User talk:Liz/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Transclusions and category left behind by G7 deletion

Template:Daum TV series has a bunch of orphaned transclusions and at least one category. Is there a bot that needs to be notified about this deletion? I am not wise in the ways of XFD. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jonesey95,

Thanks for letting me know, I didn't think about this template's transclusions so I'm just removing them manually. There might be a bot that will do this but I don't know which one that would be. This deletion was a template creator request, not through a TFD discussion and I'm sure if that route had been taken, a bot would do all of the heavy lifting. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Category:Florida circuit courts

Hi! Just wanted to let you know that I emptied Category:Florida circuit courts on April 30, and CSD C1 requires us to wait for 7 days prior to deletion. Edge3 (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Edge3,

You are correct that the category needs to be empty for 7 days before deletion. But the category is tagged on the first day it is empty. That's how the system keeps track of the 7 day period...it's 7 days after the category has been tagged that it is empty. Empty categories that are tagged CSD C1 do not get deleted until 7 days have passed since they were tagged AND if they are still empty. Empty categories that are tagged that are not empty after 7 days have the tag removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

P.S. Editors are not supposed to empty categories "out-of-process". If you want to rename a category, merge categories or delete categories, please nominate them at WP:CFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for clarifying! I don't have much experience with speedy deletions, so I appreciate your willingness to explain the process. As for the changes I made, I actually blanked several articles (Seventh Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, Tenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, Thirteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida, and Eighteenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida) and redirected them to Florida circuit courts. That is why Category:Florida circuit courts is now empty. Hopefully that was the correct procedure; please let me know if it was not. Edge3 (talk) 01:59, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

FYI - in case this gets questioned, I posted a quick note at Talk:Florida circuit courts to explain what I did. Edge3 (talk) 16:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

That's excellent, Edge3. Although you might run into pushback by announcing bold actions you've taken, it's always better to be transparent than doing edits surreptitiously. I'm not saying that's what you did but it's how things can be perceived by others. As for whether you did the correct action, I'm not knowledgeable about Wikipedia's category structure on the U.S. court system. I'd look at how other states' court categories are organized and emulate the best examples. Of course, it could be that your system is superior and then you could take on other states besides Florida! There is never a shortage of work to be done here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

WP:REVDEL request

Liz, can I please request a WP:REVDEL on this edit at Scarlett Estevez – as this involves a minor, it's even more egregious. Thanks. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Treptichnus pedum

Hi Liz. I have requested a move on this article at Talk:Treptichnus pedum. This article should clearly exist at the genus level. I was previously simply follwing the advice obtained at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1102 § Swap page title with one of a page title redirecting to the first page. Thanks. YorkshireExpat (talk) 09:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, YorkshireExpat,

The example you link to at the Teahouse was a page and a redirect that had no history. In the recent case, you wanted to delete a page with a 14 year edit history to replace it with a different article. These are two different situations. We typically try to preserve the page with the fuller, longer edit history rather than replace it with a new article because we need to preserve attribution history. That's why I suggested merging the content of two articles rather than deleting one. Is there a reason why you don't want to do this? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Liz:. For paleontology articles convention is for the article to exist at the genus level, not species, e.g. Tyrannosaurus is the page that exists and Tyrannosaurus rex is a redirect to that. This currently the wrong way round with Treptichnus pedum and Treptichnus. Note also the 'other species' section that exists on both pages; in my view that would be enough to justify moving the article for an extant species. Essentially, the contents need swapping, but I appreciate the need to maintain history (hence, don't just swap manually (looking at the history for Treptichnus someone has tried to do this already and it got reverted)). I don't think I had grasped the subtleties involved. I have rasied a request here now; hopefully this is correct. Thanks.YorkshireExpat (talk) 08:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

undelete

Category:Animated western (genre) animation is no longer empty. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done, BHG. Thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Liz. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Jaime Brooks § Jaime Brooks Wikipedia page serves as advertisement for off-site projects

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jaime Brooks § Jaime Brooks Wikipedia page serves as advertisement for off-site projects. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:15, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey Liz. You were mentioned here (but the "ping" was malformed) and I'm just letting you know as a courtesy just it case you weren't watching the article. FWIW, the OP has been indef'd for WP:SOCK, but they seem to be involved with some real world dispute with the subject of the article which is probably the only reason they were on Wikipedia. Apparently, the article was WP:REFUNDed after you'd prod deleted it, and the prodder was unwilling to accept that outcome and take the article to AfD instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:24, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

assistance with possible block.

Please see the talk p. for Care.com. and its history. I think one of the parties will probably need to be blocked, (see my user talk here, ,[1] but I've already done enough there, and it would be better if the block should be done by someone else. DGG ( talk ) 07:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DGG,

As an admin, I'm not quick to block unless there is pretty clear misconduct but I'll take a look. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

and neither am I. but it does need watching. DGG ( talk ) 02:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

It looks like you took out the bad sources but I'm a bit concerned about the paid editor even though I knew he's very professional and he knows the COI guidelines better than most of us. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Requested undeletion for K. V. Dhanesh

Could you please undelete the page K. V. Dhanesh? You deleted it because it was created by a sockpuppet, but Dhanesh is still a notable athlete who captained the Indian National football Team, and in requesting undeletion I take responsibility for the article.Jackattack1597 (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC). Jackattack1597 (talk) 01:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jackattack1597,

I have restored K. V. Dhanesh. Please make an immediate edit to the page to make good on your promise to take responsibility for the article. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft schedules

Hi Liz, I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the drafts you have been deleting today, like Draft:Mohammad Shawky Hassan, are scheduled for deletion for tomorrow, not today. The bot decided to just skip November 6 on the subpage for some reason. ✗plicit 02:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

I will try to go over them to verify. Unfortunately, there is no easy way to look at deleted material. I try to stay a few days ahead in screening them, but this past week is one of the times I have not been able to keep up, as things at RS and Fringe have not merely distracted me, but upset me to the extent I'm reluctant to get started each day. DGG ( talk ) 02:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@DGG: As for an easy way to look at deleted material, I stumbled across User:DGG/vector.js from whatlinkshere. To enable that quickviewdeleted script, you'd need to remove the lines that don't begin with "importScript". Because the remaining is the comment syntax which surrounds the importScript line and prevents it from working. – SD0001 (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Explicit,

Oh, damn, I've been working with CSD G13s since last September, I should remember this happens whenever the current month (April) is 30 days and the expiring month (October) is 31 days. SDZeroBOT misses a day updating its list that I use, User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon. It caused bad problems in February which is only 28 days, the bot skipped 3 daily reports. I've mentioned this to the bot operator, SD0001 but there hasn't been a fix yet. I appreciate you calling my attention to this. I'll just see what pops up on User:SDZeroBot/G13 eligible list tomorrow for drafts expiring May 6th. I'll work on something else like categories. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Atossa Therapeutics

You deleted the page citing that the page only cited its own website. However, all those cites were removed and the article was re-cited with independent sources several days ago. Is it possible to re-evaluate again as it seems the edit was overlooked. Thank you.73.0.115.41 (talk) 19:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, 73.0.115.41,

A few comments. The rationale for deleting a Proposed deletion is added by the person proposing deletion, not by the administrator who deletes the page. Second, there are three formal types of deletion for articles on Wikipedia, Speedy deletion, Proposed deletion or PRODs and Articles for deletion or AFDs. AFDs involve a week-long discussion and those types of deletion are difficult to undo. Speedy deletion tags can be removed if you are not the page creator but your tag removal might be challenged. But for PRODs, an editor who disagrees with the deletion rationale is able to remove the tag and any contested PROD can be easily restored. Atossa Therapeutics was deleted as a PROD and since you challenged it, I was able to restore it. The only caveat is that the editor who PROD'd the article might decide to propose it for deletion at AFD...if they choose to do so, you can always go to this discussion and argue against its deletion. But, as of now, the article and its talk page are restored upon your request.

Sorry if this all is confusing, if you ever have questions about policies and procedures on Wikipedia, the Teahouse is a good place to go for answers. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Not confusing at all - thank you for your explanation and assistance!73.0.115.41 (talk) 02:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Handling G5s

I find your rationale over some of the pages[2][3][4] concerning Kashmorwiki to be misleading. This isn't how G5 is actually treated here.

G5 is very clear that "This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others."

It has been already clarified a number of times on administrator noticeboards that mere editing, reverts, touchups don't count as "substantial" edits.[5][6]

To make it more simple, G5 was supposed to get rid of contributions made in violation of ban or block. If no one is coming ahead to take responsibility for the creation then you are supposed to delete the page. That's how G5 works. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 08:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Waiting for your response. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
• The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

Technical news

• The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

• The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Question about Undeletion

Hi Liz, I would like to ask if there is a chance to restore article Giovanni Morassutti. I am aware it went through an AFD and there is the sockpuppet issue but the page has been reviewed two times and in my humble opinion it qualifies for a Wikipedia article and meets GNG since there is significant coverage in independent, published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject like this, this or this. What do you reccomend in this kind of situation? Thanks --Ibudolor (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ibudolor,

An admin can't unilaterally reverse a AFD decision but you could try creating a draft and submitting it to Articles for Creation. That, and Deletion review, are the only ways I know for overcoming a deletion decision in a AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Liz, I blocked this editor as a sock earlier today.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

notice of deletion review

Since you mentioned on my talk page that I shouldn't add red categories, I thought you might be interested in seeing the deletion review of Asian-American librarians, which relates to the notice you left for American librarians of Korean descent. Thanks in advance for any help you'd be willing to provide. Skvader (talk) 21:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Skvader,

I leave quite a few notices about red link categories when I'm working on Special:WantedCategories as reminders to editors to not add red link categories if they aren't going to create the categories themselves because when editors add red link categories, 95% of the time, it requires other editors to go back to those articles and remove those nonexistent categories. So, it just creates work for other editors who need to go and undo their addition. These notices are meant to be an informational message rather than a reprimand because many editors aren't familiar with the category creation process. These instances usually aren't complicated like your situation that involves a deletion review. I assume if the category is restored, it will no longer be a red link category. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm just asking for help. Skvader (talk) 00:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Speedy to review

Hello Liz, Could you review Illegal gymnastic skills soeedy deletion ? "Illegal" should not be taken literally (law) but in the context of gymnastic (banned). There are sources available online and on Wikipedia, it generally refers to dangerous gymnastic routines-moves (called "skill") or to overly repeatitive ones, banned by international gymnastic associations. I am on mobile right now so i wasn't able to edit much, but listing those banned gymnastic moves shouldn't be controversial, and the hoax-based speedy deletion is incorrect. Wikipedia itself documents several gymnastic skills (=routines=moves), detailling why they are banned/illegal. At least one existing Wikipedia article use the term "illegal" and online sources do as well. At least Thomas salto and Korbut flip ("illegal to stand on top of the bars") are documented, within Wikipedia, as illegal/banned gymnastic skill. I'm confident other banned gymnastic skills are documented elsewhere on Wikipedia. A quick search online return a dozen(s) more banned gysmnastic skills. Such list-article will need some care tho, possibly to rename it in order to avoid litteral reading (law) and confusion. "List of banned gymnastic skills" could be more suitable and source can be added, but i dont see the rational to speedy delete it based on hoax argument. Yug (talk) 09:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Yug,

I think the main problem with this page is that it has no references at all and so it looks like original research. Upon your request though, I have restored it and moved it to Draft space so you can continue to improve it when you are on a laptop or desktop where it is easier to find references. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:51, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Received, thank.

I was just passing by this topic and wanted to wikify a bit into a simple list / disambiguation / redirect page. It start to become overly complex for a simple list, but I will try to push it a bit. Yug (talk) 13:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Moved to Draft:List of banned gymnastics skills.

Hello Liz, I eventually made a quick sourcing using sources cited in other Wikipedia articles and added another one from a sport outlet. I searched the official FÉDÉRATION INTERNATIONALE DE GYMNASTIQUE documentation, but the document seems to avoid to mention these forbidden skills by name. fr:Salto Thomas cites this previous document, but uses a section with broader terms which then implies a type of move-skills is banned (given this definition we can interpret that Thomas Salto is banned). Could you mentor me on this one ? I don't dare to move it back by myself since this side-project wikification already earned me hoax accusations by 2 admins. IMO, this content could also simply worth a minor section within Code of Points (artistic gymnastics). It would be ideal since it would encourage others contributors with interest in Gymnastic to complete the list. I will then asap move out of this topic. Yug (talk) 14:50, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Revdelete request

I'm assuming this is unacceptable per WP:BLPCRIME as well. [7]. The person with this name is a suspect in missing person case. His name is not in the main article. Scorpions13256 (talk) 14:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Scorpions13256,

 Done Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Also, his name was mentioned in Disappearance of Madeleine McCann around June 2020, leading to a minor edit war. However, my revdeletion request in IRC went unanswered. Do you know why? I'm trying to master the revdelete criteria. Scorpions13256 (talk) 23:28, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Scorpions13256,

Over the years, I've tried using IRC a few times but never really got it (I didn't even learn how to assign my username) so I don't hang out there or know who does. I think a lot of people have moved over to Discord but I'm not sure how secure that is for posting about sensitive matters.

I'd go directly to Special:EmailUser/Oversight to report anything that needs to be suppressed. In my experience, the oversight crew is really fast at responding to requests. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:44, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. It appears that people on Discord think I should just let it slide because it was discussed extensively on the BLP noticeboard. Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 43

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

• New Library Card designs
• 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Would Potentially Like to Request Recreation of a Page Previously Deleted

Hi Liz,

I tried to create an article about the company I work for at the end of 2019. It was rejected due to lack of notability (and also possibly due to my COI) and 6 months later you deleted it due to inactivity. We have more sources now and I would therefore like to consider reactivating it (with the same title) and trying again to get it published, this time with the new sources, and not as a separate article in itself but as a scaled-down English-language version/translation of the Czech original. Are you the right person to ask for reactivation? If so, it's also worth noting that I don't want to submit anything for review yet. I am a little confused about Wikipedia's processes and want to collect all the info before acting, so as to prevent any fumbles. Thanks in advance for help.

