User talk:Justanothersgwikieditor/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

City Harvest Church

pls read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#City_Harvest_Church I see that you are complaining against me over there. I have no trouble with you. Only NCC and CHC members who repeatedly trying to hide the truth from public. Do you have a problem with me? Have I infringed upon you in anyway? Ahnan (talk) 11:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

lol. I have only one desire, to see a fair wiki article. Your edits are not that fair. Please follow the guidelines set by wikipedia, especially Wikipedia:Verifiability and NPOV. As mentioned by yourself, since you have a vendetta against them, you have no NPOV and your edits are not backed-up by proof.

Hi there, would you happen to have a link to the edit where Ahnan mentioned the vendetta? It would be useful to keep track of these just in case things escalate, which I hope it does not progress to such a drastic stage. Mediation/wiki investigations can be a messy process from past experience.Zhanzhao (talk) 07:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Saw your reply. Thats quite a safe statement actually. Good to take note of though, thanksZhanzhao (talk) 08:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Do Not Destroy The Harmony

I have added back the notability tag. Per WP:NALBUMS, even if the singer is notable, this is little more than a track listing. It makes no claims to notability and is completely lacking in references. – ukexpat (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, based on this edit, I have sent the pages to AfD. --ZhongHan (Email) 06:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Tony Tan

So until you actually find those sources, it will be deleted.

remember wikipedia's Ts&Cs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mllcg (talk • contribs) 07:43, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Please see your talk page for my comments. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 07:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Singaporean records in swimming

You edit a short course record under a long course record table.Montell 74 (talk) 09:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Billy Koh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Billy Koh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Koh until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Cabayi (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 17

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited SDEP, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elgin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Impromptu Meetup on 22 August (Hari Raya Haji, Wednesday)

Hello Wikipedian! Andrew Lih (User:Fuzheado) of Wikimedia US Consortium is in town next week and he is asking if anyone of you can come at Han's Cafe, #01-01 National Library Building, 100 Victoria Street (S)188064 on 22 August 2018 (Wednesday, Hari Raya Haji). Should you wish to reach me directly in real time, please contact me using the Telegram mobile app @Exec8 --Exec8 (talk) 01:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

SG Wiki board

No one responded to your Teahouse question, and I know nothing about what you are asking. Did you get answers somewhere else?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:56, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

@Vchimpanzee: Nope, no answer. It's okay actually since I am just looking at stats which is not terribly important which I can forgo. Thanks for following it up! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mya Lay Sein, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Win Myint (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Holy Spirit Hospital (Berlin), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hermitage (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Sincapore (ship)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, thanks for your contributions to the index page and the ship. Until I came across the ship I had never heard of the now obsolete variant on the name. I created the two items in great part to make it easy for someone who comes across the name to see that they were not typos, and so shine a minor light on Sing's early history. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin:Hi there! I only added the wikiprojects but as I understand disambiguation pages normally have just the disambiguation project on the talk page as it will be one messy talkpage if the particular disambiguation has a lot of entries across different projects. Do excuse me if my understanding is wrong. I am actually more appreciate of your contributions for the 2 pages as I have never heard of the name before and thought someone created a wrong page in lieu of Singapore. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@Acad Ronin:Hi, I was wondering about the index page, which I am more familiar with disambiguation page, so decided to just check about the SIA class you set and realise it is WP:SIA. Thanks for showing something new to me! and I finally understand what you are getting at! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:53, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, That's the great thing about WP. We are always learning, whether about subjects, or about WP technology. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:27, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Asian Children's Festival, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Public Library (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Seletar Airport

Thanks Justanothersgwikieditor. I had reduced the subtitles under "Seletar Airport" as you had recommended and will try to minimise the timeline approach to a prose style, while eliminating lopsided views. I agreed about writing it under as a new article, but I think a better way might be to moved the section and link it with Seletar Airport. However I am not familiar with moving the section (Instrument Landing System (ILS) Controversy With Malaysia) and placed it under a new article and hope to have some feedback and assistance on this. Thanks and have a great festive season and a great 2019.SAaphIrEblUE (talk) 19:40, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

@SAaphIrEblUE: That's one way to handle it. Expand the section before detaching it to a new article by itself. You can refer to Wikipedia:Merging for help on that. The wikipedia guide on merging will help on the copyright aspect, you can treat as a full copy and merge first and then clean up the article accordingly. I will suggest that you can prepare a short summarised description of the incident to be placed in the current section you are expanding and then the link to the new article, you can refer to Template:Main to create the link so it will look something like this. You can ping me again when you have done the move (u can edit the talkpage and see how I ping you first on seletar airport talkpage or otherwise drop a message here for me) and I will help with any cleaning up etc and I dare say the article looks much better now! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:30, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor. Thanks for the advices. Will write up a summary prior to detaching it and once I have done so, I will update you accordingly. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SAaphIrEblUE (talk • contribs) 06:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Browhaus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Royal Albatross part of RWS

What is your evidence that the Royal Albatross is not part of RWS when it is sitting there between Adventure Cove and SEA Aquarium? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.118.57.20 (talk) 07:22, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Reply on your talk page --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 10:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kenneth Gin Ying Doon has been accepted

Kenneth Gin Ying Doon, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

– robertsky (talk) 01:39, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

COI at Pronoyi article

Hi, Can you tell me how you decided that I have close connection to the article I published earlier? Newteacher1 (talk) 09:01, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Newteacher1:Hi, usually editors with COI will like to use Wikipedia as a source of promotion of their related companies. Based on your editing history, you inserted redlinks before the article is created is possible indication you are related in some way. Also, the COI tag is merely suggesting that you have a possible COI and not that you definitively have it.. Nonetheless, if you do not have a COI, feel free to declare on the article talkpage. Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:13, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Yes, you are right, I inserted the red-links while I wasnt know that it is forbidden to do so under "see also" section and Thanks to you that you informed me with this rule, Also, the reason I did it was to prevent tagging the article as Orphaned article. Then you inverted my edits and again thank you that you did. However, since the article is published now, is there any other reason to not link those related articles? Newteacher1 (talk) 09:25, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Newteacher1: It is possible to re-insert provided it is not considered Wp:linkspam. Do read MOS:ALSO also first. I like to ask you now again, do you have any COI with Pronoyi? --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: No, If COI means that I am paid to publish this article, then No, Also I see Now the article is tagged for speedy deletion, can you help me to avoid that? or it will be deleted anyway? I still new at Wikipedia and I am still learning. Newteacher1 (talk) 09:46, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I am making regular appearances here. lols. Newteacher1, COI doesn't mean that you are paid to publish this article. You can be connected to the company, even as a relative of one of the staff, or even as an unpaid intern (not paid position). I placed the CSD for unambigious promotion because it simply is. 4/6 of the sources are of a press release on different websites, one from bizfile, one from the site itself. Search for Pronoyi on Google throws up limited news results (and it is the press release), and numerous hits for the song Pronoyi by the Vikings. – robertsky (talk) 09:56, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Newteacher1, You can try contesting on the article's Talk page if you want to argue for a non-deletion of the article. – robertsky (talk) 09:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Newteacher1: Do read WP:COI clearly, you do not need to be paid to publish this article to have a COI. Are you working for the company? Are you related to any of the company staff and hence there maybe an incentive to publish the article? When the article is marked for speedy deleted, you can click on the contest button and write your reasoning. While you keep saying you are new to wikipedia, your editing shows otherwise to me actually. Unfortunately, I have no interest in this article and I only come across this article while doing general maintenance on Singapore related articles so you are on your own here. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Ok thanks for the clarification about COI, and I have been on Wikipedia for 4 months now, with 148 edits most of them on my sandbox just trying to learn by not damaging others works and I am sorry If I was annoying you. Thank you Newteacher1 (talk) 10:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Quantum Apocalypse for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Quantum Apocalypse, 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/Quantum Apocalypse 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, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: To Singapore, With Love has been accepted

To Singapore, With Love, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

– robertsky (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Brother Joseph McNally

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 Brother Joseph McNally requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_682_2005-01-12.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:45, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kenneth Michael Byrne

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 Kenneth Michael Byrne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_77_2005-01-18.html. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Two-Way Contract Page

You shouldn't have deleted my page and changed the name because the players who are on the list are just the first players who signed two way contracts for every team. It wasn't the players who currently have two way contracts. WarriorsFan30112335 (talk) 01:24, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@WarriorsFan30112335: First of all, First NBA Players to Sign Two-Way Contracts is not deleted by me. I am not an administrator and does not have any power to do so. Read the timeline. RHaworth did it. I moved the page as it is simply a list and zero context and significance being shown why is that page notable. Moving to a list page will save it, given the right context. I done the first part, I leave it to you to give it context. A list of first people doing certain things will not survive WP:AFD. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:33, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Your contributed article, First NBA Players to Sign Two-Way Contracts

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.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, First NBA Players to Sign Two-Way Contracts. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – List of NBA players with two-way contracts. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at List of NBA players with two-way contracts. If you have new information to add, you might want to discuss it at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, 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. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Jmertel23 (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jmertel23: Hi there, you might have posted this in error. WarriorsFan30112335 created First NBA Players to Sign Two-Way Contracts and I moved the page to List of NBA players with two-way contracts. See edit history here. A quick look at pages I created will easily indicated this. Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

See below section as well. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:00, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: I used Twinkle to mark the article for CSD, and it must have posted the notification to your page instead of to original author's. Sorry for the confusion! Jmertel23 (talk) 12:09, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jmertel23: No problem. Seems to be an issue with Twinkle as the opposite happened here (see last section) or the move happened too fast, the tools cannot pick up the original Page name and creator. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry about that WarriorsFan30112335 (talk) 22:29, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Page I created

I know it wasn't your fault, but I am deeply disappointed that my page was deleted. I worked hard on that page. I created a page titled Preacher Lawson, and that didn't get deleted. Have a nice day or night! — Preceding unsigned comment added by WarriorsFan30112335 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@WarriorsFan30112335: I got a few pages deleted, redirected before and I learned from it. The page still lives but in another name and format. The new page (based on name) is still created in your name. Learn to let it go. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:00, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dover Court International School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dover Road (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

