User talk:Jax 0677/Archive 25
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
"Way.com" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Way.com. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 10#Way.com until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Category: American children
The category says, Children and teenagers of the United States who made history. This category includes children of the United States who made history at an age between birth and age 18, and any articles relating to a child's life in the United States."
Darnella Frazier was 17 years old when she filmed George Floyd's murder, as verified by many reliable sources cited in the article. She was then legally a minor. When she won the Pulitzer this month, other reliable sources reported that she is now 18, just over a year later, and also cited in the article. The birth date range is a simple math calculation from ages provided by many reliable sources.
People in the category include Richard Sandrak, Maria Pepe, Bryson Foster and Christina Desiderio. They all became notable as children, lived to adulthood, and are in that category. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Cullen328:, fair enough. Perhaps we should consider renaming the category. Please link to the article in question when you post on a talk page. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:16, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
You made edits to List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, June 2021 including this edit. As you can see on the article and on articles from previous months, there is a template with specific parameters the should be completed, so the article is useful to readers. Would you have a moment to either improve your edits, or move the information to the talk page. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Magnolia677:, per WP:POORLY and WP:IDEALSTUB, it is permissible for me to add information to an article without a table if I do not have the skill set to add it to the table. I have done this at Outline in Color as well as many List of pipeline accidents in the United States articles, which were lists before I started splitting them. Users have told me that if I do not want to create a table for music album chart listings, that I am welcome to add the lines as text. As history has shown, if the links are on the article (and not only on the talk page), the listings will more than likely be added to the table sooner or later. Per WP:RCD, "When you find a passage in an article that is biased, inaccurate, or unsourced the best practice is to improve it if you can rather than deleting salvageable text". --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:27, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- It's a table with five blanks to fill in, like this. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Reply @Magnolia677:, the only thing that I had to do there was hit the "Undo" button, I don't have that luxury at List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, June 2021. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:50, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- It's a table with five blanks to fill in, like this. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:47, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
"Us Time" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Us Time. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 15#Us Time until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. —Somnifuguist (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Richard Cheese
Template:Richard Cheese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. —valereee (talk) 17:10, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Dom & Roland
Template:Dom & Roland has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Richard3120 (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Entwine
Template:Entwine has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Flyersrights.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Flyersrights.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
"WeatherTech" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect WeatherTech. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 23#WeatherTech until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Derache123 (talk) 04:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
"Ella French" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ella French. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 24#Ella French until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 17:47, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Why have you partially reverted my update to the John Hiatt template to remove the reference to Leftover Feelings, his latest CD release? I realise that at this time there is no wikipedia page for Leftover Feelings, but this does not mean the CD does not exist (and it appearing in red should act as a prompt that a page does eventually get created). - Higherwiki (talk) 13:55, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Higherwiki:, WP:WTAF. --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Yes, OK. However I think logically a page first needs to be created for his earlier CD Mystic Pinball (2012). As you suggest I'll create a wikipedia page for Leftover Feelings (I'll also create one for Mystic Pinball). As there is currently no page for Mystic Pinball I would prefer that you do not remove its existence from the John Hiatt template. - Higherwiki (talk) 19:55, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
"Template:OTD" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Template:OTD. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 30#Template:OTD until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
"Helicopter dick" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Helicopter dick. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 4#Helicopter dick until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
What does WATF mean?
Inside the [1] you reverted with the edit message 'watf'. Can you explain your revert and what watf means? ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:55, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- I thought you were saying "What the actual fuck", fortunately I found similar edit messages where you reference WP:WTAF, which generally discourages WP:red links, however what I created is an existing section. Foxconn union links to a section inside Apple worker organizations#China ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Shushugah:, AFAIK, navboxes are only supposed to contain links to relevant articles, not relevant sections. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:15, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Jax 0677 could you comment in this discussion Wikipedia talk:Write the article first#WTAF² : Qualifying when this is appropriate? I'm happy to follow consensus, but right now it's not clearly stated in the WP:WTAF itself. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:21, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Raising the same issue at multiple places / WP:FORUMSHOP
I see you've raised the issue about "school of thought" on at least three different pages:
- My own talk page
- The help desk
- The article talk page
It is poor form to raise multiple discussions on the same topic, because it creates needless duplication, and editors not aware of the previous discussions might just be wasting their time arguing stuff which has already been argued. It also raises question of WP:FORUMSHOP, i.e. it does not help develop consensus to try different forums in the hope of finding one where you get the answer you want. If you want to continue discussing this, since it started on my talk page, I suggest we keep in there, at least for the time being (it can be moved to the article talk page if it gets too large or actually leads to consensus for the changes you propose, which seem unlikely).