Here is the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jack_Zagorski/Mana_(meal_replacement)

Jack Zagorski (talk) 11:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Unnecessary restaurations

Hi Liz, I'm just going to ask what is the reason for restoring deleted edits if apparently no one has asked you to do so. It seems to me more like a form of punishment on your part for recreating some deleted Starzoner drafts, is that forbidden? It doesn't seem fair to me to restore edits from a user who has created drafts by violating their lock. Bruno Vargas _{Eñe'ẽ avec moi} 19:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

It would be very courteous of you to at least give an answer instead of continuing to restore edits of a user blocked multiple times and who has created and abandoned hundreds of drafts, otherwise I will have to report your actions where appropriate, since apparently only You do it for particular reasons and not because I have violated any policy. Bruno Vargas _{Eñe'ẽ avec moi} 23:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

I’m returning

Hi Liz, I’m decided to come back. 100.11.109.181 (talk) 19:52, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Re: Deletion tagging

I was unable to notify the deletion because the username contained the phrase "is gay" which is blacklisted. I couldn't create the talk page as only admin can create blacklisted titles. What could I have done? aeschyIus (talk) 20:37, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Restoring a page for improvements

Hi, Liz! I hope you are doing fine. I saw that a page I created got deleted because I didn't respond on time for the PROD tag. I am sorry for that I got stuck somewhere. Can you please restore that page David Xiaoshan. I will add more sources to the page to fix source requirement issues. Precisely waiting for your update. Cornssmug (talk) 10:29, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

OK

IM OK WITH THE AIHOLE FORT DRAFT BEING DELETED.

User: Tulika and Satvik (talk)

Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic in Nicaragua

Hello! Since you are the one who deleted the category, I would like to inform you that since I created the article of Paul Oquist, a senior Nicaraguan government official who passed away due to COVID-19, I am about to create the category again, hoping that Orquist's article will not be deleted, making the category empty again. Regards! _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:10, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, _-_Alsoriano97,

Categories that are deleted simply because they are empty can be restored whenever there is a need for them. Go for it! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2021

Hello! I wasn't sure who to reach out to, but since you were showing up as one of the currently active admins, thought I should bring it to your notice.

The article Timeline of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, 2021 seems to be a bit biased. I'm not sure but it seems like the article only portrays the facts from one side of the conflict and there might be some reliability issues.

Could you take a look at the article.

Thank you! Pakib007 (talk) 02:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Pakib007,

I think you should bring your concerns about content to the article talk page. If you think there is misconduct going on by individual editors, please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement since there are discretionary sanctions in the Palestine-Israel area.

As personal advice, admins tend to focus on particular activities and mine isn't really content. If you would like to approach an admin who is active in moderating disputes in the Palestine-Israel area, check out the arbitration enforcement log for this topic and see which admins are knowledgeable and active in this disputed area. They might be able to provide more help than I. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:11, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarification on G1

Hey! I thought I'd given Morneo06 good advice here regarding WP:G1, but then I saw you deleted the page in question, so now I'm thinking perhaps I've misunderstood how it's applied? I've only ever used it for stuff like "apfdohjea;fdsjhads". Could you clarify? Thanks. -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) | o toki tawa mi. 19:46, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tamzin,

No, you have the correct understanding of that CSD criteria. I should have changed the CSD criteria for the page before deleting it. It technically wasn't gibberish but it was a rant about Trump put on a talk page that had nothing to do with him. It was obviously inappropriate content that had nothing to do with Senate races in Iowa but I just deleted it without changing it to a different criteria. Generally, as an admin, I limit my deletions to PRODS and only certain types of CSDs but I decided just to act and took a shortcut. I don't do this often but I should have made the rationale more clear. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Ah okay. Yeah, I figured it was deleteable under some criterion or another (G6's "wrong namespace" if nothing else), which is why I didn't untag when I brought it to Morneo06's attention (re-pinging since he was looking for clarification too). Not the sort of thing I'd normally bother bringing up with a deleting admin, but just wanted to be sure I hadn't misstated things to him. By the way, thanks for always being around to instantly delete the userpages I tag as G10! -- Tamzin (she/they, no pref.) | o toki tawa mi. 03:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Question

Contacting you as a random recently-active admin in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests: I reckon this is revdel-able (but not quite OSable). Would you mind taking a look and revdelling if you think that's necessary? — Bilorv (talk) 13:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

@Bilory: I saw your message because I have Liz's talk page on my watch list, and I have deleted the offending revision. —C.Fred (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, C.Fred, much appreciated. — Bilorv (talk) 14:36, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you from me, too, C.Fred. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:31, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz.

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Bogus Sonic games

Hey, Kiz. It's recently been queried on who has been making these fake Sonic articles, such as Sonic Unleashed 2. You've been deleting them, so by chance do you know who made them in the first place? Panini!^🥪 16:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Panini!, [8] [9] — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 17:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for everything

I just stop by to thank you for your unnecessary restorations and deletions of articles that I have dedicated time to, it did not cost you anything at least to move them to drafts. Thanks for everything Liz, this is my definitive retirement from this project, for people like you good editors are lost. Bruno Vargas _{Eñe'ẽ avec moi} 17:43, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Was I wrong about this redirect?

When I moved the Draft:Schmigadoon redirect to Schmigadoon per the creator request, I left a redirect. I honestly would have suppressed the redirect if I could have, but I don't have suppressredirect. Would that have been wrong? None of the reasons for keeping a redirect seem to apply here. It's too new (17 May) for linkrot and never had incoming links besides temporarily from the move request, there's no old article to leave a trail for, the original creator would have created it in article space if they could have (but they're not autoconfirmed), and it isn't helping users who make a typo when looking for an article. The redirect was created "because the main article title appears to break when sent via Apple iMessage", which the redirect in the draft namespace doesn't help with, hence the move request and subsequent move. The reason I'm asking is because I've been thinking of applying for page mover, if I would have been wrong to suppress the redirect in this case I really want to know. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 02:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Alexis Jazz,

Sorry for the delay in responding. Here's the thing, when you become a page mover, you can uncheck a box that says, "Leave a redirect". That would be your choice with each page move. There are advantages to leaving a redirect even when it doesn't seem absolutely necessary to have one. I sometimes have to ask page movers to leave redirects after a page move because it can break all of the other, existing redirects to the new page location and cause them to be deleted by one of our bots that deletes broken redirects. That's not good.

But, as an admin, when I'm looking at speedy deletion requests, they have to fit one of the specified criteria. A redirect from Draft space to an main space article doesn't qualify for R2, R3, R4 or G8. The only criteria that I can see applying is G6, for uncontroversial maintenance deletion but that is a judgment call and, in my judgment, I'd simply prefer to leave an unnecessary redirect than delete it. I think most editors would like to think that every admin would treat every situation exactly the same but a fair amount is left to the admin's discretion and that was my decision. I hope this explanation helps with this particular example. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I already knew about the checkbox as I have suppressredirect elsewhere. There were no existing redirects to Draft:Schmigadoon for a bot to break, were there? I know there can be less-than-obvious reasons for keeping a redirect, it's just that none of them seemed to apply here. It's not wrong to keep the redirect, that's a judgment call. I suppose I could rephrase the question: if I had suppressredirect and would have suppressed the redirect, would that have been a judgment call or just wrong? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 05:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

DEMCO

I totally understand, Liz. My fault for dropping the ball on the Demco piece. Kind of sad that it’s gone, but thank you for providing information on how I might be able to retrieve it. Pangurban22 (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I have a question, Liz. I see that there is now a little page (stub?) for Demco, and it's no longer a draft. It looks very much like what I had in my draft, only shortened quite a bit. My question is if this is indeed my article that got edited and placed here or is it something someone else has done? I couldn't figure it out but looking at the history page, I think Bleubsdorf had made the first entry for it on 1 July 2020. Did they just copy my work and just cut out a lot of the detail? I'm not being fussy about credits and who did what, just wondering and trying to understand. Thank you very much.

--Pangurban22 (talk)

Hello, Pangurban22,

While it might seem that Demco would be an obscure subject for a large project like Wikipedia, it is not unusual for there to be articles both in Draft space and Main space of the project at the same time although you started your version first in 2019. It frequently happens with movies that there are several competing Drafts at the same time about the same film. But the two Demco pieces don't look alike at all. I don't think Bleubsdorf ever saw your Draft and instead just independently decided to write an article on Demco. I can restore your Draft, if you'd like, but you would have to try to merge any valuable content in your Draft with the existing article. I will say that Bleubsdorf's article more closely resembles articles that AfC reviewers would approve than your much longer article. You had a lot of unnecessary content in your Draft that would have had to be removed to get approval. New page reviewers prefer short, direct, well-referenced articles over longer pieces of work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Haha, it’s okay, but thank you for offering. My version wasn’t available, so it felt the same, but I believe you. Plus, of all the things to plagiarize, an entry on DEMCO would be both funny and sad (English needs a satisfactory word for that). We’re here sharing information with the world, and that’s been accomplished, so no worries. Thank you, Liz, for all your work and dedication. Pangurban22 (talk) 04:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, please don't let this discourage you. We need content creators and you learn through experience. Wikipedia will never be finished. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I think a better article is possible, but it would take a good deal of work in sources that may not be easily available. I'll see what I have around --I have quite a few library management type books from back when I was teaching the subject--and from when I thought I was going to do some research on the history of the practical side of librarianship. DGG ( talk ) 06:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, again! Want to hear something funny? After your original message, I requested that draft:demco be restored, not knowing there was already another entry for it. And, within an hour of our last communication and decision, the draft page was restored. So here's the plan: you tell me I'm not going hit the lotto jackpot, then I immediately buy a ticket, and then we talk a little and decide the odds really are pretty slim. Soon after, I win the jackpot and split it with you for your half. I'm kidding. Hope you have a great weekend. Btw, I'm a librarian too, though now mostly teaching freshman comp. Okay, bye :) Pangurban22 (talk) 17:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh wait, it says DGG. Sorry DGG, I thought I was talking with Liz. My confusion — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pangurban22 (talk • contribs) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarity

The explanation I gave you on my tp might have been a tad bit too ambiguous, I have however re-worded it, see here and re-read it. Stay safe Celestina007 (talk) 02:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the explanation, Celestina007. I guess there are downsides of having these editing contests. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Likewise, I’m very much skeptical about them and never participate in any of them as I believe the cons outweigh the pros. Celestina007 (talk) 03:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Velar/Chettiar

I tried to rollback the edit but i said it was failed. The article was previously deleted cause of CopyVivo by admin. Than it was created back again within a few minutes i csd it as spam but you moved it into draft space but the creating user is again moving it from Draft to Mainspace. Look into the matter. Owlf (talk) 20:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Owlf,

I removed the CSD tag because it didn't seem like obvious vandalism to me. The page creator stated they removed the copyright violating material but I believe it needs to be reviewed by AFC so I moved it back to Draft space and submitted it to AFC. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:03, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Move Deeringothamnus r. To Asimina genus

In 2015 Deeringothamnus rugelii was moved to the Asimina genus Addysgreenhouse (talk) 21:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Addysgreenhouse,

I look over somewhere around 400-600 pages a day on Wikipedia. Could you give me a link to what you are talking about? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I edited the page "Deeringothamnus rugelii". On the second paragraph I added the citation where the species was moved back into the genus Asimina making it Asimina rugelii instead. Addysgreenhouse (talk) 18:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Me and a couple other botanists that mainly work with Annonaceae will be loading all of the Asimina and Annona species with as much as we know. Addysgreenhouse (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deeringothamnus_rugelii Addysgreenhouse (talk) 18:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Not sure if a whole new page would need to be created Addysgreenhouse (talk) 18:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Page : Velar/Chettiar

Liz,

I have reverted Velar/chettiar page by mistake. But I have given 💯 justification to the article also done some modifications. Every single line from the article is sourced from reliable article.

Kindly to go through the article and let me know the sentence should be removed to make the article clear and crispy. Tamilan pugal (talk) 21:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tamilan pugal,

As you can see by the message above yours, there are questions about whether your article contains copyright violations. The reason I moved it to Draft space is because it was tagged for speedy deletion. I removed the deletion tag and moved it to Drafts instead so that a Articles for Creation reviewer can look it over. They are editors who spend their time evaluating new articles which is an activity I don't spend time doing. Since questions still remain, I moved your article back to Drafts and submitted it for AFC review.

You can continue to work on it but a reviewer will take a closer look at the sourcing. I do not recommend you moving the page back into Main Space because it could very well be tagged for deletion again which is what frequently happens to new articles that raise questions. I think if it receives the AFC stamp of approval, it is very unlikely to be deleted which is why I moved it back to Drafts.

If you have questions about AfC or the deletion process, I encourage you to visit the Teahouse where experienced editors can help you out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

This information will really helps to improve the article. Much appreciated Tamilan pugal (talk) 08:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Velar has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Velar. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

I never figure out if we're supposed to add the template to the subject line and be done, or sign below. Perhaps the template should allow us to sign it? Atsme 💬 📧 13:14, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	It should be roughly 00:22 in New Jersey if I’m not mistaken, it’s been a while I visited my family in NJ. It’s currently 5:18am in Nigeria where I currently reside, to be honest we are both robots, You are indeed a tireless contributor. Thanks for all your tireless contributions Liz Celestina007 (talk) 04:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

What are you doing up, Celestina007? You're on UTC time, right? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

UTC + 1, so whilst the time stamp on my comment says 4:21am it’s actually “5:21” in Nigeria. I can’t sleep because my knees are killing me, I played basketball extensively today, and for someone with acromegaly that was pretty silly of me and to think I still have to prepare for work in the next 40 minutes. But wait! back right at you, why haven’t you gone to bed yet? Is there still a lockdown stay at home policy in NJ? Celestina007 (talk) 04:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Sincere request for Guidance and Help

I have been following the Discussion on article for deletion of Vikash Verma and also have been commenting and putting my points forward. But unfortunately, Its all going in vain as the reviewers and other user who has nominated the page for deletion are not judging the article on it merits and supporting evidences which are given in my comment. I am writing this to you, as I could see that you also had made a positive edit on to this page and would like to request you to please review the discussion page and let me know. I need your help in having the said article survive, completely on merit and not to deleted because of some misunderstood criteria. I maybe wrong somewhere and that's why I need your expert help in this. Archiedesai (talk) 08:50, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Archiedesai,

All I did was change a category on the article, I'm not invested in whether it stays or goes. But I looked over the deletion discussion and it seems like you have several editors arguing for saving the article and offering a detailed defense of it. That is much, much more than happens in most deletion discussions on Wikipedia.

A few points: Tweets and social media are not considered reliable sources. Also, just because someone was mentioned in a news story does not make them notable. Winning an award is not always very notable. There are plenty of awards that get presented that are just honorary, they don't reflect the quality of his work.

Rather than overwhelming discussion participants with too much information, regulars at these kinds of discussion are looking for 3 or 4 GOOD, reliable secondary sources. Present a few of the most substantial coverage he has received, do not mention every little website where his name has come up. Stick with a few good sources from well-regarded media organizations.

Also, if this article does get deleted, that doesn't meant that there will never, ever be an article on Verma. I would recommend saving a copy of the article content and working on a draft article which you can submit to Articles for Creation to get reviewed. Those are just some of my thoughts. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Archiedesai (talk) 08:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

PlayScore article

I would like to re-write the PlayScore article that was removed.

