User talk:GB fan/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Inquiry on Wiki.gg page deletion

Heya there GB fan, I browsing through and noticed that the page had been deleted quite a while ago, I was just wondering if you could clarify the deletion reason for me please? specifically "which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject", also what would you have improved with the page and changed etc? And is it possible that I could have the deleted pages content sent here, added to my Sandbox or have the page undeleted and moved to a Draft/Sandbox location to be worked on by someone like me or anyone else interested in Wiki.gg please? Thanks! Aeyeu (talk) 07:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Aeyeu, I have restored and moved to Draft:Wiki.gg. ~ GB fan 22:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey thanks for that, could you also possibly do the same for the page Freedom Games please? Aeyeu (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Aeyeu, I will not do that one. I wasn't the last admin to delete it and it was last deleted after an AFD. You should approach the admin that close the AFD. ~ GB fan 11:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Apology

Sorry for using the wrong rd code. What would be the best code to use if the redirect does not fit the target article if possible? Thanks. Red Director (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Red Director, The only way at this point to get Woody Guthrie Deck and Dee Luong Friedman deleted is to nominate them using WP:RFD. ~ GB fan 17:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks.

Sycamore Shoals

That redirect needs to be deleted so that the Sycamore Shoals State Historic Area article can be renamed! The park is not longer called Area and it needs to be corrected! It cannot renamed as long as the redirect exists.. –ACase0000 (talk) 19:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

ACase0000, if the article should be moved, follow the directions at WP:MOVE. ~ GB fan 19:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

I already tried to move it. It said it cannot be moved because article with name already exists (the redirect) so the redirect needs to be deleted. ACase0000 (talk) 19:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

ACase0000, the specific section of that page is WP:MOVEOVERREDIRECT ~ GB fan 19:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

I submitted a technical request here, WP:RM/TR. It will not let me move it over redirect either. Sorry for bothering you. Have a great day. –ACase0000 (talk) 19:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Indy Rahmawati

BLPProd asks for at least one reliable source. Blogspot is not reliable. SL93 (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

SL93, This is the first two sentences of WP:BLPPROD (bolding and links as in the original):

Unsourced biographies of living people (BLPs) are eligible for a special proposed deletion process, BLPPROD. To be eligible for a BLPPROD tag, the entry must be a biography of a living person and contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise) supporting any statements made about the person in the biography. Unlike standard proposed deletion, the BLP deletion template may be removed only after the biography contains a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article.

A single source in any form, any reliability is enough to disqualify an article from being eligible for BLPPROD. The blogspot source is enough to make it ineligible. The reliable source is required to remove a BLPPROD that was entirely unsourced when the BLPPROD was added. ~ GB fan 17:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

That's odd. The whole purpose of the template creation stemmed from discussions about making sure that BLPs were reliably sourced. SL93 (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

SL93, I don't disagree, it is odd. That is the way the policy is written. There have been numerous discussions over the years about this and there has never been a consensus to change it to reliable in both cases. ~ GB fan 23:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

About deleting National Outreach Programme

Would you like to get the ball rolling? No pressure if you don't, but I tend to screw up a step or two with AfDs. Just a suggestion. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I am not the person who thinks it should be deleted. The rationale you placed in the PROD is a reason to add references to the article not delete it. You will need to come up with a good reason to delete, see WP:DEL#REASON. AFD is easy if you activate Twinkle in your preferences (Gadgets tab, Browsing section). It automates the process and completes all the steps for you. ~ GB fan 12:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Not going to happen (adding references or using Twinkle), but thanks for the clarity and advice. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Ivan De Battista

(Article) I know you removed the PROD tag but do you think it would be ok to nominate at AfD? Would put on talk page, I guess, but it will probably never get noticed there. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

GoldRomean, AFD is always an option. ~ GB fan 12:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

South Central Cartel

Hello. I noticed that you removed my proposed deletion for the SCC albums. If you believe they should be removed, can you instead have the albums redirect to the SCC wiki page. JuanBoss105 (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

JuanBoss105, if you believe the independent articles do not belong, you can redirect them. They shouldn't be deleted, because there is a valid redirect option. ~ GB fan 14:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Can you tell me what I should add to a page to redirect the albums to SCC? JuanBoss105 (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Here are a couple of pages that discuss how to make a redirect.