In addition, I'll just note that RfCs shouldn't be the first step in a discussion. Polling is not a substitute for discussion, and the usual structure of RfCs encourages more of the former than of the latter, and is only really useful if the issue has been much discussed and there appears to be a stalemate (in which case, an RfC might be appropriate so that everyone can state their position clearly and everybody can see which policies and guidelines are at the heart of the matter). At this stage, it would be far more useful if we tried to iron this out without jumping the gun; which is also what WP:RFCBEFORE suggests: you still haven't answered my latest concerns about this... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 21:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Opiate for the Masses
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Opiate for the Masses requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opiate for the Masses. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Liz Read! Talk! 05:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Athaenara:, @Liz:, I saw that y'all deleted "Opiate for the Masses". I am trying to recall if I actually recreated that page, or if someone else did so. If I did, did I create a redirect or a full article? Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
- This is like the 5th or 6th time this has happened to me in the past month. An editor either creates a redirect or moves a page, thereby creating a redirect from the old location to the new title. Another editor comes by, could be a week later or it could be years later, and changes the redirect to an article. At some point, that article gets tagged for deletion and Twinkle posts a notice on the talk page of the "page creator" who is not the "article creator". The original editor who created the redirect or moved that page years ago says, "Huh? I didn't write an article on that topic! Why am I getting this notice?" I actually had one editor who got very upset by getting a notice like this over the summer. Twinkle just looks at whomever made the first edit on the page, not whomever added the most content.
- Thanks for being merely puzzled and not upset. Liz Read! Talk! 01:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
""dick helicoptering"" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect "dick helicoptering". The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 11#"dick helicoptering" until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 00:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
October 2021
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Please refrain from hijacking pages as you did with School of Thought. Should you believe the subject you were writing about deserves an article, please use the Article Wizard, which has an option to create a draft version that you can then get feedback on. Also see Wikipedia's disambiguation guideline which indicates how to handle separate subjects with similar names. If you continue to hijack an existing article, you may be blocked from editing. If you have any questions, you are always welcome to ask me on my talk page. You should most certainly not do this kind of stuff when there is an ongoing discussion at RfD... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @RandomCanadian:, that applies to changing an article subject to a different article subject, not making a redirect into an actual article, which people are encouraged to do. If I am wrong, why does the page say "Don't add anything after this line unless you're drafting a disambiguation page or article to replace the redirect" in the comments? --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- There's a difference between that and taking a redirect for which there is clear consensus that it is inappropriate for it to be about the album or to link to the relevant band's page (per the RfD, which you can't ignore). You were already given the suggestion, multiple times, that an article about the album should be at School of Thought (album). Why you keep trying to put undue emphasis on it (fanboy lack of judgement? something else?) by putting it at an inappropriate place (at a redirect which really should link to the clear primary topic) escapes me, but I'll note that persistently taking into account only the letter and not the spirit (i.e. WP:WIKILAWYERING, as you are doing above) is frowned upon here as it is everywhere else, so I suggest you stop that. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:57, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
"Dick helicoptering" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Dick helicoptering. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 22#Dick helicoptering until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:08, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:The Cumshots
Template:The Cumshots has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Lennart97 (talk) 23:34, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Kristin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kristen.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:The Andy Griffith Show
Template:The Andy Griffith Show has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. ButlerBlog (talk) 17:39, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Reverting Skold template
For what reason did you decide to revert my template change? (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Tim_Sk%C3%B6ld&oldid=prev&diff=1055534578) Quaeler (talk) 19:05, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Quaeler:, WP:WTAF. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting - this implies that a template is not necessarily a complete enumeration of work, but instead a subset of work that happen to have their own pages. I wasn't aware of this restriction on template content. Though, technically, the WTAF guidance advocates doing the article first in lieu of doing a red-link-ed entry; i was, however, not doing a linked entry, only ensuring the list of albums was complete. Quaeler (talk) 03:20, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- Similarly, we don't apply WTAF to Infobox content (i.e there is plenty of Infobox content that lists an item, unlinked, in the interest of being complete; we don't say 'due to WTAF, we should not list this in an Infobox until there is an article'); why are templates a special case? Quaeler (talk) 05:57, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- We should take this to arbitration; i believe you are interpreting WTAF incorrectly (the actual lede text even calls out red-links "For the official guideline on this topic, see Wikipedia:Red link.") I'll look up how arbitration works - it's been like 15 years since i've done it. Quaeler (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Similarly, we don't apply WTAF to Infobox content (i.e there is plenty of Infobox content that lists an item, unlinked, in the interest of being complete; we don't say 'due to WTAF, we should not list this in an Infobox until there is an article'); why are templates a special case? Quaeler (talk) 05:57, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting - this implies that a template is not necessarily a complete enumeration of work, but instead a subset of work that happen to have their own pages. I wasn't aware of this restriction on template content. Though, technically, the WTAF guidance advocates doing the article first in lieu of doing a red-link-ed entry; i was, however, not doing a linked entry, only ensuring the list of albums was complete. Quaeler (talk) 03:20, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