The reason that there should be a PlayScore article is simple:

- OMR products are complex, and that a new one arrives is rare.
- PlayScore is first serious new product to hit the market in about 10 years.
- It is offered at with an attractive subscription model.

I understand that there were shortcomings in the original version of the article. Wikipedia's reaction (immediately insinuating a financial interested, and deleting an update to an OMR article that I had done in November 2019) was uncalled for.

Should I even bother to do this? Is the old version of the article still available, or would I have to start from scratch? Heinzr99 (talk) 00:20, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Heinzr99,

There are problems with the article but I have restored it and moved it to User:Heinzr99/PlayScore where you can work on improving it. You can not write content that promotes this product/website, it has to reflect a neutral point of view.

If you move it directly back into main space of the encyclopedia, I am very sure that it will be deleted again. You need to submit it to Articles for Creation and have a reviewer look it over and let you know how you can improve it to meet Wikipedia standards. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:43, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Liz, thanks for your advice! Heinzr99 (talk) 00:50, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

delete it Draft

Hello dear colleague Liz. I recently created Ariana Nabaey article, but after checking the sources, I realized I was wrong and asked to delete it, which was deleted. Now the person has created an account with his real name and wants to publish his draft. Please delete the draft like the article itself. It should be noted that the user insulted me on my talk page in this regard.--Parizad (talk) 16:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

And let me also say that the article was evaluated by a poll, which is the seal of approval for the deletion of the article.--Parizad (talk) 16:22, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Parizad,

I typically do not delete drafts of articles that have been deleted in deletion discussions because there should be a way for editors to overcome the verdict in a deletion discussion by submitting a draft to AFC. But this draft was promotional so I have tagged it for deletion as I'd like another administrator to look it over, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

thank you.--Parizad (talk) 17:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Internal Security Act

Hello Liz. I can't quite work out what's gone on here [10]. There's a redirect Internal Security Act (disambiguation) that used to target Internal Security Act which ought therefore to have been a disambiguation page. Internal Security Act (disambiguation) now targets Internal Security Act (Singapore) which is clearly incorrect, but I can't find where the disambiguation page it should target has gone to. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shhhnotsoloud,

Going through the page history and page logs, it seems like the page was moved or deleted and I created what was supposed to be a temporary redirect so that the Wikipedia bots could change all of the related redirects. But it's confusing and maybe the other admin involved can supply more information. But the important part of this response is not explaining what happened but letting you know that I restored the deleted edits and turned Internal Security Act back into the list article it was before it was deleted earlier in May and reverted the last edit on Internal Security Act (disambiguation). I hope this resolves the problem and I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Perfect. Thanks! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi Liz, All edits by 106.208.247.227 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) need a revdel as grossly insulting. Would you do it? Thanks, — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:08, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :) — kashmīrī ^TALK 23:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Kashmiri,

 Done. I had to trust you on this because Google Translate didn't offer me any translation of this content. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Zishan Khan

Hi. The IP who created the above page is an obvious sock, meat or not. See Draft:Zeshan Khan (Awards list), Draft:Zeshan Haider Khan, Draft:Zeeshan (artist) and Draft:Zeshan Ali. --Minorax (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Minorax,

As an admin, I want to see that the page creator has been blocked as a sockpuppet and this IP wasn't. But I have tagged the draft for speedy deletion for being too promotional. In the future, you might want to ask a checkuser or report an account to SPI if you have suspicions that an account is a sockpuppet. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

METO disambiguation

Hi Liz I'm new here, thanks for your message on my talk page. A month ago I tried to create a METO disambiguation page which you speedily deleted following "Criteria for speedy deletion". You offered me to "restore the page and move it to Draft or User space so you can continue to work on it" - please could you do that? I want to address any problems so it can be featured again. Thanks! Beetheory Beetheory (talk) 09:07, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Beetheory,

I have restored the page and moved it to User:Beetheory/METO. I think the problem was that it wasn't really a disambiguation page, which is typically a list of existing Wikipedia articles having the same or similar names, it looks like you were starting a draft article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:30, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

socks Ariana Nabaey

Hello dear management If you remember Ariana Draft, which was tagged and deleted yesterday, was re-created by a user's socks. I request that you stop making this user's socks.This user seeks to create his article by making socks. Is there a way to prevent the activities of this user's socks?--Parizad (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Parizad,

If there was a fool-proof way to prevent editors from creating sockpuppets, then SPI would not be as busy as it always is. I'm not a checkuser so I don't know what IP this editor is using so I can't hard-block it (which is done in some cases). But I did protect several varieties of the page that he has created so that he can't create new versions of the same article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. The administrator checked this issue and blocked the accounts.--Parizad (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

page creator isn't a blocked sockpuppet

Are you sure that Detoxtu is not Edgeback and Sorginak and Ridership and approximately 80 IPs ( I can provide the complete list if you like), or are you declining the CSD because Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sorginak has not yet concluded that this is the same user? Thanks,

Hello, Vexations,

No, I can't be sure because I'm not a checkuser but I'm not going to delete a page based on suspicion and I don't think most admins would either. I need to see that a) the page creator is blocked as a sockpuppet (and not blocked for other reasons) and b) other editors haven't made substantial contributions to the page. Please do not prematurely tag pages when an editor is reported at an SPI case. Many editors have been suspected of being sockpuppets but haven't been shown to be sockpuppets. I know, I think I was reported at SPI when I first started editing. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Liz, Well, the user was just confirmed as a sockpuppet. I probably shouldn't submit the same CSD notice twice, so would you mind reverting your removal? Vexations (talk) 21:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Liz, I agree with what you said there. However this character is quite particular and we all agreed that it was none other than Sorginak. Can I replace the CSD, or could you delete it now? Thanks. 21:31, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done. That's all I needed to see! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:38, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Question

Hi, dear management, recently I created an article called Negin Parsa, which was taken to a poll, and in a user poll, it commented on the reputation of this article, which should be taken into account, but I could not do more precisely. If you have the time, take a look the article.--Parizad (talk) 01:55, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Parizad,

"Dear management"? I'm not management, I'm just an admin called Liz. I had to check and make sure you were the same editor who posted the query to me above this one. I have never heard of a "user poll" but Negin Parsa is the subject of a deletion discussion. Are you asking me to look that over? I don't participate much in AFDs and I'm not familiar with the subject matter. But I'll give it a look later tonight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:05, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

I apologize. I did not mean to say the word "dear manager". In Persian, the word "dear" is a respected person. I apologize to you for this. I did not mean to check the article. A user in the poll had a description with a link that should have been taken.I asked you to tell me the user description in a simpler language so I can do it in the article.I apologize again for my mistake. managing Liz's .--Parizad (talk) 02:13, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh, the "dear" was fine, it was the "management" that surprised me. That's business language in the U.S., when you are talking about companies. No need to apologize, it was just a surprise because we tend to be informal on Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:41, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

YES. But we Iranians, because in my language we always like to speak respectfully to others, that is why we use these words.--Parizad (talk) 03:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, then in that case, thank you! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Help us please

Hi Liz, we really need your help with AIV. Right now, there’s a person making a bunch of sockpuppets to attack the page Waiuku. It’s just LizardJr8, Reba16, and myself vs three vandal accounts. Can you lend us a hand and block the vandal accounts before they do any more damage? We’d all appreciate it. Thanks, 🐍Helen🐍 02:33, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Helen,

I gave two of the editors short blocks and hopefully they will lose interest in editing. More importantly, I semi-protected the article for 3 days. Any idea why this small town would draw interest from internet trolls? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I have absolutely no idea. The only news from Waiuku I can see is that a health centre is getting a bit pushy with vaccines, but I don’t think that would be enough to launch a full scale war with three extended confirmed users. All that matters is... we stopped them. 🤩 🐍Helen🐍 02:50, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your work, Helen. I wish there would come a time when there is no vandalism but we haven't reached nirvana yet. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:53, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

How rude

you deleted a company page related to cybersecurity - on what grounds? Ok, you can delete a page, on what authority do have the right to delete a compqany who has other companies to exist on Wikipedia? then surely you must delete them all no? why pick on one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Link8r (talk • contribs) 02:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

First, Link8r, you should sign your talk page posts using four tildes (~~~~). And secondly, what page are you talking about? I do a lot of page deletions and I need to see what the rationale was behind this one. There should also be an explanation on the deleted page that explains the reason why. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Liz, - the page was wikipedia.org/intsights - it was marked for rapid deletion because some PR agency built one eons ago - I was just adding a basic page for a company here in NYC that has been gaining a lot of mentions in the news recently. Link8r (talk) 16:59, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Redirects

Hello! I believe redirects Queen Kapau, Kapau-A-Nuakea and Kapau a Nuakea are without purpose, but they aren’t my creations, so I can’t request “deletion per author’s request”. If you have power,would you like to delete? Miha (talk) 11:07, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Miha,

I think you'll need to nominate them at Redirects for Discussion. "Not needed" is not grounds for deletion for Speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Palantir (disambiguation)

Hi Liz! Just fyi, you deleted this page last September under G14. It was decided here to turn the Palantir redirect into a dab page, so I created the (dab) redirect again. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 18:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Okay, Paine, thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:55, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

It's my pleasure! Paine  22:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Velar (May 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon 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:Velar 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:Velar, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Liz! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 05:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Advice

Hi Liz: I've been trying to tune up my CSD game. I've discovered that here seems to be a missing category-- something like "G33: stuff teenagers think is funny, but has no encyclopedic value". Is there a valid deletion category for Draft:Theresa y Jacko's Wedding (2021)? Thanks. --- Possibly (talk) 06:02, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, --- Possibly,

I think that you could interpret this page as a test edit, maybe vandalism or a hoax. However, vandalism usually implies a disruptive intent and there aren't enough details in the content to be called a hoax because a lot of the page doesn't make sense. So, if I really thought it needed to be deleted, I'd call it a test edit.

But, you know, at this point in time as an editor, I'm spending a lot of the day looking at CSD G13 stale drafts as there are hundreds expiring each day. And they are almost all, I'd say 97%, are pretty bad or, to be more positive, very very incomplete drafts (DGG saves the promising drafts). So, there are a lot of "deleteable" pages in Draft space and it seems like there is an unspoken agreement to just let them expire after 6 months rather that try to speedy delete them. If it was me, I'd probably just leave it be because I doubt that this editor will return and work on it. Those of my 2 cents, late at night. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:16, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

thank you for the insightful advice!--- Possibly (talk) 15:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

CK McCubbing (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Possible meat puppet

Hi Liz,

Could you please have a look at this. The editor also deleted a SPA notice at this AFD. Regards, VV 18:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, VV,

I don't have access to the Checkuser tools that would enable me to check on this. If you have concerns, you might consider contacting one of the Checkusers who patrol SPI. I have removed a personal attack by Amit Srivastava and posted a warning. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Liz. I now have the other editor accusing me of religious bias. VV 04:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz, Request you to investigate VV comments on the same article ever since he has nominated it for deletion. You would find reasons to see a certain bias. He has shown WP:RUNAWAY to explanations/evidences and also WP:ATTP. As far as his complaint about me, the word "reliogious" bias was already deleted by me much before he commented and posted a warning on my page. I am new editor, and have been subjected to intimidation by both VV and Kichu. With hope that it will be a learning experience for a new user like me and I shall be encouraged to contribute to Wikipedia constructively. Thanks Shatbhisha6 (talk) 15:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shatbhisha6,

I'm sorry if you feel intimidated. Sometimes the normal disagreement on Wikipedia can be a little bruising. But please, in this AFD and similar discussion pages, focus your remarks on the subject at hand, the article that is being considered, and do not attack other contributors. There are different forums for dispute resolution here. Since you are a new editor, if you have questions about them or editing on Wikipedia, please bring your concerns to the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Liz, thats exactly my point but VV chose to sidestep the discussion on the deletion as he couldnt argue further against the evidences/sources provided by me, he chose to attack me putting an unsigned comment on deletion discussion, that I'm a new user to discredit my arguments and edits, a clear case of WP:ATTP. Thanks again.

User:Clicketc

Sorry, I didn't see you had recently declined G11 of Clicketc's userpage when I deleted it U5. Looking at the user's edit, all they seem to be doing is spamming links for their own (== username) website. And possibly also sock/meat of Allinone365. If you think it's worth keeping as a viable proro-draft, I don't object to you undeleting it and I'll send it to AFD to sort out. DMacks (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DMacks,

Thanks for letting me know but I think different administrators view situations a variety of ways and if you think it should be deleted, that's okay with me. I just know that some new editors use their main user page for drafts and some CSD taggers will tag these pages as "Not a webhost" when the content would be perfectly okay if it had been placed in a sandbox. And the page might have changed since I viewed it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:56, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'm always extra-cautious against wheelwarring or stepping on other-hat-wearers' toes. DMacks (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Black Mixology Club - restore request

Hi Liz, can you please restore this draft? I think there may be additional sources. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 21:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, S0091,

 Done. I'm happy to. It was more interesting than most drafts I come across in my work. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I was able to find some more sources and resubmitted it. It needs more work but hate to put the time in if the sourcing is still not adequate. Will see. S0091 (talk) 21:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Taylor Swift sexual assault trial (2017) has been accepted

Taylor Swift sexual assault trial (2017), 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!

Zoozaz1 talk 04:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Ambiguous category

"Orthodox churches in India" is an ambiguous category and cannot exist at that name. (1) Does it mean "church organizations" or "church buildings"? (2) "Orthodox" is inherently ambiguous. Does it mean "Eastern Orthodox" or "Oriental Orthodox"? In India, most churches are Oriental, however this category has been placed under an "Eastern Orthodox" (and largely empty) hierarchy for no good reason. Please do not re-populate it. I have duly nominated it for deletion. Elizium23 (talk) 01:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Elizium23,

I accept that explanation. Please take my effort to keep this category from being deleted as an empty category as well-intentioned. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:34, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Mail Notice

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Celestina007 (talk) 07:07, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

New message from Serial Number 54129

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Square Mile Stroller's talk page.
Message added 14:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

——Serial 14:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz. You'd be helping a noob if you recreated that article for them. All the best! ——Serial 18:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for letting me know. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for doing so! like your pandemic instructions above, by the way 👍 ——Serial 08:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Velar (caste) has been accepted

Velar (caste), 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!

DGG ( talk ) 21:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Removal of CSD tag on "O3b"

Hi Liz. I nominated O3b for speedy deletion and you removed the tag - possibly in part because I didn't bother to say why I thought the article should be deleted (yeah, I know). However, there was at least some method in my madness so I have put the CSD tag on it again (sorry if that makes me appear knee-jerk, or even just jerk!) and this time explained it in a note in the O3b's Talk page. So, I'd be grateful if you could revisit the CSD judgement. Thank you, Satbuff (talk) 08:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

OK, somebody else has seen my note on O3b's Talk page and achieved what I was aiming for by a completely different method (and removed my second CSD tag), so all is well. Sorry to bother you! Satbuff (talk) 14:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Is it not promotional?

