "Loma Linda" together as search terms. There are some top notch independent sources out there on this. Legacypac (talk) 15:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Kevin Siers

On 14 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kevin Siers, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Pulitzer Prize-winning editorial cartoonist Kevin Siers began his cartooning career while working in the iron ore mines of Minnesota? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kevin Siers. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kevin Siers), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Ritchie333 (talk) 00:02, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Nine years of editing

Hey, 78.26. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 18:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Heiwadai Park

Hello! Your submission of Heiwadai Park at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for you work at AfD

I thought this was actually a well-worded close even though it went against me. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Chris troutman: thanks for the kind words! I'f I had !voted instead of closed, well, it may have been closed differently, but I know utterly nothing about the topic. I thought the keep votes were policy based, but although they were consistent I didn't find them terribly compelling. Your hard volunteer work is likewise appreciated. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:12, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

RE: Justices

All I was trying to do was make it consistent. There has been a back and forth going on regarding the political parties of the justices. Yet it seems that folks only remove political parties from certain justices but not others. Rather than allowing folks to cherry pick, I went ahead and put it back.

Now I see that someone has gone around and removed the political parties from all the justices. Please do your part and ensure it stays that way.

Thanks. 134.129.144.217 (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Answered at 134's talk page. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 23:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Why isn't the page I created not showing on google?

Hi, I'm new to wikipedia but managed to create a page by name Manasseh Azure which I was notified has been reviewed. But when I google-search the page, it does not appear. What didn't I do well and what must I do please? Please someone help out — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keneth Graham (talk • contribs) 17:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Keneth Graham: Google has indeed indexed this page, when I search for "Manasseh Azure" it appears in the middle of the second page of results. I hope that helps. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

I see the same. The article needs more content (what did he do, not just what what award did he get), and links from other articles. Please add! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Heiwadai Park

On 28 April 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Heiwadai Park, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 400 clay figures of animals, boats, dancers, houses, and warriors line the garden paths of Heiwadai Park? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Heiwadai Park. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Heiwadai Park), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

WikiCup 2018 May newsletter

The second round of the 2018 WikiCup has now finished. Most contestants who advanced to the next round scored upwards of 100 points, but two with just 10 points managed to scrape through into round 3. Our top scorers in the last round were:

• Cas Liber, our winner in 2016, with three featured articles
• Iazyges, with nine good articles and lots of bonus points
• Yashthepunisher, a first time contestant, with two featured lists
• SounderBruce, a finalist last year, with seventeen good topic articles
• Usernameunique, a first time contestant, with fourteen DYKs
• Muboshgu, a seasoned competitor, with three ITNs and
• Courcelles, another first time contestant, with twenty-seven GARs

So far contestants have achieved twelve featured articles between them and a splendid 124 good articles. Commendably, 326 GARs have been completed during the course of the 2018 WikiCup, so the backlog of articles awaiting GA review has been reduced as a result of contestants' activities. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met; most of the GARs are fine, but a few have been a bit skimpy.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

• The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

• AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
• When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
• The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is seeking additional clerks to help with the arbitration process.

Obituaries

• Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Simulation1212

Thanks for revoking his talk page access. There are some very strange edits here, including this one by a brand new editor at the SPI case as his very first edit. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@AussieLegend: Trolls are so weird. I'm very poor at sockpuppets and SPI in general, although I block the self-admitted and the behaviorally obvious. I'd say the good people at SPI are likely to catch this. My condolences that this particular troll has decided to attach himself to you. If he makes further personal attacks or stalking, let me know and I'll do my best to handle quickly. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm not really worried about the stalking. I obviously did something right in the past (for Wikipedia). :) Thanks for acting so quickly. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Gasable