New message from Dave1185

Hello, Justanothersgwikieditor. You have new messages at Talk:Seletar_Airport.
Message added 06:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You have my full support here. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 06:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Tips on running a Wiki workshop

Hi there Justanothersgwikieditor. I would like to find out if there is any way to correspond with you via email as I am planning to run a conduct a Wiki workshop. I've seen your posts and would like to seek your expertise and advice in how to improve the Wiki ecosystem (for Singapore-related topics). Many thanks. ArchDrake86 (talk) 01:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@ArchDrake86:For a first post, this seems suspicious. You can send me email via the Email function, for details see WP:EMAIL. Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:43, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor:Apologies, as I created my account to ensure that I can correspond this way. I could not see the 'E-mail this user' option in the left tab for your account (unsure if I am wrong). Could you try corresponding with me instead? Thanks. ArchDrake86 (talk) 02:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@ArchDrake86:Oh, I did not check the checkbox for Allow emails from brand-new users. Done. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor:Email sent. Thanks for the follow-up!ArchDrake86 (talk) 03:35, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@ArchDrake86:I decided not to reply you via email as I think we can further discuss here. I posted the welcome message on your talkpage which I think it is a great beginning source and also wiki's WP:VERIFY policy which I think you can pick up some materials as well. In fact, another active sg user, Sgconlaw, will be better placed than me to advise for what you intended to. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:41, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@ArchDrake86: what sort of workshop are you planning on running? What topics do you intend to cover? To whom is it aimed? — SGconlaw (talk) 04:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

@Sgconlaw: Thanks for the recommendation Justanothersgwikieditor. Hi Sgconlaw. The workshop is aimed at the general public (via sign-ups), and one of the key objective is for participants to understand the importance of research and citation in whichever topic they want to contribute in, which is crucial in further bolstering the credibility of a Wiki entry. At the moment, we would most probably be sticking to the basics (e.g. creating a Wiki account, creating/editing an entry). After our first session and based on popularity/attendance, we would see if we could expand it further into contributing to the articles listed under the SGpedians notice board. ArchDrake86 (talk) 05:16, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Multiple issues (or not)

When you remove a maintenance template from a {{multiple issues}} wrapper leaving only a single issue, as you did with this edit to Raza Obrera, it's good to remove the multiple issues template as well. (I also noticed this with Music in Dresden, but I added another tag, so the article does still have multiple issues.) Thanks, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 05:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@BlackcurrantTea:I am using the deOrphan tool which does not remove the {{multiple issues}} wrapper but generally I try to check before or after clicking the deOrphan link and clean up the wrapper once done. I will keep that in mind in future use. Thanks for the reminder. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Political violence in Germany (1918–33)

Hi, I keep a weary eye on Political violence in Germany (1918–33) and keep thinking how such a massive project could be tackled. In a way, what prevents me from digging deeper is that the page seems entirely superfluous, the various articles on the Weimar Republic cover this aspect completely.

I'm not sure how one would organize this because there were dozens and dozens of important organizations that are covered on EN Wiki already.

Some kind of timeline would be extremely complicated, and seems a near impossible task -- I'm not even sure if there is a reliable list of murders committed, in total it is estimated between "thousands" and "more than 10,000." There is no corresponding article in the DE Wiki other than de:Rechte Gewalt in Deutschland (right-wing violence in Germany) but that covers the "Fememorde" Feme murders only, a very specific form of anti-republican violence.

You de-orphaned the article, how did you do this? Are you interested in working on it?

My personal view is that the article should be deleted: nobody is working on it, and it seems superfluous.

== Peter NYC (talk) 04:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

@Peter NYC:The article actually has a navbox Template:Campaignbox Political violence in Germany added to it by User:Mangokeylime, said navbox is created by the same editor as well. The navbox is under the infobox on the right. This article used to not have any incoming links till the creation of this navbox and placement of it into this article and other related articles. I am just wiki-gnoming on maintenance tags (specifically orphan tags). A quick glance means all the political violence are tied together via the navbox and can be further fleshed out with information from these articles. Discussion with Mangokeylime will be more fruitful on this subject instead. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:24, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, I have moved your page above to draft space. Pls note that list articles do need sources to support the content claimed as like other article - pls see Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. Sources can be any languages and can be group sources. Pls provide the sources and resubmit. Inform me if you want so I could review for you and ge the page publish. Thank you. 06:27, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824). Thanks! CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 02:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake

Hi Xavier, apologies for the edit on SMU School of Law, I was intending to revert the previous editor who had added trivial and non-encyclopaedic content, but took too long and your edit happened in between and got reverted instead. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 05:42, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Apologies accepted. I saw the issues and I thought the time gap was good enough to do the references fix. My apologies also as my comment sounded harsh also. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:57, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

All good and no apology necessary - the time gap should have been plenty, I think I was probably doing multiple things at once and got distracted :) Happy editing! Melcous (talk) 06:57, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Damien Lim (June 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Clarityfiend was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Damien Lim and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Damien Lim, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Clarityfiend (talk) 06:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Justanothersgwikieditor! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Clarityfiend (talk) 06:01, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Deorphaning Ayam Geprek

Hello. I see that you deorphaned the article Ayam Geprek. I was wondering if there's a specific reason to why this action was made, since it seems like the article still doesn't have any incoming links from other articles in article space? Ilyushka88 | ^Talk! _Contribs 14:44, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ilyushka88:At its current state, yes, it is an orphan. I have just put the orphan tag to the article. The deorphan tool that I used did not indicate any other links as of now. As I did not link other articles to Ayam Geprek, it could possibly be some other editors removing the original link. It could also possibly be my mistake but since I used the deorphan tool (see edit summary [1]), it is more likely someone removed the original link, . Nonetheless, the tag is back on the article as it should be. Thanks! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:44, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Found the issue, the link was reverted, see here which lead to the article being orphaned again. Seems like its a good faith edit by User:NaidNdeso to link the articles. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:48, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Anyway, I did a simple see also link from Ayam Penyet as they are similar dishes so it is not an orphan again! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:31, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor:This was in no means meant to sound like an interrogation. :D Just asked in case maybe I didn't notice something/made a mistake. Thanks for fixing it! Happy editing. Ilyushka88 | ^Talk! _Contribs 16:19, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ilyushka88:My explanation probably too detailed but I get more and more curious about the chain of events and lead to more and more things :x. WP:ORPHANAGE tends to get a bit of flak for maybe a bit overzealous deorphaning so I might over explain and not antagaonise another editor for it! Happy editing to you also! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

References for "Lists of..." articles

Hello! Just wanted to drop a note to say there's probably no need to tag "Lists of..." articles as unreferenced (as you did at Lists of problems). These articles don't actually contain any information that can be referenced. They're just a disambiguation page to other Wikipedia lists. The fact that the links at Lists of problems are blue verify the only claim on that page (i.e. that those lists exist). If that doesn't make sense let me know. Otherwise kudos for your work on the orphan backlog! Happy editing! Ajpolino (talk) 20:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ajpolino:Ah okay, I never get to ask about list of lists articles whether is it designated as disambiguation pages, so your message clears things up. Are they officially disambiguation pages? If yes, shouldn't we not tag them as such and hence automatically they are not orphans (by definition)? --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

or perhaps set them as set index be better? --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:57, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Yep, I've never seen any "official" guideline on what to do with "lists of" articles, but I suppose a set index is the best description (rather than a disambiguation). A quick search for articles that are orphaned and have "list of" in the title only pulls a few dozen results. So I think it's a relatively uncommon issue. But you could probably remove the orphan tag from each, since the "lists of" articles are merely navigational aids. Thanks again for all your work on this! Cheers! Ajpolino (talk) 03:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824) has been accepted

List of Tanglin episodes (Episodes 509-824), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

– bradv🍁 04:44, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

ANI report that may be of interest to you

Regarding misuse of automated tools: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bot_like_edits_from_User:BigDwiki. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Superside

• Superside (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello Justanothersgwikieditor. I declined your proposed technical move of Superside back to Konsus. Please take a look at two new references which I added to the article (refs 4 and 5). These confirm that the company has changed its name. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 13:43, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

List of rural localities in Bashkortostan

Hey, don't worry about updating this list manually - I have a script that does the whole thing automatically. Since there's about a thousand new ones that aren't currently on the list it's not worth it to try doing it by hand, lol. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:31, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed about it, just clearing the orphans as it comes. Thanks! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 07:40, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

S'all good, just saves the work :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:23, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos:If the script can be shared and altered/used by me, can you link me to that? I see we have more similar articles coming up~ zzzz --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:47, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

It's kind of a long setup process, you need a bot account and stuff, it's not just a .js thing that can be installed on wiki. I'll run it tomorrow and update the article , don't worry about it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos:Ah okies, I was guessing that but was hopefully it will be something simpler. No worries, not sweating about it, it's just like an itch which cant be scratched easily. Thanks for the work! --01:48, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Criteria

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor. I will need to ask, in terms of opening of companies, what will be notable? Will it be when it's a Singapore brand or etc? I need clarifications on that. Besides, I will be reinstating the PSI 108 as it was the highest in 2010. Please explain why it is not notable. Just because there are worse haze crises recently does not mean the event is not notable in 2010. Thanks. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 06:12, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

@TheGreatSG'rean:For significant company opening, it needs to be notable, generally is that enough wide coverage in news and other areas? The reference only shows the opening speech by a MTI minister on MTI website. Meaning it is likely not notable enough for an entry in a Year in XXX page. Compare this to Google opening their own building in 2016, there are plenty and easy news coverage. Just because a minister is invited to have an opening speech is not significant. If other editors find it significant enough, I am okay with general consensus, if there is a one, to revert it.