Help:Redirect

WP:Redirect

~ GB fan 15:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

History of Varanasi

Hi, it is regarding this. Should we revert back to the redirect as of now, or an AfD is required for that? It is largely copied from the history section of the city article by the creator, but a few sources have been recently added by others, though the content is same. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Fylindfotberserk, this is an editorial decision that needs to be made. Is there enough history content to justify an independent article with a summary at the main article? If there is enough then the main article history section should be summarized and a link to the history article. If the history doesn't overwhelm the main article, any appropriate additions to the history article should be incorporated into the main article and then the history article should be redirected the section. I don't plan on evaluating the situation to see what is best. ~ GB fan 15:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Dinesh Saparamadu

Hello, GB fan,

Can you delete this PROD'd article? I can not because I tagged it for deletion. I thought someone would get to it by now but no admin has. Thanks for your help. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Explicit took care of it. ~ GB fan 00:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Prateek Raj

Though you have now objected to my move and there is no other option apart from AfD, I would like to know if there is a policy or guideline that says articles accepted through AfC cannot be draftified? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 20:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

WP:DRAFTNO #6 applies. It says Another editor has asserted that the page belongs in mainspace, e.g. it has previously been moved there, or there is a clear statement to that effect in the edit history or on the talk page. Since an editor has accepted the article an editor has asserted that the page belongs in the mainspace. ~ GB fan 23:38, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

I know it's a procedural move now but it makes no sense to have the Reviewed pages filter in the page curation tool. If the page is reviewed, accepted or tagged with relevant templates, then why do we have a filter for it? Just curious. On a separate note, there is a case where new page reviwers were blocked for abusing their rights and I believe this will end up the same sooner or later. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Palapye public library page deleted

Hi there i would like to understand further  why a page of a local public library in my vicinity of palapye,was deleted?i  dont understand why a public library that offers service to clients is not of significance.This is not a private library but a govermenemt aided public library and therefore iam  not promoting a private entity.kindly elaborate on signifance sought. Olgatladi2020 (talk) 13:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The article, Palapye Public Library, just says it is a public library. It didn't say that there was anything significant about the library. There is nothing to distinguish this public library from any other public library in the world. Wikipedia does not have articles about every public library in the world, just those that have significant coverage about them in multiple independent reliable sources. If that information is available then you can provide it and the article can be restored. ~ GB fan 13:26, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Runswick Bay Lifeboat Station

Hi. I'm clearly getting things wrong with trying to get this redirect deleted. So why not help, instead of just saying, you can't do it that way! MartinOjsyork (talk) 18:50, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I tried to help, I pointed to the process you need to use. You will need to use the Redirects for Discussion process. There are three steps to nominate it for deletion, those steps can be found here, WP:RFDHOWTO. ~ GB fan 19:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

OK, think Its done.

Apologies if I sounded grumpy.

Martin Ojsyork (talk) 19:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

It looks good, the only thing is you didn't sign the discussion, I did add one for you, if you want you can go back and resign it yourself. ~ GB fan 19:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Revert of G5 Tagging

Hi User:GB fan. Sorry, that's my bad (I think). I listed the user who created the articles (User:McSyl) when tagging them, who was indeed not blocked at the time. However, the master account User:BobVillars definitely, 100 percent was. See here. Should I resubmit the tagging using the "master" account instead? --McSly (talk) 16:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

According to BobVillars block log, they were blocked for 2 weeks on 20 March 2024 and then indefinitely 2 October 2024. McSyl has a single block entry on 2 October 2024. All of the article were created in August 2024. After the 2 week block expired and prior to the indef block. ~ GB fan 10:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough. But this was just their sock-puppets for that period. Here are 2 more of their previous ones: YtoSu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and RutoSu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), both indefinitely blocked. I'm sure I can find more indeffed socks if I start digging. They are been at it since at least 2012. So anything we can do about this? --McSly (talk) 21:08, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

If you think it is enough, retag the articles and present the actual master that was blocked when the articles were created. Another admin will look at it and determine if it meets the criteria. I am done. I looked at the blocked logs and the SPI and it G% does not appear to apply, but I won't take any more action in any way on these articles. ~ GB fan 11:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for your help. --McSly (talk) 13:30, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Marinnela

Thank you for the re-directions. It is the best idea for records that are unremarkable. I'll continue with anyone else who has the same problem, if you don't mind 77.49.204.50 (talk) 17:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Redirect Template:Merck&Co to Template:Merck & Co.

@GB fan: Please redirect Template:Merck&Co for Template:Merck & Co., had unecessary to redirect and had two different templates. 2016Começa (talk) 20:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Template:Merck & Co. is a redirect, if we redirected Template:Merck&Co to it, nothing would happen. ~ GB fan 10:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

PROD test

Hello, I was hoping to test whether or not {{prod}}'d pages (with talk pages tagged with {{WikiProject Computer Security}}) would be listed on WP:COMP's article alerts. This won't happen until AAlertBot does its daily run. This behavior is central to an ongoing discussion about taskforce/WikiProject alert tracking. It's possible my test won't work on a user page anyway, but if it does the result can be manually removed from the alerts page.

Would it be possible to flag the page as valid/testing for 24hrs until it runs? This could also be done with a real article but a user sandbox seems preferable. Thanks, Tule-hog (talk) 18:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

If you put it back with an explanation with what you are looking for, I won't remove it again. I can't speak for any one else though. ~ GB fan 18:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)