Hi 78,26, the Gasable article was soft-deleted recently. The app is used for ordering butane gas for home delivery throughout the Middle East. Could not find many references in English (though there are a couple of good ones in the article), but there are many in Arabic. It's the first app of its kind, and it's a good reference for other similar apps that may start popping up in the West. I think this would be a good article for Wikipedia. Can we restore it on that basis? Thanks. ShabbatShalom (talk) 22:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@ShabbatShalom: And a Shabbat Shalom to you in two days! Would restoring it to a sandbox be ok, allowing you to work on it until you feel it is ready to move back to article space? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Afd: TVB Anniversary Awards

Hi admin, I am one of those who commented on the Afds, since you close the 2006 as non consensus, the rest are quite similar in content and arguements *basically copy and pasted ones" and to prevent so many backlogs, can you take a look at 2005 TVB Anniversary Awards, 2017 TVB Anniversary Awards, 2007 TVB Anniversary Awards for consistency. I don't know why nominator choose to list them separately which cause all to start at different date. I am without prejudice willing to delete or keep any of the pages but given there are 2005 - 2017 awards (each separate page), why the nominator choose to pick some and not others where all follow the same format and sourcing and there are other countries awards. Not to say this is relevant (as each article notability is in itself) but just a note that I will prefer a list of Afds which will be clearer. Hope that you can help in this aspect as moderating should be clear across and standards must be the same. This is the standard used by me when moderating a FB group (though vastly difference in complexity / nature). If I allow it this time, I must allow it the other time, so I am often quite stressed up with posts which are marginal and there are controversies also. Hence, I fully understand being an admin is not easy and managing consensus is hard also (I once have posts which people reported as well as people whom supported and then I had to delete and then gave an explanation - thankfully non objected, to my relief not like here). Thanks --Quek157 (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

@Quek157: I apologize I went offline at the time you asked this question. I had not seen the related discussions. Because they are relisted of course they need to play out, but your are quite right in referencing this particular closing. There's nothing to do right now, but I appreciate your diligence. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:06, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@78.26:I think this will without any WP:CANVASS intention declared here straight, will end up as no-consensus as I really don't know how such a large complex issue be solved. We may even need a Rfc. I just returned to Wikipedia and now everything is so much changed, we have in the past closed discussions much easier (see my Afd record) so it is an nice eye-opener. Plus another issue is the one below, solved, so don't need your input as I know mops have a lot to do. Thanks --Quek157 (talk) 20:11, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

ANI - Relist

User's asking if a normal user (using me as an example) can relist articles. I tagged you there since you helped me back there with letting me know that I shouldn't relist if there's a delete consensus, so I thought you would be a good choice for this. ANI here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&action=edit&section=21 Kirbanzo (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, a normal editor "can" relist articles. The question really is, "should" a normal user relist articles. The answer to that question is "it depends". There is generally no issue with an un-involved editor with long AfD experience closing as "no consensus" or as "keep" or relisting a discussion. An editor who is new at AfD should instead participate in the discussion and learn how consensus is formed before taking an "administrative"-style action. In the specific example which has brought you recent grief, I know you were attempting to bring the discussion to an administrator's attention, but in fact your action would have the opposite effect, because "relisting" pushes back the close date another seven days. "Relist" is an appropriate action for when there is currently no consensus, but consensus still has an opportunity to be formed. Relisting is not appropriate when consensus has already been clearly formed, or when it becomes apparent that consensus will never develop. Again, I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:18, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Also pinging @Quek157: since he directly asked that question, and it wasn't directly answered at ANI. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:20, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@78.26:Do take note that I deleted the "can" part at ANI after a while, can see my timestamp, I just query whether should he do so as his closing is erratic. Solved peacefully and nicely at ANI. I will not continue or else WP:DEADHORSE. (Side note: So many new terms created recently - i meant from my hiatus in wikipedia). --Quek157 (talk) 20:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Adding, can someone adopt the user, will be a great admin in time to come if properly mentored (I know admin mentorship ended already). And on the record I will not use these things to oppose, cut the newcomer some slack please (I say this because the user mentioned he wanted to be an admin one day and all these will be discussed at Rfa like a witch-hunt kind of thing - we all know well howGMG recent Rfa went generally (though different in scale)).--Quek157 (talk) 20:26, 7 May 2018 (UTC) "clarified --Quek157 (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2018 (UTC)"

