Open main menu

User talk:Lopifalko

Active discussions


Regarding article at National Board for WildlifeEdit

This page at National Board for Wildlife is redirected to Environmental policy of India. This redirection is not relevant. This board is a apex body in India for wildlife conservation.

I'd removed the redirect tag and added info about the board.

You erased all the content and restored the redirect. I think this is a mistake. You just destroyed an article.

I'm not able to restore that.

@Shivck13: Hi. Nothing is destroyed. I moved it to Draft:National Board for Wildlife with the edit summary "Draftify whilst it is worked on. Needs multiple independent reliable sources with sustained coverage of the subject." Your article had only 1 reference, and even that wasn't an inline reference. -Lopifalko (talk) 15:35, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
This page is just collection of some basic facts like Purpose, Functions, Composition etc. I think that source was enough for it. I guess there is no proper govt website for this so I could cite that.

And I'm sorry I only know basic things about Wikipedia so I couldn't restore that and I thought it was destroyed. 15:42, 2 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivck13 (talkcontribs)

@Shivck13: WP:ORG says an article on an organisation needs multiple independent reliable sources with sustained coverage of the subject. -Lopifalko (talk) 15:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Advertising flag on DMTF page remainsEdit

Greetings Lopifalko,

I hate to bother a busy editor with this, but your edit of 2 May 2019 (diff, I hope:

seems intended to remove the advertising flag from the page, but it's still there. I'm paid to edit for that organization, so I'm wary of removing it myself, but I will if you want. Thanks for your earlier help with Redfish (specification). GGSloth (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion nomination of OpenEdgeEdit

Hi. OpenEdge is not my article. I mayde a redir to different topic. You should write to User:Congress1787 who seem to have actually wrote the article. If you still consider it necessary that is. Cheers, --Nux (talk) 17:20, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Question - Draft:Otis_MensahEdit

Hi Lopifalko.

Would you mind please taking a look again at Draft:Otis_Mensah ? I have added some more independent sources, but I'm not sure if they constitute 'sustained coverage'.

Many thanks!

Mikeysandford (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mikeysandford: Hi. I review many articles, which one is this please? -Lopifalko (talk) 16:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
@Mikeysandford: Hi, sorry it has taken me so long to get around to looking again. I should have been saying "significant" coverage not "sustained" coverage. The bios you have added are written by the artist or their people, so are of no use in establishing notability. However The Star source is now working, so let's do this thing... -Lopifalko (talk) 10:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeysandford (talkcontribs) 09:59, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Request on 19:37:56, 20 August 2019 for assistance on AfC submission by Parent55Edit

I revised my submission to address the reviewer's comments. I resubmitted my submission "Progressive Capitalism" for another review two months ago. I understand there is a queue and that I need to be patient, and I am being patient. I would greatly appreciate some indication about where re-review of my last submission stands. I have people interested in what I am doing and I need to update the expectation of a two month review cycle that I previously set with them. This is my first new submission and I a afraid of doing something wrong. Please help me work better with the review team. Warm regards, parent55

Reply to Lopifalko: Great help with review and corrections. I looked at every change you made and see I still have much to learn. Thank you, warm regards, parnt55 Parent55 (talk) 02:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC) Parent55 (talk) 19:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

@Parent55: That's OK, don't worry about doing something wrong, it's fine to ask me to take a look. The review process is not formalised, in that it could be looked at at any time by a reviewer. I didn't have this article on my watch list and haven't been reviewing drafts for a while. I am happy to take a look, as long as I can get my head around the subject. -Lopifalko (talk) 05:52, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Done. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Gringo (rapper)Edit

I ask for the reason why the article Gringo (rapper) is moved to Draft:Gringo (rapper) and what the problem is. English is not my mother language, so sorry if I did not understand something right. I have only revised an article which was redirected to the page List of number-one hits of 2018 (Germany). What can I do to revert back to the previously saved state? —Jnnc19 (talk) 17:59, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

@Jnnc19: The article doesn't have multiple independent reliable sources with sustained coverage of the subject, which I suggest you find before moving to article space. However the article would appear to satisfy the following criteria from WP:MUSICBIO: "Criteria for musicians and ensembles ... Musicians or ensembles (this category includes bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists, etc.) may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria. ... Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart." -Lopifalko (talk) 16:48, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Photography Studies CollegeEdit

Hi Lopifalko, thank you for your helpful edits on Photography Studies College. I've restored some relevant info on founder Roger Hayne, but otherwise have left what you have done. Added some much earlier 'notable alumni' in the hope that the article can become more historically informative. Cheers, Jamesmcardle(talk) 11:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Updated -> new page for Michael KoelmelEdit

Updated content and sources for new page submission for Michael Koelmel

Hi - since your recommendations I have located sources and added more depth to the draft page in my sandbox. Would be grateful for your review. thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by GipsyG (talkcontribs) 22:29, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019Edit

Hello Lopifalko,


Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.