Hi Liz, Please have a look at this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swati_Maliwal and its last 5 edits. Can personal claims unverified by independent sources be included in an article? Shatbhisha6 (talk) 08:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Re: Category:Orthodox churches in India

Hello,

I see that you have tried to restore and populate Category:Orthodox churches in India, however as a result it parented things that should not be parented. There are indeed Indian churches belonging to the Oriental Orthodox tradition numbering several million members. However this compound term should not be confused with the word Orthodox used on its own, which usually refers in English to an entirely different branch of Christianity, which is called on Wikipedia, for convenience, Eastern Orthodox. (See e.g. dictionary definitions at Oxford, Collins or Merriam Webster.) This term when used alone is dangerous (or at least ambiguous), that's why after much to-and-fro we seem to have settled with two distinct category trees at Category:Eastern Orthodoxy / Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings and Category:Oriental Orthodoxy / Category:Oriental Orthodox church buildings.

That's why placing content about Syriac Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic topics and Oriental Orthodox cathedrals in a category that is parented to Eastern Orthodox categories is an issue. That's why I created instead Category:Oriental Orthodox church buildings in India to avoid the confusion and follow the naming pattern of sibling categories, but your subsequent edits [11] [12] [13] seem to indicate you do not agree with this.

Also note that there are virtually no Eastern Orthodox in India (there may be at least a church building without flock [14], but Wikipedia does not say anything about it). Also, despite the confusing names, there is no larger Orthodox group that would gather Eastern & Oriental Orthodoxies, the split between them having occurred in the 5th century, long before e.g. that between the Catholics and Orthodox (11th century) or the Protestants and Catholics (16th century).

I hope that this bit of context will make this clearer. I would therefore invite you not to recreate or repopulate a category (Category:Orthodox churches in India) which is ambiguously named and poorly parented. I would be happy to read any differing arguments though of course. Place Clichy (talk) 09:00, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Place Clichy,

Yes, another editor brought this to my attention (see message above). I appreciate the full explanation you have provided. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem. I hadn't seen the message above. I see some users can say the same things with fewer words than me. Sorry for the unnecessary flooding. Place Clichy (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Khidr

Hi Liz, I see that you moved this page to a new title[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=El-Khader&diff=1023480541&oldid=1021711995} but Khidr is used over 130 times in the article, the new title, El-Khader, is used only once. Did you forget to clear this up or do you think it's unnecessary? Doug Weller talk 11:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Doug,

No, this error wasn't intentional, I just did a requested page move and I guess I screwed up. I remembered reviewing it and it seemed like a legitimate request. Do you think it should be moved back to Khidr or should I just make 130+ corrections in the article? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Check me, but if I searched Google Scholar right, Khidr is far more common. Doug Weller talk 18:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

?? Doug Weller talk 17:53, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

May I ask a question of you off wiki?

To avoid any unintended ill feelings or ascribing intent, I'd like to send you an email about an admin action you took today. Would that be an imposition? BusterD (talk) 16:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BusterD,

I can't think of anything controversial that I did today but go ahead. I just have to remember to check my email which I don't do very regularly. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:50, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

It's nothing to concern you overmuch. More of a heads up. You should have gotten it by now. In any event, thanks for the mopping you do. BusterD (talk) 17:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind and well-considered reply. BusterD (talk) 01:58, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

User:Free wants to have a dog‎

Saw you deleted a page this user created. I thought that their first edit might interest you. When I couldn't find a clear sockmaster—User:Free got zapped in the SUL finalization, Free~enwiki had 0 edits, and there was nothing obvious in Special:ListUsers/Free—I figured I'd just keep an eye on the account and not waste any admins' time. But if they're wasting admins' time now, well, I leave this in your capable hands. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 18:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Well shoot, I forgot to {{noping}} that, didn't I? -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 18:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tamzin,

This is curious. For me, this editor hasn't been disruptive enough to warrant a block and I don't know if I believe their comment about being a banned editor. But I'll kept tabs on them and see if they return. Thanks for the head's up. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Deleted article

I looked away for one week and found an article to which I'd contributed deleted. (Yes, one week. Speedy deletion proposed May 23rd, article discovered gone on June 1st.) Do you save copies anywhere? Is there any archive accessible for the deleted text? Wyvern (talk) 02:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Wyvern,

Can you give me a link to the specific page? Then I can see why it was deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:21, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I found the appeal for undeleting a Speedy Deletion and Fencer of Minerva is back now. We can at least have a discussion rather than suddenly finding it gone. Wyvern (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 21

News and updates associated with user scripts from the past four months (February through May 2021).

Hello everyone and welcome to the 21st issue of the Wikipedia Scripts++ Newsletter:

Scripts Submit your new/improved script here

New scripts

• Alexander Davronov's HistoryHelper helps to copy diff links from the history display of a page
• Aseleste's Purger makes it easier to purge or null edit a page
• Awesome Aasim:
  • CatMan adds a category manager to simplify interactions for adding and removing the categories of a page
  • redirectcreator allows for easy creation of multiple redirects
• Bop34's EasyDesc adds a link to the top navigation bar which allows you to add a short description without opening the edit menu
• BrandonXLF's NullEdit adds a portlet link to perform a null edit on a page
• Chlod:
  • FoldArchives collapses archived talk page threads in order to reduce screen space
  • GoToTitle converts the page title into an input field for navigating to other pages
  • UserHighlighter adds highlighting to links to the userpages, talk pages, and contributions of administrators and other user groups as well as tooltips to indicate which groups a user is in
• GhostInTheMachine:
  • NoEditSummary adds a warning if an edit will be saved without an edit summary
  • SortWhatLinksHere sorts the links shows on Special:WhatLinksHere
  • WatchlistTidy moves the "new updates found" timestamp block from the bottom of the filter block to the top of the filter area on the watchlist
• GorillaWarfare's curlies simplifies converting curly quotes to straight quotes while in the source editing mode
• Nardog:
  • AutoSectionLink corrects the /* section link */ every time you hit "Show changes"
  • AutoTestcases autofills "Preview page with this template/module" with the most relevant /testcases page that exists
  • SortCentralAuthByEditCount sorts the list of local accounts on CentralAuth by edit count
• Novem Linguae:
  • CiteHighlighter highlights 1800 sources green, yellow, or red depending on reliability.
  • NPPLinks adds WP:BEFORE Google search links, copyvio check, duplicate article check, and other links to the left menu.
• Ritenerek's goce_nav adds a link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors to the navigation menu
• Suffusion of Yellow:
  • filterDiff: Adds a "Show changes" button to the filter editor.
  • filterNotes: Parses filter notes as wikitext (so links are clickable), and signs and dates new comments for you.
  • filterTest: Adds a "Test changes" button. Opens Special:AbuseFilter/test with what's currently in the edit form, not with what's saved in the database, so you don't have to copy-paste your changes.
• Terasail's COI Request Tool allows users to reply to, close or remove conflict of interest edit requests

Updated scripts

• Twinkle has a number of improvements, including that most watchlist defaults now make use of the new temporary watchlist feature. Other changes include rollbacks treating consecutive IPv6 editors in the same /64 range as the same user, adding a preview for shared IP tagging, a preference for watching users after CSD notification, and for sysops, the ability to block the /64 and link to a WP:RfPP request, and new copyright blocks default to indefinite.
• Wikipedia:Shortdesc helper now v3.4.17, changes include minor fixes and preventing edits that don't change the description.
• BrandonXLF's CitationStyleMarker now recognizes WP:CSLSA and WP:CSVAN styles, in addition to WP:CS1 and WP:CS2
• Joeytje50's JWB now version 4.1.0, includes the ability to generate page lists from the search tool, major updates to the handling of regular expressions, the storing of user settings, the addition of upload protection, and an option to skip pages that belong to a specific category, among other changes. See User:Joeytje50/JWB/Changelog for a full list of recent changes.
• User:SD0001/deleted-metadata-link.js – updated to include a link to snippet of deleted content, instead of just metadata.

Miscellaneous

• Wikipedia:User scripts/List has been revamped to make it easier to find scripts suited for your needs. If you know of a cool script that is missing on the list, or a script on the list that is no longer working, please edit the list or let us know on the talk page.

Pending requests

• A request for a script to help admins posting "recent death" items to Template:In the news
• A request for a script to warn users about syntax and template errors
• ...and many more, all available at Wikipedia:User scripts/Requests

My apologies for this long-overdue issue, and if I missed any scripts.
Hopefully going forward we can go back to monthly releases - any help would be appreciated. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 13:04, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

---

• About the newsletter
• Subscription options
• Discuss this issue

Need help (again)

Hey Liz, I'm so sorry to bother you again, but I don't know where to report this. There is an IP address, 2600:8805:3008:3800:61C2:1F00:866A:4CDD, who is repeatedly adding original research to Jill Valentine, violating their final warning against doing so (keeps calling her a lesbian and calling me a homophobe for rving their unsourced claims). I would report this to AIV, but I don't know if AIV covers cases like these. Helen (let’s talk) 23:34, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Helen,

I decided to semi-protect the article for 3 days. Maybe that will get the message across that they need to find sources for their interpretation of the character. Please let me know if they start up on other articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz:, will do! Thank you once again for acting so quickly. :) Helen (let’s talk) 23:54, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

And now the IP editor has received a 48 hour block. So, I think that covers this crisis for now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Sharlin Farzana

The page was improved with a lot of original references & the content was modified. Even it overcomes the initial speedy deletion process because it was changed tremendously as there were issues when it was deleted 1st time. Overcoming all that, what's the point of improving an article if you delete it without any further checking? I tried to cover all the points which were the main issues for the 1st deletation. Did you checked that or you just delete it because someone nominated it without any hesitation. This is really discouraging! If you can please undelete the page.Kingdom Atlantis(talk)

Hello, Kingdom Atlantis,

I have restored your article. Perhaps another admin will see it differently than I did. Typically, an editor overcomes an AFD decision by writing an article in Draft space and submitting it to Articles for Creation for approval. Putting an article right into main space that has been deleted due to an AFD decision are typically deleted. I'd recommend moving your article to Draft space and submitting it to AFC or it could be deleted again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:29, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

TolumiDE deletion

Liz,

Please have another look at this. The content you deleted is vastly different than the content of the page at the time of the deletion discussion. I would suggest undeleting it as a first step. Then if you feel strongly that the page is of no value you could list it at AfD.

UninvitedCompany 17:00, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, UninvitedCompany,

I have restored this page to the version prior to when it was tagged for deletion upon your request. But I cannot guarantee that it won't be tagged again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks much. I'll keep an eye on it. I believe it would be kept if it were listed at AfD in its current form. UninvitedCompany 17:28, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Can I view the source code for SMK Hamid Khan before deletion? angys (Talk Talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, *angys*,

First, the article was already deleted last month. However, it was deleted as a Proposed deletion which can be restored upon editor request so I have restored it for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:02, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Review of indefinitely salted article titles. Thank you. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 20:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Night Owling

It’s 3:57am(yes I’m already in “tomorrow” in my time zone) and it’s probably 10:59 in your time zone. I see we are both night owling again. We indeed are aliens/robots. Celestina007 (talk) 02:58, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Celestina007,

Yes, you are a night owl! I hope you are feeling better. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:04, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Good as new, the surgery was successful, thanks for caring. Celestina007 (talk) 03:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know it was that serious. I'm glad everything worked out well for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Not that serious, I do myself a disservice by playing basketball despite my condition, but all is well for now. Thanks Liz. Celestina007 (talk) 20:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

A redirect

Hello, thanks for deleting those "Volons" and "Volohian language" hoaxes. I notify you forgot to delete a redirect, Draft:Volonian language, so I was hoping you could delete that one too. Super Ψ Dro 09:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Super Dromaeosaurus,

Looks like Explicit got to that one. There were others I just deleted right now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:SMG4 (series)

Hi Liz. I was about to decline the speedy tag on this draft when you deleted it. Last I checked, there is no CSD criteria (or consensus for that matter) that allows for "duplicate" draft speedy deletion. Would you mind restoring this so I can redirect it to the "duplicate"? Thanks, FASTILY 22:31, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fastily,

 Done I've restored it and removed the CSD tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Great, thanks -FASTILY 22:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

carolyn piedzholt thing

i moved it into a draft because it was an autobiography. it was an article.

I have no idea who you are or what you are talking about. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi, could you please revdel the copyvio from East African Community. It was this edit Thank you, —chaetodipus (talk) 06:39, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

2021 World Outdoor Bowls Championship

Hi Liz, A citation for the cancellation can be found on the main article page, now renamed - 2020 World Outdoor Bowls Championship). PLEASE NOTE, the main article page needs to stay but the 8 associated event pages (singles, pairs, triples and fours (men's & women's) need to be deleted. many thanks Racingmanager (talk) 08:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Undelete Request

This is a request to undelete the page Deepak Mohoni. It was deleted on the grounds that "Writing on a certain topic or appearing on TV regularly don't contribute to WP:GNG.".

This is/was the page : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Deepak_Mohoni

However, his page has existed for several years for a completely different reason.

For that, we need to refer to the sensex - India's primary stock market index. A search on Google for 'sensex' gives about 29.4 million results. This is its Wikipedia page : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSE_SENSEX.

The term was coined by Deepak Mohoni, as you can see in "etymology" on the sensex page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSE_SENSEX#Etymology.

By removing the page, the etymology link on the sensex page has also been orphaned.

Actually, he also happens to be a well-known media personality in his own right, and appeared on India's CNBC and later ET Now TV channels every day for many years and had been a columnist in the leading business paper in India (Economic Times) even longer.

However, that's not the real issue. He is best known as the person who coined the word "sensex". Here are some Indian mainstream media links highlighting this, as also one from BBC.

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/expert-who-coined-the-term-sensex-doesnt-like-giving-trading-tips-meet-deepak-mohoni-2998301.html

http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/who-coined-the-word-sensex-/308231/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7402595.stm

You are therefore requested to restore that page.

Thank you in anticipation.

Hello,

You don't have to go to all of this trouble and send me email messages. This page was deleted as a Proposed deletion and can be restored upon request which I have done.