(edit conflict)@Quek157:Yes, much has changed here. What hasn't changed is the need for more editors who can edit constructively and collaboratively. No, Kirbanzo should not have relisted that discussion, because his inexperience shows. His intentions are stellar, and as such he is not "in trouble" here, so all's well that ends well. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:35, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

agreed. and the above is what I am editing when there's the conflict. I am just somewhat concerned only, if it was other editors, this may ended up with a hard press of sanctions (such as topic ban). There's the ARBCOM also which is not there when I left. I totally agree with your assessment. --Quek157 (talk) 20:40, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@78.26: I wanted this to close but just saw another Afd [2], third time relisting clearly need reasons. Just let it run it's course as IMO arguments really need to be expanded (the third listing is alright) - but why not the requester do a CSD on advert first, but let it be ... Cheers =) Quek157 (talk) 20:53, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Quek157:I actually don't have much of a problem with this one being relisted. The IP is a long-time editor who claims his sources make the topic notable, and the delete votes are from highly respected editors/admins who cite policies but don't go to great effort to explain how individual sources apply or do not apply to the given policies, so I don't deem that a strong consensus has formed yet. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:25, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@78.26: yes, that my viewpoint also. But do see the entire 7 May 2018 Afd page, how many are from this editor, I find a lot of relists. all are fine after close examination. But this one please take a look at [3] clearly inappropriate to label as WP:SNOW close (especially when an admin just relisted one day before). --Quek157 (talk) 21:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC) Sorry for the ping and I will close this here or else it will be non-stop, just check out the Afd is what I need . Thanks and have a nice day --Quek157 (talk) 21:35, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh dear. That is definitely not a "snow" keep. If I'd run across it I would have relisted it yet again, hoping someone would give an argument containing a blazing moment of clarity. If forced at gunpoint to close, I would have done so as "no consensus". I would not be opposed to having this discussed at WP:DELREV, but I am also not particularly opposed to just let it alone at this point, Kirbanzo won't be doing this again. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:53, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

• noted. imo if noiminator wants he can do the deletion review. this issue I am not wanting to pursue anymore but will monitor as I go through afd. For going through all these reports , 3 admins and 2 experienced editors are wasting so much time. I can at least do 2 full afc submission review to clear the backlog and you all can clear socks as well as other tasks. thanks for the attention. we all learn and hope the user don't run afd into a place of even more contentions than it is now. Of all the place new users can do why do it at afd where things are so hard to handle, so I'm stunned by this case as it's unique. really thanks for all your indulgence in this I know I'm ranting already Quek157 (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC) @Power~enwiki and Randykitty: for reference for the proposer of this Afd and the relisting admin --Quek157 (talk) 11:34, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

deletion of digitaljournal.com?

Why did you delete the digitaljournal.com page? It's been online for years and is accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digitaljournal (talk • contribs) 01:19, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

I deleted it because that was the consensus outcome at the WP:Articles for Deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Digital Journal. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:11, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Margaret Olwill

On 9 May 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Margaret Olwill, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that not having been observed by a potential rescue ship, three survivors from the Margaret Olwill coordinated their shouts to attract the attention of a second ship? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Margaret Olwill. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Margaret Olwill), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Request

Hi since your an admin can you please include the following lines on Abdullah al-Harari. In 2009 Nuril Huda, chairman of Nahdlatul Ulama's dawah division visited his grave.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.nu.or.id/post/read/18460/ziarahi-makam-para-tokoh-islam|title=Ziarahi Makam para Tokoh Islam {{!}} NU Online|last=Online|first=NU|website=nuonline|language=en-GB|access-date=2017-03-26}}</ref>

The article has a notorious vandal named makon who will not allow new information. 112.215.242.70 (talk) 06:09, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

A couple of things. There is no user named "Makon." There is a user who has edited that page named McKhan, but his actions are not vandalism, and calling someone a vandal who is not will cause you to be blocked.