For PSI as a gauge, it is only the second level in a 5 level ratings (0-99,100-199 and so on). General news coverage is quite low when it is still below 200 but only gets wider and deeper only when it is reaching 200. Hence I felt that it is only significant when PSI exceeds 200 and then to be noted. However, it is considered a rare moment to exceed PSI 100 in Singapore, hence if you want to revert, I am okay with that. Give it some context, like this is rare occurrence for Singapore. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 07:08, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the info. Will let the editors decide for notability. Cause to be honest, news organisations in Singapore don't usually keep their archives for many years unlike other organizations. I bet some of these events were reported back in 2010. Nonetheless, once the editors rule, I will consider the decision final. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 07:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Some legwork required, either subscribe to some of the news portal which keep archives, or search with NewspaperSG, which if the microfilms are not displayed online, you have to go down to the library to get the reels to read and then write. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 07:26, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

That's kind of true. Not all the articles on NewspaperSG are freely accessible at home. Only Today articles and SPH's articles up to 1989 can be publicly accessed. Nonetheless, I will do it. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 04:22, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Ernest Steven Monteiro

Hi,

I have just removed the copywrite violation portion from the article. Can you help to reviewed if it is acceptable? If yes, please remove the copyvio template. If not, please advise how can I proceed further. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 09:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Flipchip73: I am unable to see the copyvio portion so I cant help in that. For copyvio issues, just have to wait for an administrator or relevant people to take a look and probably do a revdel for the previous revisions. Do not worry about it, just be genuine about the issue and mistake. You can use the tools listed here and check the page against it. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the reply. Diannaa (admin who put the copyvio tag) has replied. Do you have any idea how low of a percentage is considered acceptable, if you happen to know? I'm in the progress of removing or rephrase some sentences. Diannaa provide a tool to check. It is a bit slow to chat with Diannaa as he/she lives in Alberta, Canada. Flipchip73 (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

@Flipchip73: I do not know of the maximum percentage allowed but the version's percentage looks good to me! Green is good, Violation Unlikely 24.2% confidence so I guess it will be fine. The line In 1973 he won the coveted International Award for Distinguished Service of the US National Kidney Foundation. need to be rephrased though, the whole line is red! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Chinese Football Association Footballer of the Year

Hi, Justanothersgwikieditor.

I find that you have merged two articles 'Chinese Player of the Year' and 'Chinese Football Association Footballer of the Year'. As the founder of 'Chinese Player of the Year', I need to point out that these two awards are separate two different awards. Could you undo the merge and resume my article 'Chinese Player of the Year' as it was? I have no idea how to undo your change.

This is the link. The two awards should be in two independent articles. Please revert this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Football_Association_Footballer_of_the_Year

Many thanks!

@Ujishadow: Do remember to sign after commenting! I assume too fast on it and realised it is two different awards. I see that you have since removed the redirect already. Thanks. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Twinkletoes (book series)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor,

I have read the general notability guideline and I believe the article I created, Twinkletoes (book series), does deserve to have a Wiki page of its own. The book series has been around for 10 years, 18 books have been published and more than 60,000 copies have been sold as of 2016 in Singapore. Everything written in the article is informational and factual, and I've tried my best to put in the appropriate references such as news articles (as secondary sources). The parts where I have used the website and books as references/citations, they are used because they were necessary eg. which year the first book was published.

As far as the COI is concerned, I do not represent the publishing company, Flame Of The Forest Publishing, and chose this username, FOTF1989, just sort of a way to deter others from editing and writing things that are not true in the article (as usernames can be seen in View History).

Again, everything written in the article is informational, factual and accurate, with no thoughts and ideas that's simply my own.

In any case, I plan to only do minor edits in this article going forward such as updating the book list, and if I do add anything substantial, it will be properly cited.

Having said all the above, please consider removing the COI and notability tags you added: A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (March 2019) and The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. (March 2019)

Additionally, may I ask why did the article get a start low rating?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FOTF1989 (talk • contribs) 08:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@FOTF1989: Thank you for clarification on the possibility of WP:COI, as per the tags said, there is a possibility and you had clarified that you do not have it. Will clean up the tags shortly and refer to this declaration! The issue is due to the closeness of the username and publishing company, it is very suspicious and I am glad we cleared this up.

Your initial references are WP:Primary sources and one unrelated source (no mention of the book) which cannot establish notability, see WP:GNG. Your 2 new sources from straits times and nyp established that from a non primary source. Once notability is established via secondary sources, primary sources are okay to be used (though sparingly if possible). So we are good here now.

"Flame Of The Forest - Books by Thomas Koh and Titian". Flame Of The Forest Publishing Pte Ltd. Retrieved 2 March 2019. (Primary source)
Thomas Koh & Titian (2008). Twinkletoes #1 A Star Is Born. Singapore: Angsana Books (Flame Of The Forest Publishing). ISBN 978-981-4193-60-3. (Primary source)
Inside back cover of Twinkletoes #1 ISBN 978-981-4193-60-3 (Primary source)
Kor, Justin (2018-06-20). "Chia Boon Leong – The only Singaporean to play football at the Olympics". Singapore Olympics. Retrieved 2 March 2019. (unrelated source)

I am using automated article rating which has a predicted Start rating. Some articles will never move pass a certain rating due to length and information available. Personally reviewing, I will still rate as a start class, perhaps at most a C. The rating is based on certain criteria which you can view here. If you are interested for a better review, you can bring the articles to Wikipedia:Peer review for a better look and review, they may also advise on what can be improved also.

Thank you again for willingness to discuss the various issues! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 08:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Mandai Bus Depot

Hi!

Why revert this? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mandai_Bus_Depot&diff=prev&oldid=885455418

It's clearly not completed in 2018, and will not open in 2020+ either with very high probability. So 2019 it should be... at least according to the most recent LTA statement: https://www.lta.gov.sg/apps/news/page.aspx?c=2&id=e9e38ac6-8e96-4a8a-8870-5feacadaaa5d

In any case, your revert to 2018 is worse than:

• using 2019
• removing all scheduled dates from the article until it actually opens

— Zertrin ^(blabla) 16:48, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

@Zertrin: The initial dates are without a reliable source, the only source with a date (2018) is from land transport guru which is not exactly reliable. Even though it is not that reliable, at least it indicated it is 2018. Arbitrarily changing to 2019 without a source is not helping the article either. I only removed one instance of a scheduled date which is from the infobox, which specifically indicated 2018 as the opened date. Since we do not have a source for this information (opened date for the depot), we can certainly remove any unsourced statement. I refer your LTA source, I saw that and that's talking about the train depot and not bus depot. Even if it is integrated, it will be WP:OR to assume the same. And based on your own words, you are making assumptions which is original research (clearly not completed in 2018, will not open in 2020+ with high probability. so 2019 it should be). I understand your rationale, and hence undo the change, marking it as a good faith edit but we still need to fall back to reliable sources and such when making such statements. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:45, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

I understand your statements, but then it seems to me that instead of reverting, you should have removed all references to 2018. The fact that it opens in 2019 might not be backed by a reliable source, okay, but the 2018 date is wrong and it is not original research, it is a real life fact (go see by yourself on the terrain if you don't believe it).

— Zertrin ^(blabla) 08:23, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zertrin: If you understood my statement, you can be bold and removed it as suggested by yourself, I would not have reverted the removal. 2018 is supported by 1 unreliable source, it can stay till someone updates it with a reliable source or remove it completely. 2019 as you now admitted is completely unsourced and original research, which can be deem vandalism. As said, I removed the opened date as it is blatantly false as physically not open and unsourced. Wikipedia is meant to be backed up by reliable sources so people can trust the content. You might be frustrated by the need of reliable sources, it is nonetheless how Wikipedia works. I actually spent time searching for any articles to support your changes. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

It misses my attention, as I was searching for bus depot but your source listed here indicated completion should be on 2019. It is usable as a source and hence I had updated into the article. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I might have forgotten to cite the source I provided here in my initial edit, and that's my fault, but your first answer was very off the point in light of the source I provided. But more importantly, what's so annoying are people loving the quick revert button of the "live edit" tool, and then throwing WP:xxx pages and then finally calling it vandalism (heck, I invite you to actually check the definition of vandalism!) without considering whether what they did is better or worse than what they undid. Reverting to "2018" when today is 2019 and it is clear that the depot did not open yet is just stupid in my very humble opinion (good luck finding sources announcing things that did not happen, --- indeed, no one does a press release "2019-01-01 we are pleased to announce that the depot did not open in 2018" ---, even if it is clear to people on the terrain (ground truth cannot be referenced in wikipedia sadly...) that it did not happen) — Zertrin ^(blabla) 04:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Zertrin: Your opening remarks are off. You said I removed all mentions of 2018, I did not. Again, go check the history, I reverted your changes, and in a separate edit, removed the opened date in the infobox since we know it did not happen. This is Singapore, we know that there will be fanfare, newspaper reports etc. It was unsourced so hence removed.

When I revert your changes, I marked your changes as good faith edit in the edit summary. I did not mark it as vandalism nor did I just revert the changes with the default vandalism tag. That is an unfair accusation. While you invite me to learn what defines vandalism, I ask you to read all the edit summaries, changes properly when you calmed down.

Again, Wikipedia required sourced statements, when you make an unsourced statement, I can leave it and tag citation needed. Since the change is made about dates and does not match the source given, I decided to revert your unsourced changes to match the source. Some editors will simply mark your changes as a waste of time, making no meaningful changes. If we cannot find sources that update the scheduled dates even if we know it expired, we just wait for the next official updates and update accordingly. Articles get outdated, we let it get outdated, we wait for sources then we update based on these sources. We do not update based on what we see or anticipate. Reverting to 2018 is stupid in your opinion but that is the only sourced date at that moment. Again, just because you think it is stupid, we cannot just change it because we still have to keep to the policies of sourced statements. If you still think that it is that stupid, I invite you to go to the various official noticeboards and express your opinion there. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:30, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"You said I removed all mentions of 2018" --> where did I say that?

"It was unsourced so hence removed" --> my mistake for forgetting the source, your mistake (IMHO) for reverting to a version which is worse from the point of view of ground truth + common sense under the blanket argument WP:OR. Yes WP:OR must be respected in general, but not blindly and without common sense.

"That is an unfair accusation" --> just reacting to your statement "which can be deem vandalism"

"even if we know it expired [...] We do not update based on what we see" --> I think we will need to agree to disagree here on whether this is stupid.

— Zertrin ^(blabla) 10:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

My bad on the first line - read revert to 2018 as removed 2018. I take that back.

Common sense - remove the opened date (you changed to 2019 which is WP:OR, I removed it). If an article is outdated, let it be. If you do not have a source for what you write, it is either unsourced or WP:OR.