Please also end all of your talk page messages with four tildes (~~~~) which will leave your username and the day and time you posted your message. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:10, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Deletion of Soon Yu

Hello Liz, I am writing regarding the deletion of Soon Yu. I am the author of that page. I was surprised to see it deleted because I didn't see the PROD tag on there, nor was I notified on my Talk page about the deletion. I do know there was a tag on there about it being too promotional and written from a viewpoint as a fan, which I was researching how to improve my writing. I was in the process of editing the page to improve it so that I could remove those tags. I was reading on the protocols for the PROD tag. Since I didn't see the tag and wasn't notified on my talk page, shouldn't I have 7 days (at least from June 5 it was deleted) to contest it? Looking forward to hearing from you. --Fiz327 (talk) 12:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Fiz327,

I'm sorry for the delay in responding, I missed seeing this message. Soon Yu was deleted as a Proposed deletion and PRODs can be restored upon editor request which I have done. You should have been notified any time a page you created is tagged for deletion. Be aware that often articles that have been de-PROD'd are sometimes nominated for deletion at Articles for Deletion. But right now, the article is back. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Liz, I appreciate that. --Fiz327 (talk) 16:58, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Miss and Mister Supranational speedy nom

I see you're editing - would you be so kind as to remove your tag? I see the chance of it being deleted akin to that of Trump being reinstated. It's gotten Quite A Bit more press since the AFD you refer to, it's got neary 100 references, from every populated continent and most countries on Earth. If you disagree, I'll propose the same wager I did on the initially deleting admin's talk page - nominate it for AFD, and if it is deleted, I'll write or noticeably improve an article of your choice, and if it isn't, you'll write or noticeably improve one of mine. Deal? --GRuban (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, GRuban,

I don't spend my time writing articles so I won't take you up on your wager. But I'll nominate it for an AFD and see what the consensus is. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I hope there aren't hard feelings. I realize you were trying to improve the encyclopedia. Is there an article you would be interested I write or improve for you regardless? --GRuban (talk) 01:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Your comments to Aapna Glori

Hi, I saw your good-faith attempts to talk to that user. Just wanted to note that this is a rather long-term vandalistic behaviour and that user is not known to respond to any talk. User:First_Light/Fauna_vandalism#Nationalist_vandalism - a sock-puppet investigation report has also been filed - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zeshan_Mahmood Shyamal (talk) 03:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Shyamal,

Well, I take no pleasure in deleting such a huge number of an editor's page creations so I thought I should offer an explanation. He got blocked so swiftly, I assumed that other admins and editors might be more familiar with his behavior but I appreciate you providing an explanation. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:05, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Draftifying articles - Vedbas

I just had a quick scan of most of the articles on the list and I would have to say most of them wouldn't pass WP:GNG, in that they lack any sources or references at all. There are a couple of articles about places in China that might satisfy WP:NGEO, where the onus of notability is a little more lax. It does seem a little odd that a novice editor is apparently being so zealous in their crusade to draft so many articles however it would appear from some of their interactions on other editor's talkpages that they changed their user name from User:Bāsudēba kr̥ṣṇa (meta-wiki request), which is why they are clearly not a novice. Dan arndt (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dan,

I really appreciate you looking this situation over. This is more information than I had before. They continued to draftify articles after I asked them to stop doing so so I gave them a short block which, considering they want to work for WMF, they will probably be alarmed about. But I'd prefer they go through NPP or get familiar with AFC before they go on a draftifying rampage like tonight. Except for one or two notable exceptions, there are very few editors who draftify more than one or two articles per day, not a dozen. I guess my main goal tomorrow is to connect him with a group like AFC page reviewers so that so he is not going off on his own. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:18, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

That sounds like a reasonable plan. It would appear from his comments it would appear that he has been extensively editing other language Wikipedias - where I would guess that he has built up some knowledge of how to edit and what the general process/procedures are. Might be worth checking his meta-wikipedia account as that might give you some better clues as to what his motivations are. Dan arndt (talk) 05:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Good idea. Many thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:27, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia sockpuppets of Contango7

Hi, please fix Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Contango7 - it's inside itself, and mustn't be. It also has no legal parent. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Redrose64,

 Done Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - is the same fix appropriate for Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Krabs502? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
• Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

Technical news

• Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

• After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Vulkan Couplings speedy deletion

Hi! Is there a chance I could retrieve the text and references for the Vulkan Couplings entry? Also, if you could tell me what paragraphs read as an advertisement I'd be thankful. Thanks --Neoui bada (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Neoui bada,

 Done I have emailed you the content of the page. I think the article read like an advertisement, describing all of the products and services that the company provides. Look at similar companies' articles on Wikipedia for comparison.

If you would like to try again, I recommend you working on a new version of the article in Draft space and submitting it to Articles for Creation where it can be reviewed by experienced editors and you can receive some assistance from our reviewing team. Also, the Teahouse is staffed by editors who can answer any questions you have about editing on Wikipedia. I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the text and the tips! --Neoui bada (talk) 17:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

THANKYOU

Thankyou so much for taking time on Hemant Sharma as the previously deleted article was of someone else . Thankyou so much Khagendrawiki (talk) 01:57, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Khagendrawiki,

I wish I had looked at the article talk page first. This is not the first time this has happened but it is quite rare. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

* I can still see the history of the old deleted ( article of different person ) on the edit history tab . How can it be removed as those edits were not done on the cureent article . Please help me to remove those unwanted history logs Khagendrawiki (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion Miss Supranational 2016

Hi Liz, I created the latest version of Miss Supranational 2016 that you speedy deletion, I know you deleted because the AfD from five years ago. But it's a new version, can you Undo Delete and nominate it for new AfD or merge its AfD into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Supranational 2017 with its other editions of the pageant, please! Sorry for my English not good. Vpop123 (talk) 07:25, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vpop123,

I have restored this article, removed the CSD tag and added the AFD tag to the current discussion which, as you know, you can find at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Supranational 2017. I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Matholela Moloi has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Matholela Moloi. Thanks! Greenman (talk) 18:03, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:1943 in the Republic of Macedonia has been nominated for renaming to Category:1943 in North Macedonia

Category:1943 in the Republic of Macedonia has been nominated for renaming to Category:1943 in North Macedonia. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 22:26, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Susanta Rout

Hi Liz. Would you mind taking you a look at Draft:Susanta Rout? New editor who probably means no harm, but simply isn’t aware of WP:NOT. I found the draft after seeing this, which almost certainly was a test edit. My guess is that this user mistakenly thinks Wikipedia is for online profiles. I thought about moving the draft’s content to her(?) user page, but it might just get tagged for speedy per WP:U5. Just based upon what little content it has so far and the way it’s written, the draft has almost zero chance of developing into a proper article. Any suggestions on the best way to explain this because the draft is likely going to be tagged or nominated for deletion if left as is. — Marchjuly (talk) 04:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly,

I put a welcome notice on their talk page, discouraging them from writing an autobiography. There is also a notice explaining that Wikipedia is not a social network but I can never find the template code to post that message. I wish it was included in the Welcome message options.

Personally, I would move that page to her user sandbox. I've found if I put {{user sandbox}} at the top of the page, it discourages patrolling editors from tagging the page for deletion. User pages are generally an area that is less policed which is why I get a little annoyed when editors move other editor's pages out of User space into Draft space and sometimes after this move, the pages are immediately tagged for deletion! It's a bad move against new editors who know very little about Wikipedia policies and practices, much less the criteria for speedy deletion. I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Liz. Just for reference, Bonadea moved the draft to the editor's user page and left a message explaining why; so, things appear to be OK for now. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

June 2021 Block notice

Hi Liz. Can I delete a block notice from my talk page?I'm ashamed to have it.if you I would accept your advice before you block notice for me. I'm so ashamed to edit because you blocked me. Chief Minister (Talk) 11:17, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vedbas,

I think what would be best is for you to start archiving your talk page. I don't have a block notice but if you go into my talk page archives (see top of this page), you'll find editors posting questions and complaints to me (or about me) that aren't remarks I would brag about. So, you can find negative comments about things I've done in my archives!

It's considered best if you archive your talk page history rather than blanking your talk page. The only comments I remove and delete are clear vandalism. This is the practice that longtime editors do so if you plan on editing for a while, I'd start archiving your talk page. I typically leave one or two months up, some people leave only a few days and other editors leave years' worth of comments on their talk page. What I see a lot of editors do is to leave the first message they received (typically a Welcome message) on their talk page and start archiving everything else. I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:32, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz:I request archiving my talk page, and delete it after a week or two as you said.Chief Minister (Talk) 17:19, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, Vedbas, you can either have a bot do it (read over the instructions at Help:Archiving a talk page), or do it manually. Towards the end of the month, I just copy the content of the previous month's comments on my talk page and paste it into an archive page. If you use a bot, you can set how many threads you keep on your talk page or set it up so it archives threads after a certain number of days. But I'm not really knowledgeable about archiving bots, you can ask for advice at the Teahouse. When I was a new editor, I went there with all sorts of questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Cedar Avenue Band AfD

Hi Liz,

I saw you deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cedar Avenue (band) which I requested for speedy deletion. I was going to recreate Minnemeeples AfD as it was not done correctly but forgot to copy and paste the original nomination before it was deleted. Are you able to see what the original nomination reason was and copy-and-paste it below so I can recreate the Afd? Thanks much! JayJay^{What did I do?} 13:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JayJay,

There wasn't much content to the nomination, only a couple of sentences, but here it is,

The music group lacks significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. The band's most significant work was published on a compilation album. The content of the article contains mostly unsourced biographical information about the band. Minnemeeples (talk) 19:34, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:39, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you I appreciate the help! JayJay^{What did I do?} 16:55, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Empty regional identity categories

Liz, Please let me know if you find any more of these empty regional identity categories and I'll take care of them. Thanks,  Buaidh  talk e-mail 16:15, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Buaidh,

Well, since you created most of these categories, you will receive a talk page notice if they are tagged for CSD C1 deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I just don't want to have you do more work than necessary. Yours aye,  Buaidh  talk e-mail 21:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Request PROD reversal

Hi, could you please undelete the article Congress on Research in Dance? I noticed that it was gone, evidently from an uncontested PROD in March, though if I would have known about it, I would have contested. Thanks. --Elonka 02:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Elonka,

 Done I'm happy to restore articles for editors who want to improve them! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, could you also please undelete Society of Dance History Scholars? The two articles are related. --Elonka 19:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done It turns out that they were PROD'd by the same editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:18, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, and yes, that seems to be the case. I was wondering about vandalism, but then upon investigation it looks like that editor was attempting to create a third article, but their draft kept being rejected. So, in response they tried to delete two similar articles (both WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:POINT come to mind). They seem to be a fairly new editor, I've reached out to them to see if I can help with their draft, and then explore the advisability of a merge. --Elonka 19:29, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

That's a generous approach, Elonka. I think we see so much bad behavior that we have to remind ourselves that most new editors are just trying to find their way through policies and practices that experienced editors have come to know and abide by. I just got off a Zoom call with a friend with multiple advanced degrees who told me, "Well, I wouldn't even try to edit Wikipedia!" I was surprised that they found the Wiki system intimidating but I guess I did, too, when I started. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:59, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Category for deletion

Hello Liz Main page and category page have been added to the TKO MMA category marked for deletion I will be adding more as it is a massive work in progress. I do apologize for creating the link in the first place without adding the main page at least I was just trying to make sure it worked sorry about the misunderstanding Stay safe:)Tsims23 (talk) 10:49, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tsims23,

I removed the CSD C1 tag from Category:TKO Major League MMA as it was no longer empty. Just know that with empty categories, they sit for a week and if they are still empty then, they are deleted. And if they are deleted purely for being empty categories, they can be restored should you need them in the future. This is different from most other types of deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:15, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Well that is truly good to know for the future thank you for getting back to me Miss hope that you have a good day Tsims23 (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Deleted page Create Again

See this. Which you deleted a few hours ago.

And that article has been deleted again and the page fully protected. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Warning

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at CMT Brasil. 84.1.247.135 (talk) 15:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I removed a speedy deletion tag that you mistakenly placed on this article which is not considered vandalism. What is vandalism is you repeatedly tagging an article for deletion even though you were told your reasons were groundless. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

And you reported me four times at AIV for removing a CSD tag. After 8 years, that's a new one for me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:18, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hasty deletion of Campaign Against Racism and Fascism

Hi. You used PROD to delete the above article. When you flagged it, I opposed, added a couple of sources, and said I would add more later. I have a window open with several tabs full of academic articles on this organisation and sat down to do it today only to find the page gone. PROD should only be used for non-controversial deletions, and I would've thought my objection and promise to work on the article should rule that out. I'm not sure if the proposed deletion was listed anywhere, e.g. the UK or politics deletion noticeboards. I believe you were too hasty and would be grateful if you could reinstate the article so I can work on it. Thank you. BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BobFromBrockley,

Proposed deletion is for uncontroversial deletions. Anyone, including yourself, can remove a PROD tag and stop it from being deleted. Deleted PRODs are restored upon editor request so I have done so. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Liz. Much appreciated. (This is my first experience of the PROD tag.) BobFromBrockley (talk) 09:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Good call

Good call on this! Extremely notable.--- Possibly (talk) 08:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Possibly,

You did all of the work! I am somewhat skeptical of articles tagged for being promotional because most articles focus on the accomplishments of the article subject. And especially using this criteria in Draft space where editors are in the process of working on articles and aren't finished with them yet. Unless it is blatant advertising, I do not agree with CSD G11 tagging in Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

User page Smiles.ai was deleted

Greetings Liz, User page Smiles.ai was deleted under speedy deletion criteria U5,G11. Can u please help by guiding me to recreate it? Can I change the content and republish it under same title? Smiles.ai (talk) 10:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Smiles.ai,

Unfortunately, you are blocked. If you ever request and are granted an unblock, you can return for advice. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

AFD

Hi @Liz: I saw that you earlier temporarily blocked a user. I wanted to make you aware of the discussion on the talk page at the moment, User_talk:Vedbas. PhotographyEdits (talk) 16:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz:user:Possibly After telling me I follow the rules since then Today I try to correct some articles and then two articles report .I have followed everything rules.I made a mistake at first AFD.I made two AFD today by correcting them later and see those two.Chief Minister (Talk) 16:57, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz:If I'm wrong, i request you to suggest correcting my mistake please don't block meChief Minister (Talk) 17:05, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

and please see Photography article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StrongVPN Where two other users have supported delete.Chief Minister (Talk) 17:07, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vedbas,

I'm not going to reblock you but you need to listen to what other editors, especially ones with much more experience, are telling you. Like I said to you, you are doing tasks that editors with a lot more knowledge and experience do and you are still very new to the English Wikipedia. Tagging pages for speedy deletion or a deletion discussion is a serious business, especially to the page creator. You need to know the Criteria for Speedy Deletion thoroughly. And if you want to get involved with Articles for Deletion, start by participating in some AFD discussions, do not start with nominating articles. AFD has its own culture and it helps to be familiar with how editors are determining whether an article covers a notable subject or not. Many participating editors do not make a simple "Delete" or "Keep" vote but go out and look for sources themselves and they will be annoyed if the nominator didn't do this before they posted the AFD nomination.