Now, as to your request, why can't you add it yourself? Your source seems to back what you want to add to the article, but it seems like trivia that doesn't help with the understanding of the topic. My recommendation would be to make this request on the talk page, and see what the larger editing community thinks. I hope that is helpful. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:27, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Yet last year i was called vandal by Mckhan for adding the same thing to this article. Look- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:36.79.65.55. 36.82.101.218 (talk) 02:02, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

I see that. That is template language. It is the incorrect template, because what you added was not vandalism. That does not mean what you added should necessarily be included in the article, because it appears to be largely irrelevant trivia to me. However, you call him, of your own volition, a "notorious vandal." This is a personal attack which you should redact. Regarding what you want to add, you still haven't brought this up for discussion on the talk page. I will not be adding this to the article. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:19, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

TVB Anniversary Awards

Hi, will like to seek advices, it seems that based on consensus (me also voting for delete), is it time to also PROD / AFD again the 2016 version which you close as non consensus. Willing to keep it at first but now a WP:SNOW. Thanks a lot --Quek157 (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Quek157: I believe you mean the 2006 version, not 2016 (which was closed as delete today). Normally I'd say wait at least a month, but given that every other iteration of this article has been deleted, and not seeing anything particularly special about 2006, I have no objections if you bring this up for deletion immediately. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I will wait for the 2010 - 2012 versions to close first. Will AFD after these closed. Thanks --Quek157 (talk) 17:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

@Quek157: I don't think you'll need to wait long.... 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:46, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

will nominate, but what rationale will be better, I don't want the lame fail GNG, can i put per community consensus and no difference. Just a pity can't PROD this --Quek157 (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Balhae

You are welcomed to discuss the matter at hand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Balhae#Recent_edits_on_Mohe Koraskadi (talk) 06:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Koraskadi: thank you very much for your detailed explanation on the relevant talk pages. When I see removals of large amounts of sourced material I will revert if there is no substantive explanation. Please understand that I am not at all knowledgeable about Korean antiquity, but I do know a few things about Wikipedia. For my own curiosity, if the sources you removed don't represent "Western scholars", which authors would represent "Western scholars"? Why would Western scholars have a sufficiently different viewpoint from other scholars such that the differentiation needs to be made? Happy editing! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 20:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

There are a lot of Western scholars who deal with the history of Balhae, but rarely do they specialize in it. If we can find some Western scholars who specialize in the history of Balhae, I think that could be start. Koraskadi (talk) 23:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Newspapers.com Account

Hello 78.26. I just saw the message on Megalibrarygirl's talk page and sent a request to the folks at newspapers.com to renew your account. My records indicate they processed and issued your account in September 2017. I apologize for the issues with your access. I will work to resolve these issues ASAP. --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 19:51, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cameron11598: - Nevermind. I tried and tried, and gave up. Now I just tried again and it worked great! So either a) I was incompetent, b) it took a couple of months to kick in or c)you just fixed it. Many thanks, and to Megalibrarygirl also! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cameron11598 and 78.26: Hooray! Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

@78.26: I sent an email off to the folks at newspapers.com looks like it worked --Cameron₁₁₅₉₈ ^(Talk) 20:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
• Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.

Technical news

• IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
• There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
• It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

• A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

• In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref: Anthony Acevedo

Thank you for your feedback.

My name is Anthony(Tony) F Acevedo. I am the son to the subject, Anthony C Acevedo, and attempting to correct and update my fathers information.

I'm knew at Wiki updates and learning as I go along and will endeavor to follow the rules. Not too clear about authenticating/providing reliable references

Tony AcevedoTonyace1 (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

(replied at Tonyace1's talkpage) 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:14, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref: Anthony Acevedo

Hello Aspening,

Once again thank you for your feedback. I'm still processing through my father's wiki and will continue to make corrections.