Unsourced or WP:OR can be vandalism because you altered dates without a source supporting it. Without the sources, how do people deem if this is a genuine edit or vandalism?

This is the very foundation of Wikipedia, sourced statements to update the article. You can try on other articles using this line of reasoning and see where it will get you.

Seems like we are not getting any further from the first replies, we can stop the discussion. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 10:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

"Unsourced or WP:OR can be vandalism because you altered dates without a source supporting it. Without the sources, how do people deem if this is a genuine edit or vandalism?" --> from WP:Vandalism: "If it is clear that the editor in question is intending to improve Wikipedia, those edits are not vandalism, even if they violate some other core policy of Wikipedia."

"You can try on other articles using this line of reasoning and see where it will get you." --> I think you did not understand my complaint at all. I don't disagree with the fact that everything needs to be verifiable, and it was my mistake to forget to include the source. I disagree with how you dealt with that (by simply choosing the easy path of clicking revert on the live change tool even if it leads to something clearly wrong) that's all.

"we can stop the discussion" --> well, I tried, but you insisted in reverting my edit on your talk page (for which you indeed have every right).

Sorry for this unpleasant discussion, to reiterate clearly, initially I was only complaining about your usage of the live changes revert button.

— Zertrin ^(blabla) 11:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Self-Published Sources

Hello Justanothersgwikieditor! The issue is different here, as this is a new international forum: in that PARTICULAR context, quoting their website ("self-published source") is perfectly fine. I am told a feature article mentioning them will be published later this week in a leading, peer-reviewed, European financial quarterly => Will link to that article as soon as I have it. Thanks for your help. B.Andersohn (talk) 11:04, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

@B.Andersohn:I tagged wrongly and should be tagged as primary source. I do not write new articles as much and I know I can always skip the AFC process but I always try to keep in mind will the article passed AFC submission? At least three reliable secondary sources and notability. That article is notable but lacking three reliable secondary sources. It could likely become a draft once it is reviewed in its current state. You can search for related articles in The Straits Times since it is Singapore based. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:45, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: No worries, & thanks encore for your help. I also keep the AFC criteria in mind (without necessarily going through the process). Like I said: it's a recently established Anglo-Asian conference. I know the Forum will soon be mentioned in leading financial journals and pension industry media in Mainland Europe (this week) and in the UK (next month) etc. Will update & enrich the article as soon as the said publications are out. There may not be any article in Singapore itself before say October 2019 -- recall: this is an international event held in Singapore -- as opposed to a Singaporean event. etc. B.Andersohn (talk) 12:50, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

**Para infantry brigade**

Hello dear regret to inform para infantry brigade and para commando brigade is not same I happen to know alot abt about Military Targaryen-Daenerys (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

@Targaryen-Daenerys: And this is with regards to which article? --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:44, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, as we meet up every few days near the middle of orphans with incoming links I thought I’d drop by and say hello. Mccapra (talk) 10:42, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Mccapra: Hi! Yes, I believe we been "fighting" over the report haha. I like to check through those with large number of incoming links as they are likely to have navbox links to them and make sure the navbox are inserted into the article~! You can see that I am lazy to check those with 3 links~ hahha. My activities are dropping a bit due to COVID-19 and had to work from home, lots of things to do in the house and no time for wiki! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Ah yes it’s pretty serious this coronavirus thing. We’ve only had a couple of well contained cases in the U.K. so far, but who knows? Anyway I don’t mind starting at the bottom and working my way up. I’m happy to leave the top ones to you. All the best Mccapra (talk) 07:25, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

ONIX AUDIO

Please can you help me to stop the user MR OLLIE in the article ONIX AUDIO a well established and historic article from his contnnued vandalism of editing it .. I beleive he is paid to do this as its clear his iterest is not that of the WIKI resource .. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonyb1961 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tonyb1961: I will take a look but it will be a neutral stand. If you think it is better to be resolved by administrators, please report to WP:ANI. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:08, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Please do I am sure anyone will see this persons edits are crazy and he clearly has motives to make them so . Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonyb1961 (talk • contribs) 03:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tonyb1961: After a quick review, I think you have a conflict of interest and you need to respond to that. I am currently of the view that MrOllie is doing the right thing instead.--Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:16, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi I have responded I am not employed or have a conflict I enjoy the research and have been active in building the resource .. I do not think his interest is honourable in the way he is detstrying the articel built over years — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tonyb1961 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@Tonyb1961: Your personal attack is not appreciated. Any edit dispute, please talk it out on the article talk page and not by reverting edits. Please do read up on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially WP:OWN. The original article is almost unreadable, MrOllie had trimmed it up nicely. Any unsourced or promotional information can be removed at anytime. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Edit tracking

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, apparently a user UltraSGuy is tracking my edits again and claims that he knows me when I don't know him in real life. Besides, he also claims he's behind the IP edits back in September 2019. Is there anything I can do about it? Will need help on this. Thanks. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 17:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

@TheGreatSG'rean: I see he has been blocked as I was not on wiki during the CNY period. You had done the correct thing by going to ANI but we know it is a temporary fix until the person got tired of harassing online. For real life, I will suggest that you change different places to do ur wiki editing and see whether are you still hounded or not. Do stay vigilant in real life as well, take note of possible stalkers and report to the school administration if such stalking really occurs. Stay safe! It does not matter which gender you are, both (or all) genders can be at risk. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Welcome. Anyway, I don't even know the real-life identity of UltraSGuy, so I will just treat it as an online case for now. I will keep a lookout. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 02:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Chua Chu Kang

On the usual standard of most articles accross en.wikipedia, it should be noted that it is
==References==
<references/>
==External Links==

What I did is bringing the article on the same wikification on most of articles


TYSM Azmi1995 (talk) 09:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Azmi1995: Yes, that is the standard but you also bunched up all the categories together in a single line instead of 1 category per line. Hence the Reverted good faith edits edit summary. See the bunching up --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:30, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Re: Lisa Von Tang

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, I am not Morningsunshine. I am a different person altogether. Morningsunshine had previously attempted to write about Lisa Von Tang, but was not successful. So now I am trying my own hand at it. And no, I am not being compensated for trying to write this article. Lisa Von Tang just happens to be my favourite Singaporean fashion label. Thank you. Ireallyreallylikewriting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ireallyreallylikewriting (talk • contribs) 12:37, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I do not see why is there a reason to actively to protect the draft? Please discuss all this on User_talk:Cabayi#Re:_Lisa_Von_Tang_page instead. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

W!LD RICE

Sorry about the overly quick removal. Once I looked at the source in more detail I quickly realized it was much better than I had thought and restored the material. And thanks for starting to repair the article. I put it on my todo list, to evaluate its past gutting, but I'll leave it to you since you obviously know more about Singapore articles. Meters (talk) 02:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Meters: No problem, I can understand the feeling as I am now monitoring Singapore related articles and always have to refrain from biting new editors or showing an overzealous attitude to these articles. Quick glance on the gutting seems that it was a bit promotional and hence reduced to stub. Do feel free to write up or update the article as you like! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:43, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Solomon Carpet

Hi. I saw that you put Notability tag on Solomon Carpet article. This company is one of the main carpet producers of Iran and the largest carpet in the world was woven by this company. What is your criteria for notability? Please help me to improve its references. Thanks  MrInfo2012  Talk  04:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@MrInfo2012: Hi, looking at the lead paragraph, there is only 1 source which made this claim and it is at a ceremony held by Solomon Carpet. I skipped the self published sources as they cannot be used for notability purposes. While I do not doubt is it the one of the main carpet producers of Iran, more sources are needed and how it passes the usual notability guidelines. Producing the largest carpet in the world makes the carpet notable (if enough sources exist) but does not confer notability to the company. In short, better and more sources (not necessarily English) are needed. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

SFF

I am not a paid editor, I am in the Fintech industry and have been to SFF.Kwansss (talk) 06:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not part of the Monetary Authority of Singapore, though I met a few at SFF, but I met a lot of overseas foreign dignitaries at SFF. I am not from Singapore and currently staying other part of the world.Kwansss (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

@Kwansss: Okay great! Thanks for all the information! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding. I may expand in the coming days, if you think that’s promotional, please revert it.Kwansss (talk) 09:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Please create a new page

Hello my name is Ishan and I am from India, I noticed your edits on Garena. Thank you for your edits. I request you to create a new page of Garena's Parent company Sea Limited Itsrear (talk) 08:38, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Itsrear: Hi there~! I am still working on some other changes and finding references so creation of Sea Group can be done. Planning to work off the Draft:Sea Group and submit the draft instead. Its still a work in progress so I am not sure when I submit the draft but hopefully eventually I will click the button to submit. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: you should submit the Draft:Sea Group.
Itsrear (talk) 16:48, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Lee Hsien Loong article

Hello, I have proposed for a revamp of the page of Lee Hsien Loong, but failed to ping you despite you being one of the contributors to the debate of the article's "Controversies" section. I apologise for that omission and this is a personal notification to request your participation and feedback. Seloloving (talk) 12:28, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving: no worries, reading up now. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:28, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Ng Yat Chung article

For that article, do we need to put SPH's history for 2020 and this year given restructuring? TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheGreatSG'rean:Yes but that will be on SPH page, not Ng. Please do not use SPH's papers for the sources as it will be primary sources. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Thanks. Will be updating the SPH article soon. If the vandalism continues on that NYC article cos of that conference, that article should be placed under protected edits. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 03:13, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@TheGreatSG'rean: Thanks! I raised the PP request and RobertSky requested urgent protection via Discord and already done! Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Thanks once again!

Removing edits made on Tampines GRC

Hi, 2nd minister appt is also important too. Unless appt shown the individual not helming the ministry then we could leave that out. But why are u removing edits that shows individual that helms the ministry be it as first or second minister? What do you mean by sufficient when 2nd Minister appt are also impt. Pls give me a valid reason. Thanks!