The general advice you are being given is to Slow down and start out observing how processes unfold and editors interact before acting in such bold ways. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:46, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Liz: thanks for your comment, I think you wrote it down quite well. A few hours after you posted your message here, they boldly made a false accusation of sockpuppetry without backing it up by any proof (which obviously isn't there). See here. They keep apologizing, but the fact that they don't seem to listen to advice of experienced editors and administrators like you is not very nice. PhotographyEdits (talk) 19:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Sigh. Thanks for letting me know, PhotographyEdits. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: well, there is more. There have been multiple speedy deletion requests who were declined, User_talk:Vedbas#Speedy_deletion (Pearl.com and Rachel Goldman). Also, they seem unwilling to fix mistakes they made while adding images. This needs to stop IMO, but I'm not sure what's the best to do. PhotographyEdits (talk) 15:21, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, something weird happened here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Viy_Cortez the article was speedily deleted before consensus was reached. It was relisted and speedily deleted afterwards, even though multiple people including me voted for keep. PhotographyEdits (talk) 15:29, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, PhotographyEdits,

I looked at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Viy Cortez and it looks like the page creator MaccWiki requested deletion of the article during the AFD discussion so it was deleted through speedy deletion. I'll check on the other issues today. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Article Deletion rewrite proposal (follow up)

Hello, Thank you for your help with my page. We have edited the content to make it less 'sales-oriented' and more factual with cited sources. The new content can be found here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RE95BWDv9-hm-NqkALBXy6-4hj4ei6iX1XU6T7QVli4/edit?usp=sharing Do you think this might cause any concerns when published?

Bcvisi2009 (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2021 (UTC)Brian

Hello, Bcvisi2009,

It still is like a sales brochure, listing all of the products and services that this company provides. A Wikipedia entry is not interested in what a company says about itself but what reliable sources (newspapers, magazines, books, media websites, etc.) say about the company, both positive and negative.

Also, you say "We". Do you work for the company? Because that would mean you have a conflict of interest that would need to be disclosed.

What I recommend is that after you rewrite the content, put into Draft space and submit it to Articles for Creation for a review. If you put it directly into the main space of the project, I think it will be deleted. Let an experienced AFC reviewer (I'm not a reviewer) give you their opinion and advice.

Those are my thoughts. If you have questions about editing on Wikipedia, I recommend you bring them to the Teahouse where experienced editors can offer you support and advice. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:35, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Md. Shafiqul Islam Shimul

Hello Liz, regarding Md. Shafiqul Islam Shimul, the Md. is short for Mohammad, a common practice in Bangladesh is to shorten the first name Mohammad to either M. or Md, and is actually part of his name and not an honorific. Regards and happy editing. Vinegarymass911 (talk) 07:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Vinegarymass911,

I was just trying to get the text to match the page title. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Recreate Mohammadreza Goodary

Dear User:Liz, The Mohammadreza Goodary page has already been deleted by you. According to the references, Persian and English Wikipedia and being WP:Notable, I request that you allow me to recreate this page with the principles and rules of Wikipedia. Sincerely MMA Kid (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MMA Kid,

There is no deleted page at Mohammadreza Goodary. Can you provide a link to its previous location? I need to see why it was deleted. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Mohammadreza_Goodary&action=edit&redlink=1 MMA Kid (talk) 06:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MMA Kid,

The editor who wrote this draft requested that it be deleted. So, I think you should start from scratch. Alternatively, you could contact the editor Abmousavi and see if they want it restored. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you MMA Kid (talk) 14:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Attack user page

On User:Hoad, the line "if you have read this far then there is somthing wrong with you". Would you delete it based on WP:ATTACK? --Catchpoke (talk) 17:55, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Catchpoke,

This editor made one edit, over 14 years ago. I don't think this user page is attacking anyone, it's just a rant. If they were still an active editor and this rant was directed at a specific person, that would be a different situation.

Please don't go looking for pages to tag for deletion. There are many activities that are more worthy of your time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

What about blanking the page?--Catchpoke (talk) 18:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello Liz: I see you are still online. CouldWould you answer my question for my learnings either here or on my talk page? --Catchpoke (talk) 18:43, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:User_pages#On_others'_user_pages says if a userpage is edited, any reasons for doing so should be posted on the talk page. I am assuming this is the reason why you don't feel there is a need to blank the talk page either.--Catchpoke (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Catchpoke: I totally agree with Liz. This is a trivial and insignificant post to a user page 14 years ago. Scarcely anyone is likely to ever see it, and if they do all they will see is a meaningless bit of scribbling, probably by a child. I really really hope you have something better to do with your time than keeping on about this. My advice is to just forget it. JBW (talk) 20:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I am unsure if this is a response as you passed by or if you are watching this page but either way, I appreciate it.-- Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Catchpoke, I will often blank a user page or at least remove any offending material instead of deleting it. In this case, I didn't think it was offensive. Deletion is kind of a big stick and it isn't always the solution. Of course, you will find different attitudes among admins about this but that's my point of view.

Especially with user pages, if you look at some editors who have been here a long, long time, you will find personal content on their user page that if it was on a new editor's page might cause it to be deleted. We allow some biographical content on user pages as long as it is not promotional or just a listing of their social media accounts or websites.

Feel free to ask me questions here (I'm not great with pings) but if I'm involved in a task, it might take a bit of time for me to respond unless it's an emergency like vandalism or a revision deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

O.K. Liz. I appreciate your response, help, and information.-- Catchpoke (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Denver Wolverines

Hi, as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denver Wolverines closed as delete, would Denver Wolverines be a candidate for speedy deletion rather than RFD (Especially as the redirect is basically pointless)? Cheers c87d98b10 18:51, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, c87d98b10,

When the page was an article, it was deleted. But I think it has a different status as a redirect. If you don't want to file an RFD yourself, you can tell me the rationale for deletion and I can file it for you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply, my rationale is that the team in question was proposed (at least according to the original article) to be a development team for an amateur league a decade ago that never materialised. It basically never went any further than an idea as far as it's possible to tell. It was only redirected to the USARL article on the basis that this article had a mention of it, but I had to remove this as the source provided was a deadlink and I was unable to locate any other RS's to verify that this club even existed as an idea and isn't pure OR. I hope that helps, many thanks for your assistance. c87d98b10 19:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Same rationale for Seattle Force, Dallas Dragons, Orange County Outlaws and Houston Hornets, which have all been de-PRODed by another user. c87d98b10 19:36, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I've tagged the redirect and you can participate in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 17. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:22, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help :) c87d98b10 02:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Questions

Hello Liz. Would appreciate if you could reply at TimedText talk:Million Dollar.ogg.zh-sg.srt & User talk:Minorax. Thanks :) ----Minorax^«¦talk¦» 06:57, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Generosity

I've just seen your block of Matty.1127, and I must say that, in view of the attack page, you have been much more generous in blocking for anything less than indefinitely than I would have been. Evidently you are a much nicer person 😇 than I am 👿. JBW (talk) 14:51, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JBW,

I'm sure that most admins would give an indefinite block. I guess I foolishly believe in short blocks to get their attention and if the behavior is repeated, then indef. In my experience, many new editors don't return after a short block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 14:58, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right. I certainly agree that this is a kind of new editor who almost certainly won't return after the block, so in that sense it doesn't matter how long the block is, and there's a case for a short block on the slight chance that they will come back and the block will have conveyed the message to them. As for your mention of how most administrators handle blocks, I have serious concerns, both on how ready administrators are to give out blocks, and even more on how reluctant the few who regularly patrol unblock requests are to lift blocks. JBW (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, JBW,

I agree. I have issues with quick blocks and even more issues with speedy deletion criteria that maybe one day I'll bring up at the Village Pump. You have to pick your battles.

I don't think I've ever told you but after my RFA, you were my model for being an admin. When I was a new editor, I saw you go to great lengths to explain to inexperienced editors who were slipping into problem behavior where they were getting into trouble and how they could get back on the right path. I saw you go through sometimes long discussions with editors, some of whom just didn't get it and eventually ended up being blocked. But I always wanted to have the patience you showed to them and not give a short, dismissive reply when what they really needed was an explanation of Wikipedia policy which can often seem confusing and arbitrary to new editors. I sometimes get it wrong but I think it's important to try. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

That's really interesting. Unfortunately I think I'm less good at doing the kind of thing you describe now than I was when I started as an administrator 😕. I suppose years of dealing with awkward editors who just don't want to know wears down one's patience 😬. However, I still try, and it does encourage me to keep trying when I get messages indicating that at least some people appreciate my efforts, such as what you've written above 🙂. JBW (talk) 13:20, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't know whether this will interest you, but I have just been subject to your influence. I was about to indefinitely block a new account that was being used only for vandalism, and then I thought of what you said above, and gave a fairly short block instead. Thanks for getting me to reconsider my approach. JBW (talk) 11:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

The article draft: idea spectrum was not advertising

It was deleted for being advertising but I would like to edit it to be more objective, have secondhand sources, use less marketing buzzwords, and not seem like advertising, as it is not and I am unaffiliated.

Rory Sutherland (advertising)

Hi Liz, I saw that you deleted this recently re-created page. I had that page undeleted a few months ago and re-wrote it in entirely. The original version of this article was blatant puffery and deserved to be deleted. My cleaned up version was substantially different and re-created in light of new secondary sources. . At the time I moved it into mains-space I was fairly sure this met notability guidelines, but if you are convinced otherwise, could we have the page brought back to draft? --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:47, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Salimfadhley,

The only way I know to overcome an AFD decision to delete an article is to work on a draft and go through the AFC process. I have restored your page at Draft:Rory Sutherland...please submit it to AFC reviewers when you believe it is ready to be reviewed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I will submit --Salimfadhley (talk) 22:53, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

It's submitted, but are you sure that previously deleted articles can only be re-created via AFC? This is something that could also be dealt with via New Pages Patrol. The article I have written is very different to the article which was deleted via AFD some time ago, and I certainly agree with the reasons for deletion. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:01, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz my understanding of CSD G4 is that it only applies if the article is basically the same as the one that was deleted. In this case the article was deleted because of poor referencing, and the draft seems to actually have real sources now, so the previous AfD doesn't really apply IMO. (disclosure: Salimfadhley asked for help on IRC so I took a look). Legoktm (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you all. If either of you are willing to review the draft then I think we might all get our way. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

It was my understanding that to overcome an AFD deletion decision, a draft article should go through AFC and receive approval from an AFC reviewer. This may not be the strict policy but it's my experience with our speedy deletion taggers that if the article doesn't go through AFC, it will likely be tagged for deletion. A recreated article that is moved from draft space to main space by an AFC reviewer is unlikely to be tagged for CSD G4 deletion so I see that as the most successful route to overcoming an AFD decision. But it might not be the only way. I also have seen articles where I have removed CSD tags where I thought they were inappropriate be retagged soon afterwards.

Of course, it's up to admins to check versions and I guess my view on this article was colored by the fact that it had previously been deleted four separate times so I might not have been as thorough as I should have been. I see AFC reviewers as superior to me in this task which is why I refer editors to the AFC process so frequently. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

I think I will allow AFC to run it's course. An article created by AFC is less likely to be deleted in future. --Salimfadhley (talk) 12:45, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

restored spammy article

Hi Liz, I just wanted to ask you so I can understand what went on. Last week I proposed the deletion of Carsforsale.com. My concerns were:

• created by a single-purpose user
• the only sources are either own references, or references from sporting events sponsored by the company (which are things companies simply pay for)
• no treatment in sources that is not superficial

The article was deleted yesterday. Shortly after, a new single-purpose account was created, and was used to request the undeletion, which you carried out.

I must admit I'm confused, and I thought a good idea to ask you. Dr. Vogel (talk) 11:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

• Hi, Liz. I notice you're editing right now. Could you please explain why you undeleted the article? Bishonen | tålk 17:35, 18 June 2021 (UTC).

Proposed deletions are for uncontroversial deletions and contested PRODs are restored upon editor request which is what occurred at WP:REFUND. I agree it's spammy and should probably be nominated at AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz, thank you for your reply. I've nominated it at AFD as you suggested. Dr. Vogel (talk) 22:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

It was about CSD not vandalism

How someone can push an article via draft by adding fake reference on award section?? [15] Owlf 📪 22:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

About Draft: Vivek Verma Owlf 📪 22:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Owlf,

CSD is for obvious cases and I looked over some of the references and they seem real to me. Speedy deletion is not intended for admins to review and evaluate citations, that should happen when the draft is submitted to AFC. If you feel strongly that this draft should be deleted, make a case at MFD but, personally, I would leave the situation to the AFC reviewers who I think do a great job checking out drafts. I know because every day I delete quite a few stale drafts that have been rejected.

Should this draft get moved to main space instead of submitted to AFC, you can tag it with a speedy deletion tag but we allow more latitude in draft space because editors are working on improving the articles including the references. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

As it is misleading draft I've reverted your last edit i believe it should be deleted. I had also mentioned about that on talk page.. you should have look into it before. Owlf 📪 22:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

You can do this but now you've had two administrators decline to delete this page. As I said, you can always take it to WP:MFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:00, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

User Page Deletion

[16] was deleted unexpectedly a month or so ago and I would like to respectfully request that you please restore the page, and follow up with me to provide opportunity to discuss the reasoning further with you, since I was unaware of this proposed deletion until the page was no longer present, and was therefore not able to comment at the time.

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

[[17]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mws pgrep (talk • contribs) 17:24, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mws pgrep,

I didn't see your message because you placed it at the top of the page. On Wikipedia talk pages, new messages are placed at the bottom of the page so that's where editors look for them.

Mike Shapiro (programmer) was deleted through a Proposed deletion and since you are contesting it, I have restored the page. That doesn't mean that it won't be subject to a AFD deletion discussion. Pages deleted through an AFD are not easily restored.