It's unfortunate that the web has some inaccurate details about my father. With regard to my, aunts, I can attest that my aunt Luisa Rainer(Acevedo maiden name, deceased and lived in San Bernardino CA) is my full aunt (dad's full sister). My other aunt, Estella Reyes (maiden name: Acevedo) is my dad's half sister. She is sister to my step-uncles: Augustine, Guillermo and Paco(deceased) (all live in Mexico). Short of going to a genealogy website, this is my proof at this point. Note: my cousins, aunt Luisa daughters, can confirm and authenticate this disclosure.

Also making corrections to some of the narrative, in particular: "He was first assigned to Fort MacArthur in Texas" should be: "Acevedo was inducted into the Army on August 9, 1943, in Fort MacArthur, Calif" One reference is: https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/voces/template-stories-indiv.html?work_urn=urn%3Autlol%3Awwlatin.676&work_title=Acevedo%2C+Anthony+C.

Regards, Tony Acevedo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonyace1 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

OK, we'll continue the conversation here if it's easier for you. I'm in no way offended, but I'm not Aspening, my user name is 78.26. You can call me "78" if you want. I fixed the part about the Fort, I'm glad you mentioned that. The link you sent doesn't work for me, would you please be so kind as to re-check the URL? Many thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref: Anthony Acevedo

My Apolgy 78

Let me resend the URL. It's based on an interview my dad had with the University of Texas: https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/voces/template-stories-indiv.html?work_urn=urn%3Autlol%3Awwlatin.676&work_title=Acevedo%2C+Anthony+C.

I tested it in a a new browser to make sure it worked. Let me know if it doesn't work for you.

Are we good on the full sister half sister topic or do I need to proceed with more references?

Tony AcevedoTonyace1 (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

I modified the sentence to make it more generic. Hopefully that is a reasonable compromise between what NBC says and reality. Do you concur? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:24, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref: Anthony Acevedo

I tried URL on IE and this appears to be stable: https://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/voces/template-stories-indiv.html?work_urn=urn%3Autlol%3Awwlatin.676&work_title=Acevedo%2C+Anthony+C.

Copy and paste

Thank you Tony AcevedoTonyace1 (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

All links you have sent give me "ERROR: Invalid Input". Does this link require that you be signed-in as a subscriber, perhaps? Does this source discuss the exact genetic relationship of your aunts to your father? If so, we can add it even if I can't access it. Let me know and we'll get this finished. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 19:01, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Ref: Anthony Acevedo

Continuing to update my father's information. Revised in order of importance his military awards based on DD-214 Army discharge document Tony AcevedoTonyace1 (talk) 14:04, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Wonderful! One thing that would be helpful is if you would leave an "edit summary". You'll see this at the bottom of the editing page. That lets other editors know what you did/why you did it. If you want to discuss the article proper, it would be better to continue this conversation at the talk page of the article. That way other editors can benefit, since 1)I'm not the only editor here and 2)I'm not available 24/7.

Deletion of the article Pedro Perebal

Hi. I was wondering if you could transform the deleted article into a draft in case the subject gets more press coverage within a year and stop being NOTNEWS and having a BIO1E issue? Thinker78 (talk) 05:49, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Deleting labels