 Response to third opinion request:
|
I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Template:Tim Sköld and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. I think the two newer albums should be included as red links. WP:NAVBOX appears to be the most relevant guideline and it allows red links by implication with no mention of unlinked text. The guideline also links to the explanatory supplement, which says at WP:EXISTING to avoid unlinked text and mostly avoid red links. The exceptional red links the supplement allows for include "navigation templates that represent a well-defined and complete set of data (geographic divisions, annual events, filmographies, etc.), where deleting red links would leave an incomplete and misleading result", which I think applies to the current situation. EXISTING does go on to recommend that you write the articles.That was my dive into PAGs, but my IAR opinion is pretty much the same. I think leaving the other studio albums off could mislead readers, who won't know that we are only including albums that have articles, and I prefer red links (encouraging article creation) to plain text. I have this user talk page watchlisted, as well as Template:Tim Sköld and its talk page. I would be happy to answer any clarifying/follow-up questions. Firefangledfeathers 21:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC) |
Format of contribution
Hello Jax 0677, you have contributed a !vote at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Waukesha_parade_attack#Move_from_Waukesha_Christmas_parade_attack. For whatever reason, people have ended up using wordy embolding for their responses. Your current !vote, on which you emboldened only your "oppose", may result in a miscount of intent if we keep getting rushed inappropriate closes like the one that caused the referenced discussion. May I suggest you refactor your formatting of your !vote, if you wish. Have a great evening! XavierItzm (talk) 05:47, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @XavierItzm:, I am fine with either my suggestion, or a formal discussion publicly announced via proper channels. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:53, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
The article Barnes Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:NCORP
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 17:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Why?
Why do you keep adding this template that is made for article talk pages? [2] Jehochman Talk 03:07, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
December 2021
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Qwirkle (talk) 03:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Canaan Smith
Template:Canaan Smith has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 06:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Redirection is not vandalism. If an article like Hole in a Bottle is a stub, then it is perfectly acceptable to redirect to an appropriate target. Please do not revert my redirects unless you improve the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
- ETA: I did add a source to Canaan Smith (EP), so you were right on this one. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:53, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, WP:BRD. --Jax 0677 (talk) 10:26, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Mirrors
Thanks for contributing to the article Alisa Xayalith. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable and attributed to reliable sources. You have recently used citations which copied, or mirrored, material from Wikipedia. This leads to a circular reference and is not acceptable. Most mirrors are clearly labeled as such, but some are in violation of our license and do not provide the correct attribution. Please help by adding alternate sources to the article you edited! If you need any help or clarification, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. Thank you. Kuru (talk) 12:17, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Article moves
Why are you doing this? What a mess. -- GreenC 16:34, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @GreenC:, "What I wrote did not make sense in the context of the new RM". "At a minimum, you should close my RM, then start a new one". And "it says not to move the page during an RM". This became a problem for Waukesha parade attack Move Request, which has yet to be closed. When you post on my talk page, please link to the article in question. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:40, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- This is not Waukesha parade attack. The only problem we have now is an unnecessary bureaucratic RM to which no one cares because no one objects to moving it back to Turpin case. I would please ask that you close the RM, move it back to Turpin case, and I will start a new RM for the family. -- GreenC 16:44, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Nightmares on Wax
Hi, you reverted a change of mine on a Nightmares on Wax template. I added their 2021 album. Why did you change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkilly (talk • contribs) 06:43, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Reply - @Mkilly:, please link to the article in question when posting on a talk page. I reverted per WP:WTAF. --Jax 0677 (talk) 11:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
You'll find this funny
To try to get the Waukesha Christmas parade attack article rename concluded, I went to Wikipedia:Closure requests and tried to close as many other requests as possible. I figured that when our request was one of the last ones on the page, somebody would probably close it. No such luck.