@202.166.70.149: As per edit summary, every appointment is important. Each minister has multiple appointments but we do not list all the appointments. If you say second appointment is as important, I will say the same for the third and the forth and so on. To avoid puffery, we usually just note the highest appointment the person has will do. Per your edit summary, you noted he is the second minister, not the main minister, which means it is not the highest rank! If he is not the main minister, he is not helming the ministry, he is just the backup of the main minister. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:33, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

One-North Additions

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to One-north. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Justanothersgwikieditor, I want to check since there are missing key buildings missing in the One-North Wiki, which includes the Rochester @ Rochester Park, then how do i add it it the page without "promotional" feeling? Although I only included the facts of the building like number of units, level, who is the developer. This is similar to section under "Nepal Hill" where there is a sentence: "Co-living property by The Ascott Limited, lyf one-north Singapore, will also be within the compound within completed in 2021. The property will offer 324 units.[43]"

@PropertyExpertSingapore:, thanks for highlighting on the information of lyf one-north Singapore which I had just removed as well. Based on other articles on regions in Singapore and there is no mention of any condominium and hence likely any information of condominium will most likely be scrubbed out eventually. Since lyf one-north Singapore and One-North Eden are basically condominiums, I do not see any particular reason to retain such information (Singapore has lots of condominiums).

It does not matter whether was the information was existing or not. Wikipedia is an ongoing update of information so if something is not caught the first time round, subsequent reviews can remove such materials the next time round.

Also, if you have any conflict of interest or not, it will be best if you can declare them. Based on your username, it sounds like you are likely working in the real estate field and might be specialising in one-north area (based on your contribution pattern). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:53, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. So if I update on the Ntu Alumini club will it also be considered promotional? PropertyExpertSingapore (talk) 04:15, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

There was also a mention of Citadines Hotel, so can I add in Park Avenue Hotel too? PropertyExpertSingapore (talk) 04:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

@PropertyExpertSingapore: Ultimately it depends on common sense. Does the statement sounds like coming out of a brochure or an advertisement? If the answer is yes, maybe, some aspects might sound like it, then yes it is promotional or advertorial. Until the words are out, it is hard to judge. Rochester Commons might be notable enough though there is some promotional wording there. Hotels are generally okay as it is considered a facility which is acceptable. NTU Alumni Club is worth a mention (no promotional wording please). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:09, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

warriors

how club can exist if misses league season, has to be noted at least...thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.143.110.110 (talk) 02:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@93.143.110.110: The club can exist without playing a single season of football as long as it is registered as a football club and recognised by the authority. Missed participation does not means the club suddenly does not exist anymore. Look at Tanjong Pagar FC, it sat out for 5 seasons and played in the 2020 season as a replacement for Warriors, it was still existing during the 5 years. I noted that you add in a line about missing the 2021 season, do add a source for it, even if it is true as this is per Wikipedia's policy. Thanks. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:42, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

https://www.instagram.com/p/CLoRId_lQ3X/?igshid=1mwaemw1juszn

Easy im not just so skilled in adding ref's. Any schedule showing they are out confirms it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.137.20.134 (talk) 08:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@93.137.20.134: Then learn to write reference, there are many references in the article, copy and paste a cite web reference and modify content accordingly. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 08:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

also

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuala_Lumpur_City_F.C.

pls fix few infobox details (image size 200px 👈, the hawks outdated nickname... since page is locked — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.137.20.134 (talk) 08:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC) ........ afc cl group g: jiangsu should be removed from table please as shanghai took the spot. tnx in advance if fix first — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.137.20.134 (talk) 08:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@93.137.20.134: Also, I am not that interested to fix all these football articles. If you have an issue due to page protection, do create an account and you can edit it after being autoconfirmed. Feel free to ask for these changes in their respective talkpage. Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 08:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

List of Denmark military equipment of World War II

Hello Justanothersgwikieditor I see you have been adding to the article I started List of Denmark military equipment of World War II thank you for your contributions in making the article better!.I am just writing to you as I feel I should inform you that I am not sure that the new title for the list you put List of Denmark military equipment of World War II is fully grammatically correct in that I am not sure whether the use of Denmark in the title sounds correct.The use of Denmark in the title does not sound right to me. This is not an insult to your knowledge of grammar I just feel I should give you constructive criticism to help you improve it further just a little bit.I just feel the right thing to do with people is just tell them when they have done something wrong so they can improve themselves with that feedback.It does not seem to me to let somebody do something that I would think is just slightly not correct and not tell them about it as they would keep making that error and never improve themselves with the feedback.What would sound right in my opinion is List of World War II military equipment of Denmark or List of Danish military equipment of World War II Danish being the word used to say that somebody or an organisation is from Denmark just like the use of German for somebody from Germany or an organisation from Germany.I am only saying this so you can investigate thìs further and improve your knowledge in the process. I will leave the title of the article as it is to respect your contribution you can change it if you want keep up the good work on Wikipedia! Anonymous contributor 1707 (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC).

@Anonymous contributor 1707: Hi there, do see WP:OWN and I know that you are going in a big circle, trying to camouflage the fact that you are saying I have poor grammer. It's obvious from the fact that you spent almost 50% of your reply, beating around the bush on it. Yes, I do notice it comes off as awkward and per my edit summary, I noted that I am basing off the navbox template. It was a quick fix and if you find the fix inappropriate, you can undo the move, make the change in the template and everything will be better. You choose to come to my talkpage and being passive aggressive about the whole change without reading edit summaries and fix things up. As I view it, please read WP:OWN and move on. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I apologise Justanothersgwikieditor did not need to come off as passive aggressive and should have paid more attention on my part I just wanted to be informative I did not intend to force you to make changes or be aggressive towards you(this is all literal I am not being sarcastic I have good intentions). I only talked about grammar so you would not be offended when I said that I was not sure about the article title although looking back on it I should have picked up how bad it could have sounded. I see the reason why you changed it now and it was a valid one. Guess I should not have used exclamation marks I did worry it would sound sarcastic but I thought it would make the text a bit more friendly.So I understand there really was no error just a mistake on my part for not reading the edit history properly.I am sorry for having this on your talk page I give you permission to get rid of it(bit embarrassed I did not pick up how bad the post could seem to others) if you want to and keep up the good work Anonymous contributor 1707 (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2021 (UTC).

Request for opinion

Hey again Justanothersgwikieditor, I hope you're doing well. If you have a spare moment, could I ask you to weigh in at WP:Articles for deletion/Devadas Krishnadas (2nd nomination)? It's a persistent piece of advertising that's returned because of minimal participation on the first AfD. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 02:47, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle: Remarked on AFD, notability tends to be a fine line and commented based on merits. He did wrote a fair bit of articles for the local newspapers which might passed the bar for somebody's interpretation. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time. In relation to the articles he has written, you may find the following reassuring: Wikipedia:Notability#cite_note-4 says that Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of notability. This is because they are not independent of the subject, which is one of the requirements of the general notability guideline. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Task force for Singapore movies

​I had interest in movies but not much in terms on local films in Singapore. However, there's clearly lots of proofing and maintenance as what I did on the past, such as Money not Enough and I Not Stupid, but need to extend to other films so that it will match the standards to the other films in Americas and other films. I will need help with a few editors because in terms I will be busy and on hiatus. Let me know. And happy CNY in advance. Sculture65 (talk) 08:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Sculture65: I do not have much interest in Singapore's local films as it is pretty much Jack Neo and his over-squeezed movie franchises. As I often lamented to other SG based editors, there are really not much sources or coverage other than the usual media, and they are pretty limited in scope and information. Tends to be more human interest especially on this area of Singapore topics. Hence, I decline your suggestion/offer but I will do wiki-gnoming on it if it crosses my path or I see something I can fix. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

​Sorry for the late reply. I respect the decision, since I return to come across some Wikipedia articles I had done in the past. It's sucks the edit got revert because of a long plot, but at least you can do is to trim down or revise the plot so that it was much clearer. The old plot is too outdated and not to movie standards, but that's what I can do. This edit was came to my attention. Please look again at my edit and try to reduce it like less than "1500 words" etc. Sculture65 (talk) 14:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

@Sculture65:No worries on late reply. While technically not a guideline, WP:PLOTSUM did say 400-700 which was derived from WP:FILMPLOT, the MOS on film, also indicating 400-700 words. I read a lot of film plots on wikipedia and the long plot you introduced is way too long and detailed. As per my edit summary, it is not a blow by blow description of what happened, it should be in a few sentences of less than 10 words each, what is happening in this scene? I agreed with Hildanknight that the fastest way to fix the long plot is to revert back to the GA's version of the plot. Any missing important plot points can be re-inserted again, which is easier to keep removing unimportant points which require lots of re-reading. I retained your cast section which is well written and concise, giving enough information about the characters to have an overall view. It is a lot of efforts and I understand your own efforts being removed etc but I feel that you had done a good job nonetheless. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor:I've seen and glad I learn something. I'll edit again if time permits, and I thank you appreciating my works. Just to let you know, I pretty dislike having my edits undone (and so was some of the other editors to be fair, unless it is an extreme case of course), but that's Wikipedia's part and parcel of life. Sculture65 (talk) 12:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

How do I request a file upload?

@121.200.86.194: Hi, you can upload a file via the Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

No I mean, I found the file upload request page, how do I request an upload? 121.200.86.194 (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@121.200.86.194: Are you meaning you are requesting for other editors to upload a photo for a page? Try asking in the article's talkpage. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Edits regarding radio stations

Hi there, apparently radio stations by SPH have been redirected because of lack of independent and verifiable content. Is there any idea how to resolve this so that at least the radio stations can be there? Thanks. TheGreatSG'rean (talk) 17:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

@TheGreatSG'rean: Well, the good thing is that it is not deleted so we can work on getting independent and verifiable content to remove the redirect. The best way is to find articles for their name change so we got coverage and hopefully be considered independent and notable. I understand your concern but currently I am trying to get Singapore related articles which has no sources (Cites no sources (168)) down to zero as they can be AFD anytime and we lose these articles (though a refund is possible but avoiding the route if possible). @Robertsky: Any interest for the radio stations article? --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hariz Farid (April 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Luciapop was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hariz Farid and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hariz Farid, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Luciapop (talk) 15:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Justanothersgwikieditor! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Luciapop (talk) 15:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Faizal Raffi has been accepted

Faizal Raffi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 01:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose

He was not just an author, he was our freedom fighter our liberator from foreign rule. Also his death date is an alleged one. Make necessary changes or allow other with better knowledge to make them. Palak Mehta18 (talk) 07:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hoffman & Associates (April 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Hoffman & Associates and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hoffman & Associates, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DGG ( talk ) 04:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Removing edits time and time again

Hi please stop your nonsense of removing my edits. It is very irritating. Please dont pin point me that I vandalise as what u did on my talk page. Please look at what u want made is it the same as me. If it is same then dont change. No point getting u and I into an edit war. And do not threaten me by saying u will block me. I relly dont see a need to take down my info. In addition no grammar mistake also. Be this the last time I see u taking down edits if not i will now request u to be block instead of me. Thanks! If u want to delete my message to you go ahead but dont regret that u will be block. Sorry if my words is harsh but that is the frustration I have on you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.166.70.149 (talk) 09:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@202.166.70.149: Please reply to all the comments on your talkpage. There is fairly no need for me to repeat what others had said. It has been noted time and time again on your talkpage but you did not respond to any of the messages and you chose to come to my talkpage because I reverted your disruptive editing. Persistent disruptive editing will get you banned. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Seeking a neutral opinion

Hello. I am seeking your assistance again.