I've been working my way through American independent record labels, making small improvements and trying to get an idea of their value. As you probably know, many of them are mediocre at best. Many have little content and no sources. Many can probably be deleted. I've been compiling a list of articles that could be deleted. I didn't start this until B, but so far I have about 40 articles from B through H. Are there any rules regarding how many articles can be deleted or proposed to be deleted at one time? One proposal per week strikes me as too slow, but I don't know how to approach this subject. Thank you for any help you can give.
Vmavanti (talk) 01:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Vmavanti, thanks for thinking of me. There are a lot of garbage articles on labels out there. Quite a few of them are just promotion for some non-notable, electronic-download-only so-called label. There are others which are completely unsourced, and the article is in such poor shape that you'd never know it was notable unless you already are highly knowledgeable about the topic/genre. I try to save the latter, as you know. There are no rules, technically you could nominate them all at once. My personal request is that you nominate about 10 a week, that'll give me time to see if there's anything I think is encyclopedic, while not taking forever to "take the garbage out" as it were. Of course, I may see the first batch and tell you to nominate them all. I'll bet a number of them are EDM labels. I find the electronic dance labels baffling, they often have several notable artists which would normally indicate the label is notable, but so often there is absolutely zero reliable coverage (or any at all!) on the label. Perhaps its because there is very little production work done by the label itself, I dunno. Also could be that it takes very little for EDM artists to meet notability thresholds. Anyway, is that helpful? All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 01:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, very helpful. Thank you.
Vmavanti (talk) 17:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

@Vmavanti: Taking a look at the 7 PRODs you performed in the last 12 hours, I'd agree with four of them. If you had nominated Bunny Huang and Captivity for speedy, I would have deleted them. I think maybe Chocodog should be taken to AfD because it has four notable artists, although this is a borderline case because some will feel it is a "vanity" label (which, when I look into it further, probably is because there seems to exist a close relationship between the artists) and others will feel that 4 is not enough notable artists to meet the vague "many" description in NMUSIC#5. As is I'll leave it as PROD, if anyone cares they'll rescue it. In my opinion it would be best if this article were deleted, and information added to the Chocodog paragraph on the Ween article indicating that the label also released music by other artists. Just my thoughts. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 13:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Unlinking after deletion

As an admin, you probably close deletion discussions routinely (thank you for your important work!) If the deletion reason is lack of notability, then it makes perfect sense to unlink redlinks left after the deletion, as you have done. WP:REDLINKS, after all, encourage article creation, and articles should be created about notable topics only; the guideline is explicit about this connection.

I've been unlinking some links to football biographies that have been deleted for lack of notability. I have, however, been reverted on a few articles by SuperJew citing: "they were linked before the articles were created and deleted. That's the consensus in soccer club season pages." I'm not aware of any such consensus, and guidelines at WP:FOOTBALL know no such thing. The post-deletion unlinkings done by you and other admins (say, you in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carla Boyce or Premeditated Chaos in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leo Shin, to name two of the most recent) seem to not follow this 'consensus'. Obviously, WP:LOCALCONSENSUS wouldn't be allowed to override the WP:REDLINK guideline anyway.

In short: should non-notable football bio articles (redlinks) be unlinked after deletion or not? – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:28, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid your question is somewhat beyond me. Please keep in mind I am very ignorant about WP:FOOTBALL in general, and I closed those discussions not because of any knowledge on the topic, but by consensus on that particular topic. Yes, REDLINK is a universal guideline, but it is that, a guideline and not a rule. By that guideline, it would seem that a redlink not likely to be created should be unlinked. However, if these are junior leagues, it would seem quite possible that a player could become notable in the future. There are forms of consensus that don't show up in a particular central location, but are longstanding practices. For instance, there is no notability guide on record labels (my specialty), but the general longstanding consensus is that if a record label has signed several notable artists then it is probably a notable record label. Have you talked to SuperJew about this, beyond the initial question? You are both highly experienced, highly productive editors. I would ask him to point you to that consensus, and if there isn't a specific place, I'll be surprised if the two of you can't come to some understanding about what is appropriate and what isn't. I hope that is helpful in some way. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Organ Grinder Restaurant

On 17 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Organ Grinder Restaurant, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Organ Grinder Restaurant's Wurlitzer pipe organ included such effects as a submarine dive alarm? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Organ Grinder Restaurant. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Organ Grinder Restaurant), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Sara Niemietz discograpy

I wouldn't mind having your opinion about this discography. Thank you.
Vmavanti (talk) 17:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