Instead, I found a really, really nasty discussion that I had to refer to WP:RFAR, which is turning into a big ordeal. Jehochman Talk 01:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
RfD is not MR
WP:RFD is not the forum to ask when a WP:MR will be closed. It is off-topic, disruptive to the RfD discussions, and can be considered canvassing. Please remove those comments. -- Tavix (talk) 01:56, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Sources
You want things to be sourced (understandable), but you can do that. Not doing so is lazy. Too many pages have that template on them. Slowly adding sources helps. I do so where I can. Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 18:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Mr. C.C.:, please link to the article in question when posting on my talk page. There are so many songs on that page without references, that {{+R}} is the quickest way to denote unreferenced material which should have been sourced in the first place. Once that tag is on the page for a while, I start removing unsourced material from the page. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
- Refer to my previous comment. If you read between the lines, I am speaking generally. Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it! 18:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Misplaced PROD tag
When you propose an article for deletion, as you did at One World (TV series), the deletion tag should go at the very top of the article. Same for AfD and CSD tags. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of high schools in Caaguazú, Paraguay for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of high schools in Caaguazú, Paraguay, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Caaguazú, Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of high schools in Amambay, Paraguay for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of high schools in Amambay, Paraguay, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Amambay, Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of high schools in Alto Paraguay for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of high schools in Alto Paraguay, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Alto Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
The article Abhishek Upmany has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable person
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Iron Fire
Template:Iron Fire has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sikonmina (talk) 09:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Paul Di'Anno
Template:Paul Di'Anno has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sikonmina (talk) 10:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
New so help haha
How are you doing? I'm new to making articles so would you care explaining what you mean with "(Don't remove tags until discography is referenced, and tone is corrected)"? haha With the references of discography; I just need to put URL of for example Spotify for every song as reference? And tone is corrected? I have no clue what you could mean with that haha.
Thanks, Stefan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefanglp (talk • contribs) 20:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Stefanglp:, please link to the article in question when posting on a talk page. When writing an article, everything should be properly referenced. The paragraphs should be written in the tone of an encyclopedia. For example, "he got asked how he handles with not burning himself out" and "He doesn't really know how to answer that question" are not sentences written in an encyclopedic tone. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
"Cat:atbs" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Cat:atbs and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 27#Cat:atbs until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. TartarTorte 20:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
"Justin Go" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Justin Go and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 29#Justin Go until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Happy editing--IAmChaos 08:56, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
"Kevin Sellers" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kevin Sellers and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 11#Kevin Sellers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Reunion 118
Are you sure this is non-notable considering both its previous and following versions have reliable sources? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 00:25, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Atlantic306:, as sure as sure is. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:10, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Atlantic306:, please link to the article in question when posting on a talk page. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:00, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
Reverts
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Geschichte (talk) 17:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
You only need one WP link
WP:BEFORE Geschichte (talk) 17:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Geschichte:, please link to the article in question when posting on a talk page, and please explain your position in a manner in which I will be able to understand it. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Geschichte:, I do not feel that I should be prohibited from editing all of Wikipedia when I followed WP:BRD, and I did not do MORE than 3 reverts. WP:BRD states "If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again" and "Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change". AFAIK, WP:BRD does not say anything about a page being in development, which many pages are, since Wikipedia is a work in progress. Additionally, blocking me from all of Wikipedia, instead of topic banning me from Template:Morgana Lefay is unnecessary, and may be a conflict of interest. If I can only edit my talk page, will you be refraining from editing Wikipedia aside from your talk page? --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Unblock request
Jax 0677 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I only did 3 reverts to Template:Morgana Lefay. WP:3R states that "An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page — whether involving the same or different material — within a 24-hour period". I made a mistake with one of my reverts, but the overall impact came out in essence to only 3 reverts within the 24 hour period. Additionally, it may be a conflict of interest for the person who reverted my edits to institute the block. Furthermore, the individual who reverted my edits did so in violation of WP:BRD. The reversions that I did were "16:54, 19 February 2022", "17:00, 19 February 2022" and "17:55, 19 February 2022" [the reversions at "17:54, 19 February 2022" were in error, and "rm * Symphony of the Damned (1990) * Sanctified (1995)" was done because I added those back by mistake]. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:00, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Accept reason:
The blocker has replied on his talk page. Geschichte (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- (Non-administrator comment) At WP:3RR, it specifically says