In the past week, I have been increasingly reverting User talk:202.166.70.149 due to their poor English. See diffs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=East_Coast_Group_Representation_Constituency&oldid=prev&diff=974458748

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aljunied_Group_Representation_Constituency&diff=prev&oldid=975887913

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chua_Chu_Kang_Group_Representation_Constituency&diff=prev&oldid=975888999

However, it's understandable that the user may feel harassed, as they have reverted my reverts accordingly, even when it doesn't make sense. For example, on Aljunied GRC's page:

Aljunied GRC is led by Pritam Singh

was changed to

Aljunied GRC present days heads by Pritam Singh

under the reason "Rewritten the sentence as previous user (aka me) modify it and claims that is bad english structure but it does not look so." Which obviously doesn't make sense. The IP user is a useful contributor, but nevertheless has already racked up a previous block, numerous warnings, and vandalism counts (which I disagree with). I do not wish to take the user to ANI, and seek your neutral input on his talkpage, if possible. Thank you. Seloloving (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving: Based on this edit, I see that it can be a bad case of WP:OWN. I had placed an information tag on his talkpage as well. I see that his English proficiency has been noticed and a few times as well. I believe ANI will not be needed, as long as he continues to "vandalise", report to WP:AIV accordingly and he will get increasing length of blocks. Apparently he will move on to other topics after concerns are being raised on a topic. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Update : Based on the 4 warnings given, do go ahead and report to AIV if he "vandalise" again, please remember to cite WP:OWN issues as well. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:34, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance and advice. Seloloving (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Seloloving: He has been blocked (3 months) for another round of persistent editing. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor - well, I tried. Thanks for the heads up. Seloloving (talk) 09:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

```

OHD COI

Hi there, I am not sure how to fill up the COI

Under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Paid_editors, it states "If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship. You may do this on your user page, on the talk page of affected articles, or in your edit summaries. As you have a conflict of interest, you must ensure everyone with whom you interact is aware of your paid status, in all discussions on Wikipedia pages within any namespace.

Can I just keep to disclosing on the 'edit' or 'request for edit' requests? Thank you. Edvarcl (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Is this what you meant? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Oasia_Hotel_Downtown#COI — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edvarcl (talk • contribs) 10:34, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@Edvarcl: Yes. That is correct and I moved it within the project banner for better reading as well. You will need to maintain your own user page with a declaration, an example will be User:Alexdltb, as well. Can be in text, table or anything.

You are not supposed to edit the article directly from now onwards due to the COI. Any edits are to be requested, you can refer to this Template:Request edit on how to request other editors to edit. Generally it requires you to create a new section, put the template {{request edit}} there and write out what you want to add/modify/remove with references and reasoning. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:26, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Edvarcl like this?

@Edvarcl: Yes. It will be good that you list OHD (or/and others) as the client(s) of your company and mentioned which pages which you have paid COI, (requested) edits. Its better to be out front on your userpage rather than looking through your contributions, a simple but good example is here, checking the talkpages of the articles for COI declaration. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:13, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: done for user page.

@Justanothersgwikieditor: I understand that I am supposed to edit the article directly from now onwards due to the COI. But what if it is an edit for readability and no factual changes? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Oasia_Hotel_Downtown Edvarcl (talk) 09:30, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Edvarcl: Thanks for the update on your user page. Do remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ at the end of your comment so a signature will be automatically generated. Understand it is for readability and no factual changes but it will be best an edit request since it is not an obvious minor edit. It could be treated as promotional by some other editors. I can help with this edit request. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Ah I see. Thank you! Edvarcl (talk) 10:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Sorry to bother you, but I am trying to understand how long it takes for change requests to be approved. I put up some change requests on the 11th Aug. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Oasia_Hotel_Downtown Edvarcl (talk)

@Edvarcl: It really depends on volunteers and admins (who are volunteers as well) to check the requests and either approve/reject it. So it can be very fast or very slow or somewhere in between. I can only advise patience. Understand your client might be impatient about it or contract issues but the situation is sadly unavoidable. I try to see whether I am free later to take a look at it. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:34, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: I see! Yes, I did told them to exercise patience as well. Is the queue generally ordered based on timeliness (last in, last out) or individual editor's interest? Thank you so much! Edvarcl (talk)

@Edvarcl: If you look at the talkpage, there is a link (There are currently 96 requests waiting for review.) in the word 96 requests (number might be different for you as it is a cached result), it will bring you to CAT:EDITREQ where the requests are in chronological order and generally it is being done First In First out. Yours is around 50+ 60+ in queue. Of course, in eliminating backlog, the oldest are being cleared first and whether an editor is feeling competent about assessing it. There are quite a few partial done so hopefully the older ones are cleared faster or someone is interested in yours. I am not sure I am that competent for your edit requests so we can only wait for others (yes I have other stuff that I used to wait a few months for other editors to assess but generally I forget about them and it is not as time critical as yours (in your sense)). So patience is the only thing now. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:01, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: I see. Yes I did looked at the requests totals and they fluctuated up and down every week when I checked it, but I wasn't sure how they are processed. Thank you for the clarifications! Edvarcl (talk)

Please create a new page

Uhh can you help me I don't really know how to talk with someone on wikipedia. and how do I add a bio? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Felixtoothy (talk • contribs) 06:22, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Felixtoothy:Hi there, yes this is how we generally communicate on wikipedia and you are doing fine. I have posted a welcome message on your talkpage, look through the links in the post. Generally before creating an article about somebody, we generally advise new editors to start with small edits on other existing articles first. This is to get a feel on general ideas and how to edit an article. As you are mentioning you are adding a bio, please do not write about yourself, your family members and relatives, friends or your co-workers etc. Do check for existing articles first before starting to write about the person. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on an article draft

Hello, thanks for removing the orphan tag on the article I created for The Wharf. I see you've helped another editor with COI, so I wanted to see if you might be willing to provide some feedback on another article I created. It is an article about one of the companies that developed The Wharf called Hoffman & Associates. My original draft was rejected for being promotional and now agree with that call. I've made significant edits to the piece and it would be great to hear your thoughts since you are familiar with The Wharf.

There is already an article on the second company behind The Wharf, Madison Marquette, so my thought was that notability wouldn't be an issue given Hoffman & Associates' connection to Madison Marquette and The Wharf. Thanks for your time and it would be great to hear your thoughts on the draft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hoffman_%26_Associates SBCornelius (talk) 18:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

@SBCornelius: De-orphaning an article is a simple process, just checking on whether an article has other articles linking to it. I cannot say to have much understanding but I will take a look and try to improve on anything I see. If you do not see any edits by me, its either okay or I am unable to make any improvements/changes. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:50, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Reading the draft and the reason for rejection, I understand why it was rejected. Notability is not established and also note that notability is not inherited nor transferable etc. The article has to stand on its own legs. As per my archive, note the section on Solomon Carpet. Even if the company creates a famous and notable item, aka largest carpet etc, the carpet get the notability, not the company, especially if all the articles are focusing on the carpet but not the company. This is similar, as the focus are the project and the other company but not about Hoffman. One way of establishing notability is any awards earned by the company, I found one which may help to pass notability ULI award. Try to work it into the article and other possible awards (please find a major award or at least given from an institute or organisation which has their own wiki page). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Mayors Lists

Good afternoon Singapore from Ireland. I am a big fan of mayor lists and your Kenosha list was very well researched. I was just wondering if your Kenosha list was a once off or do you plan on doing more in the future? Scottlinehan (talk) 02:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Good morning from Singapore! The editor who created the list is actually User:Asdasdasdff, I only removed a maintenance tag after a quick review. He will better placed to answer your question! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:47, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hey, thank you. I appreciate the review. I consider myself more of a "Wisconsin specialist" -- so I do plan to do more in the future for other large Wisconsin cities, possibly Racine, Appleton, Janesville, etc., but probably none outside of Wisconsin unless I find a compelling Wisconsin connection. --Asdasdasdff (talk) 03:02, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Racine's list is on their wikipedia page. Oshkosh, Wisconsin Rapids and Appleton would be nice. Where abouts in Wisconsin are you from? Scottlinehan (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Maybe it is a fake news

Hello！I noticed that you edited the information about Gong Li's son, but as far as I know, the picture of Gong Li and her child in the news is incorrect. The man in the picture is xiao Shenyang(小瀋陽), a Chinese comedian actor, not Gong Li's child. This image is also from Xiaoshenyang's weibo account. So this is a fake news.

Xiaoshenyang's weibo account ：https://m.weibo.cn/1345467925/3821089740024627 Xuins (talk) 10:10, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Xuins: I was hesitating to put it on but the same article was posted on another Singapore main print media as well. Did a quick search again and find that you are likely to be correct. I note that you have reverted my changes and update some info as well. Thanks! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:24, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, I didn't realise that other editor had changed their username but I am assuming they were trying to imitate you. I have also just indef blocked User:Norimib as an obvious sock. Deb (talk) 07:03, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

@Deb: Actually, I think you are right that the other editor is trying to imitate me and hopefully with the confusion get the promotional article passed through on my merits (wild speculation). I was rather surprised myself when I got the notification but found the article very familiar and realised the name change. Nonetheless, I am glad it is a simple resolution to it~! Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 07:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I have done the report just for formality's sake. It might help to locate other socks. Deb (talk) 07:30, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

In case you haven't seen the update, the would-be impostor is blocked now, along with all their socks. Hopefully that will at least teach him/her that it's better to own up to the truth when confronted! Deb (talk) 14:17, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

@Deb: Just saw the update! Thank you for the SPI! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:39, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Lucien Wong

Thanks. I missed the mention of his father in that ref. Meters (talk) 03:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Feedback on the edit article