If you are looking for advice on article review or editing on Wikipedia, I encourage you to go to the Teahouse where experienced editors can address your concerns. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:57, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Metro Theater (New York)

Hi Liz. I was actually posting about Metro Theater (New York) on the user talk page of the AfC reviewer who last declined it to suggest that it be draftified when you actually did it yourself. I came across it via WP:THQ#Citing NYT City Blog and then saw it was pretty messed up (at least format wise). Anyway, I saw the post you left on the creator's user talk page about paid editing, but I think they might interpret that to mean that they can't even edit the draft. Is that really the case? I thought it was OK for a paid editor to develop a draft, but it's expected that they submit it to AfC for review. It's only if the draft is accepted as an article, that they're expected to then use the talk page to make edit requests (except perhaps for WP:COIADVICE types of edits). -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:23, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly,

Yes, you are correct and I didn't state that correctly. I'll try to clarify this on their talk page and if you could add a comment that would be helpful. They might be confused at this point as they went to the Teahouse for help and were told it was okay to move the draft into main space without AFC approval. The responder didn't know they had a stated COI. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Metro Theater (New York)

Fyi, I saw this discussed at the Teahouse, and threw in a few dozen edits to fix it up. I've moved it back to article space without AFC as I think it's pretty decent now. --- Possibly ☎ 04:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Possibly,

Thanks for letting me know but I actually was never commenting on the state of the draft but the fact that it had been moved to main space after being rejected twice at AFC. If you think it is okay, that's great! Thanks for helping improve it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:35, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I know. I just wanted to let you know in case you thought it was odd that it moved back so quickly. --- Possibly ☎ 04:40, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Also, I'm now seeing the paid editing discussion above for the first time. I went over every inch of the article-- do you think it's OK to ignore that aspect now? --- Possibly ☎ 04:43, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure the page creator will be pleased. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:44, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Dang. Looks like I BOGOF'ed myself, which I try to avoid assiduously! --- Possibly ☎ 04:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

I never saw that essay before. In this case, I'd take them at their word that they are a volunteer and they stated that they have a COI which is much better than a paid editor that doesn't disclose anything. I've been criticized for giving folks the benefit of the doubt but I believe in assuming good faith. But the COI is why I wanted AFC approval. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:57, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

@Possibly: It's sort of a judgement call. If you feel the subject is truly something worth creating an article about that should be on Wikipedia, then there's nothing wrong with doing so. The fact that someone might be getting paid for your work might be annoying, but there's not much point in worrying about that in my opinion. The same thing could happen for any article you try to improve on Wikipedia. A the same time, some editors really abhor any thing that even slightly sniffs of paid editing and will simply refuse to get involved even if it means just answering questions. They're not going to do someone's job for them any more that they would do someone's homework for them. The BOGOF essay was probably created by someone who falls more into the latter category. Personally, I think the WMF probably could do a little better when it comes to making known it's position on page editing. For example, any time anyone tries to open any Wikipedia page using a non-registered account, a big banner should pop up that states "Why pay for someone to create an article when it can be done for free" in huge letters followed by a bit more of an explanation in smaller print. This will probably never happen, but it would get the point across. After all, similar banners appear whenever the WMF is seeking contributions during one of its fund raising drives. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:08, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Obsolete redirect page

Hello Liz,

a user redirected my article Nobuko (1940 film) to the page Nobuko (film), possibly unaware that there are at least 3 other (TV) films of this title dating from 1957, 1964 and 1964 (all based on the same literary source), which make the 1940 a useful/necessary extra disambiguator. I switched back to the old article name (and commented on the other versions in an extra paragraph in the article which will hopefully prevent such misunderstandings in the future). Now of course this makes the Nobuko (film) an obsolete redirect page. Could you delete this, or is there a deletion request necessary in any form? (I don't think that turning Nobuko (film) into a disambiguation page makes sense, as there is already one for the given name Nobuko.) Many thanks, Robert Kerber (talk) 06:48, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Fulfillment (book)

not sure what else I need to do to keep this in article space. I'm an experienced editor with a FA under my belt. The book is notable, just look at the reviews on Bookmarks. Thanks for your great work here. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:35, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Therapyisgood,

It's barely an article. It's a mention of the book and then a statement that it got some good reviews. No details about the book, what it's about, quotes from reviews, what is significant about the book, it's barely a paragraph long. There is nothing there of any substance beyond the statement that, yes, this book was published. I think it will be deleted if you move it back to main space without some more content, that's why well-intentioned editors keep moving it back to Draft space, so it can be improved and not just speedy deleted. There must be more that you can say about the publication beyond the fact that it was published. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Passes WP:NBOOK criterion 1 even as it was just based on reviews alone. Just because something is a stub doesn't mean it should be draftified. If you don't believe it meets notability guidelines, nominate it for deletion and see where that goes for you. Enjoy the rest of your day. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:54, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Recent G13 deletions

Hi Liz, the three most recent G13 deletions you performed have all been an hour ahead of schedule. I'm guessing that hour gap between Draft:International Federation of Aesthetic Group Gymnastics (02:21 UTC) and Draft:About a School (03:30 UTC) caused that confusion, like it did for me last month. Just thought I'd let you know. ✗plicit 03:22, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I'll double-check those. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Email markup

Hello, I was told you could email me the wiki markup for some deleted articles to include the following: 40b | 50b | 40s | 50s | 60s | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 Libro0 (talk) 06:50, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Libro0,

Do you want these pages restored? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually you can disregard this. It looks like User:Malcolmxl5 was able to send them to me. But to answer your question I am electing not to request undeletion since there now exist wikis that would be better suited for hosting this content. I would have liked to discuss the reason for deletion with the nominator, sadly however he has chosen to avoid this debate. Hopefully with the move, everybody wins. Libro0 (talk) 04:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Libro0,

Well, that is your decision. Our policy on PRODs is to restore them if an editor contests a PROD deletion as long as there aren't other problems like copyright violations. And there isn't an expiration date on this should you change your mind. Of course, the nominator can then go to AFD but that is much more time-consuming than tagging an article with a PROD tag.

I'm glad you were able to get the content you were looking for. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

About Richard Burge

Hi, Liz! I went ahead and re-added the CSD G6 tag to Richard Burge, but with the Draft article linked in the rationale, as you suggested. I can do the Draft move myself, if you'd like, so long as the mainspace page is deleted. I don't think a histmerge is necessary since there's no history on the redirect. Silverseren^C 19:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: There's already been a discussion regarding that article and multiple people agreed with me that the rejection reason (Wikipedia Library sources not being allowed) was stupid. There are multiple sources in the article that are entirely about Burge and his history. I've given up on the AfC process being able to properly deal with it. I fully believe it would survive a deletion discussion, if that occurred. Could you please delete the redirect so I can move the Draft over? Silverseren^C 00:23, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Okay, Silver seren, I'll oblige. I usually like to move the page myself but I will leave that to you as I don't have your confidence in the article. Good luck with it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Silverseren^C 02:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Delete of Draft Spaces

Speedy deletes do apply to draft spaces of articles which clearly have no place on wikipedia, per: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Drafts#:~:text=The%20general%20section%20of%20the,promotion%20will%20be%20speedily%20deleted. Photonsoup (talk) 23:41, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

No, article speedy deletion tags do not apply to Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:45, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia disagrees Photonsoup (talk) 23:48, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Photonsoup, you new editor,

Since you don't believe an administrator, would you go ask at the Teahouse to confirm your idiosyncratic view? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:51, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm not a new editor, rather this is my sixteenth year editing. If personal articles where are patently just junk aren't subject to speedy delete noms then I think there many need to be some clarification in the point I linked, and I'm open to being wrong on that. Photonsoup (talk) 23:55, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

There are different deletion standards for draft articles than articles in main space. There are some draft articles that are just blank pages. Drafts are typically only tagged for deletion when they are vandalism, they violate copyright or BLP guidelines are or advertising. I predict you will not have any success changing deletion guidelines for draft articles because they are the common framework that editors in AFC have worked within for years. While you might have previous editing experience on Wikipedia, you would be a newcomer to this area. Changing a policy as central as deletion criteria has to be the work of more than one editor who thinks things should be different. You'd need a groundswell of support and that takes more than a week to acquire. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Help

How can I get my user sandbox back? Gokul 567 (talk) 06:22, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Feminist Avantgarde (June 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Hoary 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:Feminist Avantgarde 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:Feminist Avantgarde, 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.

Hoary (talk) 11:51, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Request for help with a page move you made that broke a couple of things

Can you please take a look at this request for clarification from you? Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Your recent request at Bishonen's talk

Hey, I know our last interaction about categories, at Only in death's talk page was a little confrontational (I altered my original comment, but still remain unsure that I found the best way to express myself clearly without sounding angry). FWIW, I legitimately meant it to sound less salty than I believe it did, and I hope you don't harbor any ill feelings. If you do, then I apologize, because regardless of my intent, the fault for that is still mine.

In any case, I wanted to thank you for the request you posted at Bish's talk. If my own interactions with category editors had taken place under circumstances like those you created at Bish's talk, there'd be a lot less animosity surrounding this. Hell, if you had approached me during the last round of category drama with a request as politely worded and clearly explained as that, I'd have more than likely agreed to it, or at the very least taken the approach of redirecting them to something more appropriate, as Tryp did with Bish's categories.

I just wanted to say that I appreciate the fact that you're doing things in a productive and collaborative way. I wish more of the category editors would follow your example, instead of doing things like this. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 20:29, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Virtualization engine

Can you please refund Virtualization engine, all versions, and any associated talk page, again all versions. Its not likely suitable for mainspace as is so I'm happy with a draftification or userification. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 21:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Djm-leighpark,

 Done. There wasn't much there but you can find it at User:Djm-leighpark/Virtualization engine. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, content/concept wasn't entirely what I was anticipating and I'm certainly glad wasn't returned to mainspace, certainly as is. I might explore it a little more at some point .... Thanks. Djm-leighpark (talk) 05:16, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Prod for Video in print

I don't object to the article being deleted (I wasn't paid to write it, it was just something I found interesting in the news and made a page for it, but it wasn't notable and just a blip in time, no problems here) but I notice I never got a talk page message advising on the PROD, wasn't I meant to? --occono (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Occono,

No, you should have been notified. But when I went into the deleted edit history for the page, an editor named Burnte did the tagging and it looks like he didn't have a lot of experience. Every week, I posted a couple dozen talk page messages reminding editors to notify page creators when they tag a page for deletion. Those editors who use Twinkle have the program do it automatically for them but editors who just add the deletion code to the page often overlook this step or aren't aware that it is necessary.

As a contested PROD, it can be restored should you wish to recover the content, either in main space or your User space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:22, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Nah it's not really notable I suppose. Maybe as something merged into a broader article about print advertising? It may have read like an ad but that's just all the sources had to say about it. I don't want it restored it's fine, though if you do think it could fit in a broader article feel free to add the text.--occono (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Tagging

Hi Liz. Thank you for posting your comment about tagging pages for speedy deletion on my talk tage. I have reviewed some of the critera on WP:CSD. I mainly read the "General" and the "User pages" criteria for speedy deletion. What's the next step? Hayleez (talk) 01:17, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Hayleez,

That's a good start! You can browse the Speedy Deletion folders (like Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam) to see what types of pages are tagged for speedy deletion. Right now though, there are very few tagged pages. Over the past two months, we lost two editors who did the majority of our deletion tagging so things are a little slow. We could use the help and most taggers browse through the new pages list...there are several but Special:NewPagesFeed is one that you can use.

I highly recommend becoming familiar with Twinkle. It's a tool that you can use to tag pages and will offer you the possible criteria for the type of page you're looking at. Please remember to set your Preferences to "Notify page creator" so that the page creator of pages you tag will receive a notification.

And if you really want to find a new way to help, consider volunteering at Articles for Creation (go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants for information). We always need people who can review new draft articles but that requires a little experience. There is also a nice community of AFC reviewers that might be interesting to get to know.

There are so many ways to help out on Wikipedia, you just have to find those that you find most interesting. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:45, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Caoa01

Misclick, sorry. I'll restore that. DS (talk) 03:48, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem, DS. I was just surprised. Have a good weekend...it's going to be very hot here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:29, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz!

Hi there, I just left a comment on the talk page of User:Onel5969 and noticed that you most recently left a comment on the same user for incorrectly flagging pages without conducting much (any) research. The same thing just happened for me on page fooodporn which I just restored (it was originally redirected over a year ago), as it has received a number of new notable references, including a Forbes article, since this time. It appears that User:Onel5969 did the same thing as he did on the page that you commented on, as he immediately put back in the redirect without even speaking to me about it. The page is already locked and requires extended confirmed access to able to access it (which we both obviously have), so I am surprised that he reverted without even speaking to me about it. Would appreciate your input about what to do! Thanks so much Hamilton677 (talk)

Hello, Hamilton677,

Can you provide me with a link to the page so I can see its history? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Liz: Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Foodporn&action=history Looking at it, it appears there was a lot of edit warring so it was locked by GeneralNotability. Several articles have been written about the topic since, including this one by Forbes: https://www.forbes.com/sites/eveturowpaul/2020/11/23/restauranteurs-look-to-australia-for-a-guide-on-surviving-a-winter-lockdown/?sh=696f4865279a In my mind there is definitely a distinction between the concept "food porn" and the company Foodporn so I think the redirect should be removed which is what I did before User:Onel5969 put the redirect back in! A bit maddening as he/she didn't even ask me about it. Appreciate you looking at it for me ;) Hamilton677 (talk)

@Liz: Let me know if you need anything else. What is the etiquette for editor's deleting other editor's articles in full without even contacting them about it? I obviously spent some time putting it all together and it appears now to be totally lost as the redirect removed the draft and copy in total. Thanks for all your hard work... have followed you for some time! Hamilton677 (talk)

Hello, Hamilton677,

It looks like this page was protected to keep it as a redirect instead of an article. There are a couple of things you could do at this stage, you could start a discussion with Onel5969 or GeneralNotability on their talk page, just like you've done here. Approach them in a friendly, non-accusing manner, stating that you want to develop an article for this page and ask them for their advice. Don't be confrontational or you will get nowhere.

Second, your content is not lost, it's in the Edit History of the page. You can go into the history, click on your last edit and then go into the Edit option and copy the content that you added before it was reverted back into a redirect. Things would be very different if the page was deleted but it hasn't been, it's all still there. :Finally, take the content that you wrote (and only this content), put it in a Draft article and submit it to Articles for Creation for review. Getting AFC approval isn't mandatory but it's a way to overcome a deletion decision or resistance to having an article. Go to the AFC page for instructions on how to submit a Draft for review. It may take a while to get a review but if your goal is to write an article on this subject, edit-warring will only get you blocked. It's very uncommon for an article that has been approved by an AFC reviewer to get tagged for speedy deletion so I encourage editors with tough subjects to take this route.