any amount of edit warring may lead to sanctions
and also saysEven without a 3RR violation, an administrator may still act if they believe a user's behavior constitutes edit warring
and most directlyThe rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times
Happy Editing--IAmChaos 22:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of high schools in Misiones, Paraguay for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Misiones, Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of List of high schools in Presidente Hayes, Paraguay for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in Presidente Hayes, Paraguay until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 08:25, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
"Kevin Sellers" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kevin Sellers and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 26#Kevin Sellers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Jay (talk) 07:38, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Toronto Premium Outlets.gif
Thanks for uploading File:Toronto Premium Outlets.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:High Schools in Paraguay
Template:High Schools in Paraguay has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 13:42, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
I didn't comment on this earlier at ANI, because the admin-blocking-someone-they're-edit-warring-with is definitely the bigger problem, but: you should actually read the edit-warring policy, which is very clear that The rule is not an entitlement to revert a page a specific number of times
, and Even without a 3RR violation, an administrator may still act if they believe a user's behavior constitutes edit warring
. You were definitely edit-warring, and you definitely should have stopped earlier, and if Geschichte had reported you for edit-warring instead of blocking you themself then you probably would have been blocked. --JBL (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Weird template adding
Please help me understand, as you've reverted me without a very good explanation. Are you saying you added the "outdated" template for that song article merely because of a single sentence that refers to the respective album in the future tense? Why template that (without explanation) when you could have just tweaked the tense of the verb of that sentence? Couldn't that have been solved faster to merely switching it to "released" past tense? Sergecross73 msg me 03:49, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Seriously? Are you really going to add that vague tag twice and then not answer me? You can't choose to be too lazy to fix it yourself and be too lazy to explain the tag. Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Sergecross73:, please link to the article in question when posting on a talk page. Sorry for late reply, as I was editing from a mobile phone. When editing from a mobile device, it is easier to put the tag than to edit the article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:49, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you telling me to link to the article in question when you just linked to it yourself? Not that it matters, I'm pretty sure I've already resolved this days ago since you refused to respond. Please just fix simple problems rather than using vague tags. Sergecross73 msg me 02:42, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Sergecross73:, it makes the lives of users much easier when one links to the article in question when posting on a talk page, and is common courtesy. It was quite difficult for me to remember to which page you were referring. As I said before, "When editing from a mobile device, it is easier to put the tag than to edit the article". --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Don't you see the irony here? You'll complain about people not linking to the article they're referring to on your talk page, but you won't bother explaining the vague tags you place on articles? I have no problem linking to articles, but I figured it wasn't necessary this time this this is like the only interaction we've had in months. I edit from a mobile device all the time, I know what it's like. The problem here is that vague tags without any explanation help no one. You're better off not tagging it at all if you aren't going to bother explaining what needs to be done. Please don't do that. Pretty certain this isn't the first time you've warned about overuse or poor use of tags either. Sergecross73 msg me 22:05, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @Sergecross73:, I understand now. Where applicable, I will try to explain my {{outd}} tags. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 22:46, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Concern regarding Draft:Witherfall
Hello, Jax 0677. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Witherfall, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
"Furious Love" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Furious Love and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 1#Furious Love until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The Ghost of Art Toys Past (talk) 14:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Witherfall
Hello, Jax 0677. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Witherfall".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 05:34, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
Turnpike Troubadours
Did you not read the body of the article Turnpike Troubadours? Both of the previous albums are mentioned in the body of the article with a reference. They don't need to be referenced every single time they appear. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also, for like the billionth time, please use {{BLP sources}} if the article is biographical. The members of Turnpike Troubadours are still alive; therefore, their article is considered a "biography of living people". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:08, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, sorry that I did not see the references buried in the body. Also, it is not a big deal if I use {{+R}}. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- The reason is because of WP:BLP. Biographies of living people need to be tagged separately from other articles, because of the greater potential of including unsourced or defamatory content about someone who is still alive compared to an object or concept. Also it helps for people who navigate by categories, or who may want to specifically seek out biography articles to improve. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, sorry that I did not see the references buried in the body. Also, it is not a big deal if I use {{+R}}. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Grackle
The page Grackle is a disambiguation page. It doesn't need sources or notability, as it's a navigational point and not an article in its own right. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 02:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
"Fish friday" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Fish friday and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#Fish friday until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)