Hello, thanks you for the editing and I just wanted to know if you can please kindly provide some feedback on the content being too promotional? Thank you so much. CCreate20142020 (talk) 02:16, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@CCreate20142020: Hi there, I am putting this on the bottom of the talkpage as typically all the sections are in chronological order for easy viewing and checking.

• Firstly I like to check with you, do you have any conflict of interest with Frasers Property Australia or any of the Fraser related companies?
• The general guideline for promotional editing is here. For me, personally it is straightforward, does this looks like something I will read from a pamphlet advertising for the company? or is this is like a fact sheet about the company? What you added, reads more like a pamphlet to me and does not help with the first person language. My guess that you are related to the Fraser group is based on the promotional language and the use of first person language.
• I added a COI welcome template on your talkpage as well so the relevant information will be there as well. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:47, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

karma rigzin

many thanks for de-orphaning the page :) Doctor 17 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Review Request For the Page- "Raju Kannampuzha George"

Hello @Justanothersgwikieditor, Please consider reviewing this article about a well-known event manager in Kerala which is created by me. The link to this article is Draft:Raju_Kannampuzha_George. If there are any errors in the article can you please mention it to me so that I can make the article better. --Akhilraj25 (talk) 11:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

@Akhilraj25: Hi! Unfortunately I am unable to improve much as the article will not pass notability requirements at this point of time. Please do look at the guide at WP:GNG. One of the easier ways to pass GNG guidelines will be having national level awards to him (note not to his organisation). As an event manager, he is not notable at all. Thanks --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Implemented your suggested edits

Hello and thanks for the feedback on my article. I've implemented your suggested edits to help prove notability, so it would be great to here your thoughts on the subject. Thanks again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hoffman_%26_Associates SBCornelius (talk) 18:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Hello again and I hope all is well. I wanted to check back to see if you had any thoughts on notability after I added the awards section to the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hoffman_%26_Associates. Thanks again for your help. SBCornelius (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@SBCornelius: The table looks good and will help in notability. A quick summary of the more major awards added to the lead will help. Note that the wiki prefers ascending chronology order, see WP:LOW so it will be great if you can just update the table (not a barrier to notability or anything, just general maintenance). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:36, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Hello again and thanks for the fine tuning tips. I've reordered the list and made reference to the awards in the opening paragraph. With those changes, do you think the article is ready to be moved into the mainspace? And if so, would you be willing to move it, or weigh in on the talk page stating as much? Thanks again for all your help getting his over the hump. SBCornelius (talk) 16:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@SBCornelius: Generally it looks good and should pass the move to mainspace. Since it was previously declined twice, I personally feel submission will be better rather than moving into main space directly and I have re-submitted on your behalf. The turnaround rate seems to be faster these days so we hope for good news. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:31, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Removing edits made to the page of Love 972

Hey there, I have recently saw you have remove edits of love 972 which is being made previously. Please do not do that as it is really not appreciated. I have places it back alr and please dont take it down again. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.166.70.149 (talk) 20:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about List of fellows of IEEE Power Electronics Society

Hello, Justanothersgwikieditor, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username North8000, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, List of fellows of IEEE Power Electronics Society, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fellows of IEEE Power Electronics Society.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 11:40, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Lim_Yit_Min

Hi there, Thanks for your edit on the above page. I have made further edit and added additional citation in my attempt to remove the multiple issues highlighted by other editors. I sincerely hope that you could help me to review it accordingly. Thank you. Luminosity123 (talk) 08:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletion discussion at Kwong Weng Yap

Hello there, I've just weighed on on the AfD you initiated. It seems to me to be grounds for a speedy delete under WP:G4. It obviously was created in breach of administrator protection and so has no chance of surviving an AfD discussion. I think it's worth bringing it up on an admin noticeboard or with an admin directly. The subject is in the spotlight now because of his dispute with Cherian George, and it's unpleasant to think of Wikipedia being manipulated to convey notability that he does not possess. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle: Hi, I am pretty much a wiki gnome so not much familiarity with CSD etc. I understand the surrounding circumstances so maybe an extended AFD will close the issue better (though looking at previous AFDs, meatpuppetry might be involved). As I understand, since it is now an AFD, speedy delete is not possible? If so, we let the seven days run or an admin to speedy delete it (if applicable). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Also G4 states they must be sufficiently identical copies, which I have no idea how the original pages look like also. So it might fail G4 also. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor: Haha, I too hate wading into aggressive discussions, but my little experience with them suggests that this meets the criteria. It's a clear circumvention of a block. If you know of any admins, it might be worth just dropping them a message on their talk pages, and seeing what they think. Otherwise, you're right that you'll probably have an uphill and unpleasant battle with meat and sock puppetry over the next week. No one wants to be dragged into that kind of mess. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

There's an admin who's helped me with an AfD in the past. I'll ping them and see what they think. For the moment, it's probably fine to leave the AfD as is. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

On second thought, I've left a message on the talk page of the admin (Sandstein) who protected the original page. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle: - what you wrote below (I moved from top of section to here as per chronological order, so superwifi is referring to above) sounds so wrong. You are trying to get others to gang up against the subject, and yet, you claim you have no COI politically. @Justanothersgwikieditor, I think your reasoning is reasonable and found out there are past AfDs. Perhaps we should look at how to be fair to the subject with a clear conscience. He does have notability Superwifi (talk) 02:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Superwifi: Note I rearranged comments so chronology order is preserved. Please append latest comment at the end of the paragraph. On behalf of Kohlrabi Pickle, I like to reply that he has not gone against policies, he went to the AFD nominator, aka me, for discussion. This is not a gang up, he ask me (AFD nominator), ask admin for help on review whether G4 is appropriate or not. He followed policies through and through. Although it is not exactly the best practise to come straight to me but it is also inappropriate in the AFD.

I know of the controversy surrounding Yap, so I tried the long route instead. What he had spoken here is what you have mentioned in the AFD as well, there is a controversy, we all know please, and Kohlrabi is correct to say notability manipulation is a common problem on Wikipedia and we both agreed that Yap is not notable. I will strongly advise making personal comments against another editor, either in comment or edit summaries. Also, you are borderlining on harassment --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Superwifi: I like to ask you on your potential COI again, please declare upfront do you have any COI with Yap. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Superwifi, I will try and explain my perspective to you because it seems to me that you created the article in good faith, and your breach of Wikipedia policies was inadvertent. There is no intention on my part to disrespect the work you have put into the page.

• On two past AfDs, Wikipedians determined that Yap Kwong Weng was not notable enough to have an encyclopedia entry. The page was persistently recreated, presumably by people close to the subject. In 2015, following the second AfD, an administrator placed a protection on the page, so that it could only be recreated by an administrator. In 2016, you (not an administrator) recreated the page, circumventing the protection by rearranging the subject's name to fit English rather than Chinese conventions. I have no opinion on whether this was accidental or deliberate, but as I said on the third AfD page, I note with concern that it the other pages you have created all fit regular Chinese naming conventions.
• I think it is egregious that this page has been up in breach of that protection for almost 4 years now. This is why I approached the administrator who placed the protection on the original page.
• Notability is a term of art; it does not mean "well known". The guidelines for establishing notability are available at WP:GNG. If you think that the subject crosses the thresholds there, give me your reasons. As it currently stands, I have concluded that the subject is not notable under Wikipedia's standards. I am open to changing my mind on this, provided there are good reasons for it.
• You are right that neither justanothersgwikieditor or I are focused on improving the article. This is because neither one of us is persuaded that the article warrants a place on Wikipedia.
• In 2019, another editor put up comments on the talk page questioning whether the subject of this article is notable, and pointing to the promotional tone in which it is written. Instead of responding to the substance of those comments, you responded aggressively towards the editor. An uncivil debate ensued. You then blanked that editor's comments, which is a breach of the rule that one does not modify another editor's comments.
• As far as COIs are concerned: there are three photographs of the subject on the article, one of which was taken in close proximity with the subject in military gear. All the photos are linked on Wikimedia Commons to your account as "own work". This means that you took these photographs (copyright would otherwise rest with the photographers of these images and they would have to be taken down and retagged). It is difficult for me to see how you could have taken that photograph if you do not know the subject personally. I'm open to an explanation. (I should say that if in fact if you are in touch with the subject himself, then this doesn't stop you from editing his Wikipedia page and uploading photos that he has given you, but then you must appropriately declare a connection.)
• I am very happy to help out with building knowledge of Singapore on Wikipedia and support every initiative to do so. I think Wikipedia is a superb repository of knowledge. But this has to be done in line with Wikipedia's policies. There are so many highly notable subjects in Singapore that don't have articles. Just last year, I created an article for Bilahari Kausikan; there are pages and pages of articles on him, but there was no Wikipedia page. Subjects like these could benefit from your attention.

I hope this explains my position. I also second justanothersgwikieditor's comments. I don't want to clutter this talk page - if have any more questions to ask in good faith, you are welcome to drop me a message on my talk page. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 03:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle:, thank you for the summary and replies. I am fine with the cluttering, I think I have the archive bot setup correctly! It is also better to consolidate the comments in a few places only. Also to point, either superwifi himself is up there and personally taking the photos, or it is not of his personal works which makes the licensing void and need to be removed from wikipedia commons. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Justanothersgwikieditor @Kohlrabi Pickle Please allow me to explain my rationale. I have no intention to harness. I created the article because I thought the subject is worth to put up an article in 2016 after I read his story on the news/ST. That’s where I Also started to write more on Wikipedia. I didn’t know why his original name could be used to create an article so I used Kwong Weng Yap instead which seems ok in American language. Checked with a few Editors years back and made sure I went through all the Wiki processes, same with the rest of the articles I put up.

On photos, I took the pictures myself in public functions (same for Lim Teck Yin and Gan Siow Huang) except for the military one which I made a screenshot. If that’s not ok, please kindly remove it. I have no connections with the subject/COI. I have an interest in ex-military folks who represent Singapore. Simple as that.