I hope this helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:02, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Liz:. Thanks so much for your sound advice. I did exactly what you said and Onel5969 kindly put it into draft at Draft:Foodporn. I guess if a few more notable articles about the company come out (I learned that some articles by Forbes contributors are no longer considered notable), then I can update it and publish. Have a great night/day! Hamilton677 (talk)

Please Deleted Prodyut Mukherjee

Hi, @Liz: A member is promoting on his member page, please remove that member page. Best Regards MXX8^Talk✍️ 05:41, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MXX8,

I'm not sure what you mean by "member" but I've already deleted this page twice. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:43, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry😭 liz I wrote member instead of user, the fact is that I do fast typing, that's why I wrote it wrong.Best Regards MXX8^Talk✍️ 05:52, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

No problem, MXX8, no apologies necessary. I just thought that maybe there was a group I didn't know about. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:59, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Liz Please see 7 News (TV channel) Prompt this page by an anonymous

designated to remove. Best Regards MXX8^Talk✍️ 06:05, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

:-) Follow.your.inner.heroes.2.the.work.you.love.2021 (talk) 06:06, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

GOCE June 2021 newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2021 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, our first newsletter of 2021, which is a brief update of Guild activities since December 2020. To unsubscribe, follow the link at the bottom of this box. Current events Election time: Voting in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 16 June and will conclude at the end of the month. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Have your say and show support here. June Blitz: Our June copy-editing blitz is underway and will conclude on 26 June. Drive and blitz reports January Drive: 28 editors completed 324 copy edits totalling 714,902 words. At the end of the drive, the backlog had reached a record low of 52 articles. (full results) February Blitz: 15 editors completed 48 copy edits totalling 142,788 words. (full results) March Drive: 29 editors completed 215 copy edits totalling 407,736 words. (full results) April Blitz: 12 editors completed 23 copy edits totalling 56,574 words. (full results) May Drive: 29 editors completed 356 copy edits totalling 479,013 words. (full results) Other news Progress report: as of 26 June, GOCE participants had completed 343 Requests since 1 January. The backlog has fluctuated but remained in control, with a low of 52 tagged articles at the end of January and a high of 620 articles in mid-June. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu and Twofingered Typist, and from member Reidgreg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:38, 26 June 2021 (UTC).

Bringelly Road

Please do not remove CSD notices from articles unless you intend to fix the issues or explain why it does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. I encourage you to share your thoughts on the matter at this article's deletion discussion page. —FORMALDUDE ^(talk) 20:58, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, FormalDude

There was no problem to fix. This criteria doesn't apply to roads. Go over the details of criteria at WP:CSD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:01, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

I said "explain why it does not meet the criteria", emphasis on why. There's no policy that says CSD does apply not to roadways, as far as I can tell. —FORMALDUDE ^(talk) 21:17, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

LTA

Hello Liz, I see that you blocked the last sock of this LTA. I found another active account for this LTA (locked globally now), but he made 292 edits on enwiki! (Also ping @Praxidicae:, as she dealt with this LTA a lot of times!) Thanks on advance --Alaa :)..! 21:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Closing AfD discussions (nominator withdrawal)

Hi Liz, I wanted to ask for your input on something. A few days ago I mistakenly closed an AfD discussion I created as speedy keep, and you told me I should not have done that. I stumbled upon a contradictory statement at WP:WDAFD: "If no one has supported deletion of the article you may close the discussion yourself as a WP:Speedy keep, or you may leave it for someone else to close the discussion." which is what I believe originally led me to click "speedy keep" on the discussion for Leela Owen (again, not with full intent to close it that second - I was also unaware that xfdcloser, which I've uninstalled for now, would go ahead without a confirmation prompt) - I just wanted to ask for your input, as this guide seems to state that a nominator can close their own discussion, (and in my interpretation of this, I would still have been wrong as I did not add a comment stating I withdrew before closing) if this is incorrect, the guideline should be amended so others don't repeat my mistake. Thanks in advance!  A S U K I T E  02:48, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Asukite,

Well, given WP:WDAFD, I guess there was technically nothing wrong with your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leela Owen but you did so less than 20 minutes after your posted the nomination. I don't frequent AFD daily but in cases like this, I have always seen the nominator withdraw the nomination or even tag the page for speedy deletion, rather than closing a discussion that has only been open a very short time.

So, I was acting on what I had seen in previous deletion discussions and I didn't believe it was proper for a nominator to close a discussion they started but you found a policy statement that shows that sometimes, it's okay. I don't think the guideline needs to be changed although it would be helpful if this provision, which can only occur in certain circumstances, was more widely known.

I applaud you for looking into this and tracking down this policy statement. Often when editors are given corrections, they either get angry, apologize profusely or get defensive and start reverting. But you reflected upon this, what had occurred and went looking into the policy to see if you were mistaken. And I learned that sometimes it's alright for a nominator to close a discussion they started so thank you for educating me on that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:25, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) There's at least one other circumstance where someone can close a discussion they've started: when an admin has deleted the page but failed to close. (WP:NACD, penultimate paragraph. That's also, I believe, the only circumstance under which an IP user can close an XfD.) Every time I do it, I'm terrified someone will revert me. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:37, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I knew that when an article has been deleted before the discussion has been closed, it's okay to close a discussion. For me, an article has to be supremely bad or damaging to speedy delete it when it's part of an AFD discussion but admins vary in how they judge situations. I think in most cases, deletion discussions should take priority over a CSD tagging. I think in these cases, the admin deleting the page should go close the AFD discussion but it doesn't always happen. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:49, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

As for getting reverted, it's always a little jarring but it happens to us all. Just happened to me yesterday. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:53, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Liz, Thanks! I had no problem with being reverted, and personally I think I would rather wait longer as well, just to give others a chance to object or comment before closing, so I will likely opt not to close my own discussions anyway, as I prefer avoiding taking too many unilateral actions. I actually only stumbled upon that policy when I was checking up on something else, then remembered what happened earlier. I appreciate your input and will keep that in mind for the future.  A S U K I T E  03:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Please give me Pending Change Reviwer Rights

Hi, @Liz: I've Request for Pending Change Right and I already Read All guidliness Realted to pending change. I want this right only temporarily, I have seen those articles on Wikipedia waiting for reviewers on which pending change is protected by protection, I will fulfill this right with my responsibility, so I have already request on [[18]]. Best Regards MXX8^Talk✍️ 14:09, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MXX8,

It's best to ask for advanced permissions at WP:PERM. The admins who work there are used to evaluating editors and granting these permissions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Samuel Roberts ( Welsh writer)

A tag has been placed on Samuel Roberts ( Welsh writer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 17:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nathan2055,

Yes, this page was left-over from a page move, I should have deleted it myself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:32, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Talk:Samuel Roberts ( Welsh writer)

A tag has been placed on Talk:Samuel Roberts ( Welsh writer) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 17:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Heads up

Hey Liz, just as a heads up is case you hadn't seen: the deletion of the Book: namespace is proceeding soon, possibly tonight (see discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Implementation of book namespace deletion); this will lead to the emptying of many, many categories that we can then dilete via C1 (or preferably G6, housekeeping). Just so you weren't surprised when the database report winds up being huge. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, UnitedStatesian,

Thanks for letting me know. It would be great if we could just G6 them. We just had a consolidation of cricket articles that led the deletion of hundreds of cricket & sport categories, I think there were over 70 deleted today and more coming in the future.

I miss running into you on the old empty categories list but I think you have moved on to other tasks that are more interesting to you. You also used to be great at tracking down G13s last edited by bots but I think others have stumbled on to this job. Thanks for your work with Wanted Categories, I can create the obvious ones but I get lost on all of the football ones and figuring out what should be their parent categories.

All the best, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:30, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

An update: though all of the books have been moved to subpages of Wikipedia:Books/archive, the subsequent deletion will not happen for a month, and so the categories will not empty until then. I will let you know if anything changes. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021

• News and notes: Elections, Wikimania, masking and more

• In the media: Boris and Joe, reliability, love, and money

• Disinformation report: Croatian Wikipedia: capture and release

• Recent research: Feminist critique of Wikipedia's epistemology, Black Americans vastly underrepresented among editors, Wiki Workshop report

• Traffic report: So no one told you life was gonna be this way

• News from the WMF: Searching for Wikipedia

• Humour: Wikipedia's best articles on the world's strangest things

• WikiProject report: WikiProject on open proxies interview

• Forum: Is WMF fundraising abusive?

• Discussion report: Reliability of WikiLeaks discussed

• Obituary: SarahSV

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:15, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for what you said on User talk:SlimVirgin - missing pictured on my talk, with music full of hope and reformation --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:55, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Reverting my AFD closure

Why did you revert my closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ateneo School of Science and Engineering? ✗plicit 01:36, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Explicit,

I know this doesn't make sense but I don't know how I did this or remember reverting you. I remember looking at this AFD and seeing that it wasn't closed. So, I must have hit rollback or undo by mistake when looking at the page history prior to looking at the discussion. I would never intentionally revert your closure and am so sorry. While I feel terrible, I'm glad you told me so I could rollback my edit. My apologies to you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I have found that when I accidentally hit the rollback button it is most often on the watchlist when I was trying to open a page right next to it. HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 01:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

This has happened to me when I look at a page's edit history on my phone because Rollback is right next to clicking on an edit to view it. So, I don't work on Wikipedia on my phone any more because over the years, I have accidentally hit rollback on edits several times that I then had to rollback. But now I'm on my laptop so I'm not sure exactly what happened. This hasn't happened to me before on my laptop (that I'm aware of) and I look at hundreds of edits a day. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

It is possible to remove the Rollback button from the watchlist, which has probably saved me from quite a few fat-finger rollbacks. (Maybe you knew this and have opted not to use such a script, but just in case you didn't – there are so many helpful gadgets, I keep discovering ones I didn't know about even though they have been around for ages!) --bonadea contributions talk 08:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

If we're doing tech tips, @Bonadea: to wikilink a section with square brackets in it, you can use [ and ] in lieu of [ and ] respectively. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 08:50, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Thanks for the tip! HighInBC ^{Need help? Just ask.} 08:55, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Belarusian Music Chart

Hello Liz! I saw you removed the G5 speedy deletion tag from the category above. In case you haven't dealt with this particular user before, that's an obvious creation by a sock of Alex9777777, a globally blocked user who's been sockpuppeting to promote himself and his website for years. He's been up to the same sort of tricks for a long time. Since most of the article titles have long since been salted, he likes to create categories now, sometimes about his webpage, sometimes about himself, sometimes both, sometimes written in Cyrillic script. I normally just clear out his self-promotion and G5 it, since his MO is so unmistakeable. PohranicniStraze (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, PohranicniStraze,

Well, I tagged the empty category as CSD C1 because that was a valid CSD criteria. For CSD G5, I need to see that the page creator is a confirmed sockpuppet which wasn't the case here. You may be able to identify sockpuppets of this blocked editor but as an admin, I want there to be confirmation before I'll delete a page. Not all admins have this stance but that is mine. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:59, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agshin Babaev

Agshin Babaev was moved to draft space while an AfD was ongoing. Since you deleted the redirect from mainspace, what do you propose doing with the AfD? Let it run its course? Close it early as mooted due to the move to draft? —C.Fred (talk) 01:46, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, C.Fred,

I'm not an expert in the AFD area, I don't participate much there. Every day, I check out User:JJMC89 bot/report/Draftifications/daily to see if there are pages that should be deleted as cross-wiki redirects from main space and this page was on the list along with another page under review at AFD that was moved to Draft space, (Draft:Lucas Bean), so this move happened twice in the past 24 hours. I'm not sure what should happen, either the pages should be moved back to main space while the deletion discussion continues or the AFD should be suspended. But moving an article to Draft space shouldn't be a way for page creators to save their articles from deletion unless this is the consensus of the discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think moving the page should be an express ticket to deletion, either. If the discussion were controversial, I'd have moved it back. In this case, I've closed the AfD as delete/incubate in draft space. —C.Fred (talk) 02:09, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Deleting Sandbox for "vandalism"

[19] was deleted due to the fact that I apparently created hoaxes on Wikipedia? I'd like a clearer explanation, as I used my sandbox for my personal use in creating alternate infoboxes for presidential elections. I did not post those onto presidential election pages, only my sandbox. Also, is there anyway I can get in touch with ou through email and oustide of Wikipedia? Thanks. - Dylansh99 (talk) 00:11, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dylansh99,

First, new messages are posted at the bottom of talk pages which makes me think that you haven't participated in many discussions here on Wikipedia.

Second, Sandboxes are not for your personal use to house materials unrelated to either editing on Wikipedia or the creation and development of new articles. Even your user page and user talk page are not your property but are to be used for Wikipedia purposes. This is not a webhosting service and this content is more suited for your own website or blog. There are still many free services out there that can be used.

There is a link on the left side of this page that allows you to email me. If you'd like, I could copy the content of the latest version of a particular page and send it to you. Please do not post your email address on this page, you can contact me and I'll send it to you once you specify the page you want.

If I haven't answered all of your questions or you want a second opinion, I recommend going to the Teahouse where experienced editors can address your concerns. I found it to be a very helpful place when I was a new editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:24, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, and no I haven't participated in many discussions on Wikipedia and I don't see what that has to do with anything. Second, I just don't get why it was now deleted when it's been up for over a year. I've seen many sandboxes that users experiment with, and that's exactly what a sandbox is for. I just don't understand why a sandbox is available if users can't use it to experiment on how to use Wikipedia itself. I would definitely like to email you, which I will. Thanks again. - - Dylansh99 (talk) 05:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

United Wholesale Mortgage

Hello, I was wondering if you could give me some suggestions on how my United Wholesale Mortagage article submission (since deleted) could become encyclopedic? I structured it after Quicken Loans but without as much coverage (that I could find). I found information about their headquaters like Quicken Loans but didn't think that was encyclopedic and to me would seem like stuffing content for a not notable subject. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you. --HZNLincoln (talk) 18:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, HZNLincoln,

Well, the criticism of the article was that it was written like an advertisement or press release. An article on Wikipedia can not be focused on promoting a company or person, it has to have a neutral point of view which can be almost impossible if you work for the company and have a conflict-of-interest.

If you'd like, I could restore the article to your user space but you would have to submit it to Articles for Creation for review, it you move it directly in to the main space of the project, it will be deleted again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:34, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Liz ^{Read! Talk!}, I would appreciate that. Hope you don't mind me bugging you for a look before I submit to Articles for Creation for review when I find more coverage. --HZNLincoln (talk) 18:45, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello Liz ^{Read! Talk!}, when you mentioned my user space, did you mean sandbox?--HZNLincoln (talk) 18:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Moving a page

Hey Liz, I'm currently trying to move the page Joy of satan. I am trying to move it to "Joy of Satan" because "Satan" is a proper noun and should be capitalised. However, I am unable to because the title "Joy of Satan" has been protected from creation. Is it possible that you could move the page for me? Thanks, Helen (let’s talk) 18:49, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Helen,

 Done. I've reprotected the page at this title. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

L'Année sainte

Hello,

I belatedly noticed the deletion of L'Année sainte, a film starring Jean Gabin (his last, actually) and Danielle Darrieux. Surely deleting this as non-notable was a mistake? Superp (talk) 20:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Superp,

No, it wasn't a mistake, it was a Proposed Deletion (PROD). If no one objects to a PROD over a week, the page is deleted. If the deletion is contested, the PROD tag is removed or the page restored. Would you like the article to be restored? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I think WP is better with L'Année sainte than without, so yes. Superp (talk) 07:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Liz, you stil there? Superp (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2021 (UTC)