@Vmavanti: Egads, you don't throw softballs! I've been thinking over this for a couple of days, and still haven't really made up my mind. I think if this were brought up for deletion, it would be "kept" on the basis that she's a (marginally) notable artist, and as a notable recording artist a separate discography is appropriate as the discography section is of great enough length to be unwieldy if left in the main article. My opinion is that this is incredibly spammy. Do we need a list of each youtube video? The only source for this is her own youtube channel? What's the basis for the "rankings"? I'm biased because I'm an old fogey who does old-fashioned discographical work, and to me discography is for people who pick up an old piece of shellac or newfangled vinyl and want to know more about it. (I'm kidding, I'm not quite that old, and I'm not that dogmatic.) I can pretty much guarantee that her discography is not notable in-and-of itself, if a reliable source discusses her recorded output in-depth I'd be frankly shocked. Adding chart information from ReverbNation is just awful, it should be removed. There's not a single dispassionate source in the whole thing. So my opinion is it needs to be cleaned up/weeded, but I'm not exactly sure how. Sorry that is probably not much help. All the best, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:55, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I hadn't thought about deleting the article, but I did consider deleting material on my own to take out some of the cheerleading. I've talked to this person before, a person who writes the Sara Niemetz article who has a conflict of interest. I put the exchange back on my Talk Page if you want to read it. This was a disagreement I walked away from. I don't think Sara Niemetz is all that notable, but give 'em an inch and they take a mile, right? On the rest of Wikipedia and by custom, a discography is mainly for albums. Niemetz has recorded only one. Now it's true that changes in the industry have shifted the focus more toward singles in the form or mp3s, streaming, and so on. Regardless, it's not dogmatic or old fogeyish to have standards. I've come to loathe the promotional prose I've encountered on Wikipedia which is so inflated as to be sickening. Maybe I can strike a balance. I'm not afraid to delete anything, but I don't want to have prolonged debates over trivialities.
Vmavanti (talk) 17:49, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

@Vmavanti: Heh, prolonged debates over trivialities describes a lot of what happens around here. For some reason I remember reading that exchange before, don't know why. I actually have no issue listing her genre as jazz, as much of her work involves reinterpreting songs into a pseudo-mid-20th-century-swing style. Not sure what other genre you'd place that in. It's much closer to jazz than most the content of many "jazz festivals" nowadays, and I'm no "purist". Discographies should also include singles, and of course most music is consumed via digital streaming now, my children have *never* bought a physical product. (Perhaps they are permanently scarred by my rather large collection.) So where's the bright line regarding what should be included? I dunno. I'd support removing a lot of the rah-rah material, but you're going to get pushback from the involved editor, at which point we'll probably need an RfC or dispute resolution. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:04, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I hear that from EddieHugh—"you'll get pushback". Although I don't want to debate, I'm certainly not afraid of it. I wrote some notes on the discography Talk Page. It might be possible to get into hairsplitting arguments about how much material can be kept, but what I wish would happen is that the people who write articles like this would try to be more honest. Sara Niemetz doesn't really have much of a discography in the traditional sense. Saying "that's the old way" is a partial excuse at best. There are plenty of musicians, most of them, who are still recording albums, and that's what a discography is for, hence the word "disc". There is already plenty of cheerleading in her article. I find the Niemetz discography article muddled and difficult to read, an infodump in which quantity is meant to suggest quality. I think it has the opposite of the intended effect. I find it not impressive but embarrassing.
Vmavanti (talk) 18:20, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

I am in 100% agreement with your analysis here, and really have nothing to add. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 18:27, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Ideal Records

On 25 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ideal Records, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Ideal Records was the predominant Tejano music label of the 1940s and 1950s? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ideal Records. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ideal Records), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Falcon Records (Texas)

On 29 June 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Falcon Records (Texas), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the founder of Falcon Records (label pictured) chose the name in part because it sounded the same in English and Spanish? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Falcon Records (Texas). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Falcon Records (Texas)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 29 June 2018 (UTC)