On notability, he has diverse range of experiences with the latest setting up a first AI lab KPMG-A*STAR in professional services in 2018, which I just read this morning. There are quite few mainstream articles that state so which I will put up references for your considerations too. This is notable in the business world.

On past arguments and being uncivil, I was quite offended when someone who uses an IP address and other sock puppets gang up from a certain overseas IP to make unpleasant statements. I did not agree with the statements and took off the paragraphs on my page because it looks horrible. I simply don’t wish to see it. I joined wiki to try and write, edit, better. Improve articles that I believe in.

On recent political spats, I am not really sure what’s going on but there’s definitely politically so areas of politics involved when I look at the sudden spike of views on the page. I don’t usually look at it but was alerted about it when it is asked to be deleted. But I do hope that you consider not involving politics in this discussion. Maybe we should put up the controversy to dispel all questions instead? I am not interested in politics but it might be worthwhile to explain the facts.

I disagree with both of you trying to get other admins to shut the article down. I mean it could be better if there is some respect given to the work I have worked on. I also feel that its unfair to point this out four years after the article was approved simply because the subject is brought out in public light again. Please let me know and I have no intention to disturb you Superwifi (talk) 04:44, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Superwifi, I take your point and I regret that you received inaccurate advice from other editors. I appreciate the difficulty of your position as well; Wikipedia has quite a labyrinth of rules and it's sometimes difficult to know when one is falling foul of one. Even so, the rules on notability are meant to prevent the indiscriminate inclusion of information on Wikipedia, and to preserve its reputation as an encyclopedia.

• I accept your point about the photos. Please note that the copyright for those photos lie with the photographers; you can't screenshot a photograph and represent it as your own work. Doing so is a breach of copyright. You now need to go to Wikimedia Commons and remove any photographs that you haven't taken yourself (including the one in Myanmar; I assume you were not the one who took that photo). It is generally very difficult to get freely licensed photos of living people, so it's fortunate that you even managed to get the one that you took yourself. Despite how well Bilahari Kausikan is covered, for example, I have still not been able to find a copyright-free photo for his article.

• To your point on notability; you have to justify it against either WP:GNG or one of the rules in Wikipedia:Notability_(people). It is not enough that someone else (e.g. the business community) considers him notable.

• I understand that you were offended, but the statements he made were critiques of the article, not of you. It doesn't matter where IPs come from; they are also entitled to edit Wikipedia. He was not, of course, entitled to make personal attacks against you. Once he did that, you were free not to engage with him. But his initial comments were not personal. Separately, if you have issues with sock puppets, you should bring them up at WP:SPI. If they are confirmed sock puppets, an admin will block them, and then you can freely remove material they have posted. This is part and parcel of working on Wikipedia; we have to learn to work and collaborate with other editors.

• You can put up details of the political context at the moment if you like, but I doubt it will sway an admin, because it doesn't have any bearing on whether he is notable. Admins will make decisions based on fidelity to WP's rules and policies. (this is why I say, if you want the article to stay up, you need to give evidence in relation to some rule on the pages I linked for you.) I don't intend to comment any more on the AfD at the moment; I think I've said all that I needed to.

• The "other admin" I approached was the one whose article creation protection, accidentally or otherwise, you breached. I thought they should have the opportunity to respond to the breach. I also believe that a breach of this protection is grounds for a speedy delete. I explained this in my first comment on the AfD.

• As a fellow content creator, I appreciate the effort and work you put into Wikipedia. However, see WP:OWN. This is a collaborative enterprise, and none of us own the articles we put effort into, even if we feel possessive over them because of the time and effort we spend on them. I wish I could help you; but I simply do not believe that this subject is notable under Wikipedia's notability guidelines. If he is eventually elected as a PAP MP, this page can be restored, probably in its entirety, because he will have crossed the notability threshold for politicians. But Wikipedia cannot hold pages of potentially notable people.

It will be a great pity if this discourages you from spending time on Wikipedia. I very much hope that we will be able to work cordially on other things. If you feel as though you're running into trouble because of unfamiliarity with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, then you might find WP:Adopt-a-user helpful. An editor more familiar with how Wikipedia works can then ensure that everything you're doing is correct. I had one as well when I was first starting. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 05:23, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Kohlrabi Pickle I am disinclined to believe what superwifi is saying now, if you check his past contributions [2], there is no evidence that he Checked with a few Editors years back and made sure I went through all the Wiki processes, same with the rest of the articles I put up. Based on history, he asked around for improvements for articles and not about the title, see here and the url is the draft of the current article. And following his edit history, he turned on you after I refuted his claims and then subsequently turned on both of us after clarification. Now he is pleading innocence and pushing responsibility to other editors. This could be a severe case of WP:OWN and he is trying desperately to ensure that the page does not get deleted. It is also interesting that a new user (without any editing history) will remove AFD notice twice and blanks the AFD discussion, four hours after the notice it went up [3]. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a fair enough point. Based on what's been presented at the AfD page, I think it's most likely that the AfD will pass and that the article will be removed anyway. I'm just thinking that assuming good faith is helpful here so that we don't inadvertently chase Superwifi off of Wikipedia. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 06:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Kohlrabi Pickle Yes, likely the AFD will pass and article deleted. I am just taking issue with how he conducted himself and let you be warned. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:42, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate the caution, thank you. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 06:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Kwong Weng Yap 2

Just created another section so that our discussion isn't interspersed with Superwifi's. I think you've explained yourself very clearly on the AfD, and there's no real need to respond to the personal attacks; they will be obvious to a closing admin. I might pop up to reconsider my vote if new evidence surfaces, but for now, I'm going to move on with my life. All the best. Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 04:04, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle:Yes, I am quite done with it also. All the best in your studies! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle: I am actually considering taking the issue to WP:ANI, asking another admin another editor for advice at the moment.

Strike the above, hahaha. i genuinely thought he is an admin but will follow his recommendation of admins to seek advice. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 13:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'd suggest posting on an admin's talk page before going to ANI. I've got exams starting in a week, so I'm going to let it go on my end. Also, I missed your message of good wishes above - thanks very much! Need all the good karma I can get. :) Kohlrabi Pickle (talk) 13:55, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Kohlrabi Pickle: Ah good luck and all the best then! Yeah real life is more important and sign out of your account till its over! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 15:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

"wikipedia committee"

I didn't realise that you are "wikipedia committee" per edit summary. LOL – robertsky (talk) 15:10, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky: RfA is a brutal process, I go there to see the bbq fest but not to be meat to be bbq~! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:27, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

hurhur. wish me luck for Singapore's artistes BLP articles! another bbq session in there soon. lol. – robertsky (talk) 01:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky: Damn tired of the IP editors zzzzzzzz..... --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Seah Kian Peng

I would typically push the page to mainspace, but there is a block on the article name. In the meantime, if you can, please help to improve the draft. – robertsky (talk) 04:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky: Made some changes. Only major change is the lead which seems to be the norm for most of local politicians. Do check on language also. I suggest seeking the blocking admin, GiantSnowman, in help to move from draftspace to mainspace directly, as this is a new article and not a recreation of the old article. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Have pinged GiantSnowman about the move. – robertsky (talk) 06:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Responding to your message

I received a message from you on Conflict of Interest, but I don't think I fall into that definition, I'm not sure what to do next.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiatyuan (talk • contribs)

I'm not seeing where you got a COI message, however WP:PSCOI will give you the guidance you asked for - Rich<sup>T|C|E-Mail</sup> 15:15, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Rich Smith: The COI welcome message is on User talk:Kiatyuan page. I was just looking into this too. – robertsky (talk) 15:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kiatyuan: Your first edit is a fully formed wikipedia page in your sandbox a year ago then one year later, you made 11 minor edits within 20 minutes to clear the 10 edits bar to publish the year old article in the mainspace immediately. With the Singaporean general elections (likely) coming soon, even though he is an existing MP and not some new possible candidate, this still looks suspicious. To make things clearer, possible specific COI are, are you related to him (family ties and connection)?, do you know him on a personal basis?, do you work with him in any organisations (co-workers) in any form (political, business, voluntary, charity, community etc)? If anything (non-exhaustive list written here) is yes, you have a COI with him and you can either not declare your COI and cease editing related pages or declare your COI and request edits using the method described in WP:DISCLOSE. You can refer to User talk:Wamprong from an recent interaction by me with another editor who has a COI. If you need any more guidance, please feel free to message me. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Robertsky: Thanks for helping me to answer! Woke up to a flurry of notifications! --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance, I have done as advised. I guess the potential COI would be that he is an MP in my GRC which I volunteer (unpaid) in. May I know what else do I need to do to make this article "legitimate"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiatyuan (talk • contribs)

@Kiatyuan: (lurker here) You may want to read further on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Rule of the thumb: all facts needs to be backed by a verifiable and reputable source as much as possible. Primary sources should be avoid as much as possible. There are leeway like backing up an undisputable fact or use in conjuncture with another source to fill a gap. i.e. primary source has some dates to an appointment, while secondary source has further details to the appointment. No copy and paste work, you will need to reword/synthesise as accurate as possible based on the different sources. Otherwise, it will be struck out like for a paragraph in the article you have created. I just wrote on Seah Kian Peng, whose page was deleted twice before due to copyright issues. You can take a look at it as an example. – robertsky (talk) 10:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, then I think I'm good, the page is 5 sentences long, but with 6 sources. If it is ok, then I will leave it as it is.Kiatyuan (talk) 11:23, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kiatyuan: I think we are all good here. As what robertsky has written, just be careful of copyvio violations. Close paraphrasing might fail Wikipedia copyrights requirements also so do watch out on that! I hope you can continue to improve other areas of Wikipedia, be it article writing (robertsky doing some of these) or just fixing broken things (I mostly do this and robertsky likes to keep all the Singapore related articles nice and readable). --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:30, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Kiatyuan (talk) 01:32, 12 June 2020 (UTC)