A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
  • Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.
Not English
  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Full-frame mirrorless fixed-lens camerasEdit


Hello, Lopifalko. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Full-frame mirrorless fixed-lens cameras".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 05:40, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Miss Bold and Beautiful NigeriaEdit

Hello Lopifaiko, I'd appreciate if you rather research on that topic and help edit the post other than tagging for speedy deletion. I have no affiliation with the event In no way and the write up was not for promotional use but rather informational. Thank you. Xtianolove (talk) 11:55, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

@Xtianolove: I did research it. It made no credible claim of importance or significance and all bar one of the the references were not from what Wikipedia considers reliable sources, so did not count to wards its notability. I searched for more sources found only more of the same non-reliable sources. As you know, only yesterday this article was deleted for the same reason by others. -Lopifalko (talk) 12:00, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Okay, so please how do I solve these problems of unreliable sources because they are valid but might not meet up to Wikipedia's conditions, so how do I fix this and re-publish? Pls assist if you can sir/ma.Xtianolove (talk) 12:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
@Xtianolove: "Valid" does not have much meaning here. Wikipedia wants multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. If these do not exist then the subject is not yet notable enough for inclusion. The rules are strict for this kind of thing, see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). -Lopifalko (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Deletion Kevin KyburzEdit

Hey, i saw you delete the Page Kevin Kyburz. Can you say me why? I was not the first editor of the Page, but now the Source has more credibility. Swisshashtag (talk) 18:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

@Swisshashtag: I cannot delete pages, but I do New Page Review and I see from my browser history that I had some involvement with that page, though I cannot remember what, probably just doing some cleaning up of the article. I can see that it was deleted because it had issues that were the same as the reason it had previously been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Kyburz. Presumably required multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. -Lopifalko (talk) 19:22, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

On new article of Shinya KumazakiEdit

I found another source regarding Shinya Kumazaki as follows:

Please assist on this part for the completion of this draft SBS9834C (talk) 06:42, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

@SBS9834C: Sorry I do not have the time to help. Please see Wikipedia:Help desk/How to ask. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:49, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

About Kowsar PublishingEdit

Dear Lopifalko, Could you please help me to publish my company page? I want to publish it in Wikipedia. And I dont know how can I do that?

Drmiri (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Please don't delete pageEdit

Bikram malati show not delete sir is show edit by Biko company don't deleting this page please give me reason Bikash 18:44, 4 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biko of manegar (talkcontribs)

@Biko of manegar: A wikipedia articles needs multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. Your article has none. I searched the web and could not find any either. -Lopifalko (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Don't delete this articleEdit

Sir don't article Bikram malati show I'm giving information this show Bikash 18:54, 4 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Biko of manegar (talkcontribs)

You made a lot of work for meEdit

If you would have allowed me to improve the article and to add more references demonstrating the notability of Urth Caffe, then I would have done it and it would have been much easier for me then deleting it within a few hours. I was not provided adequate to respond. I am recreating the article for a very notable local cafe chain in California. Please do not frivolously delete articles of mine anymore. Thank you. Yallayallaletsgo (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Yallayallaletsgo: Articles require multiple independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. Yours did not have any. The rules are particularly strict where it comes to businesses (see WP:NCORP). Your article was just a short generic listing about a non-notable business, an advertisement. I did a quick web search and found no reliable sources. If it is notable then it needs sources to prove it. You created the article in article space. If you are creating it again then I suggest you do so as a draft where it can be nurtured until it is ready for article space. If you create it directly in article space then it needs to have sources straight away at the time it is published, otherwise new page reviewers will again flag it for removal. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes I know I have been creating articles on Wikipedia since I was 6 years old, I know how to do this. I just needed s little more time to add reliable sources which I have done. It is a notable business. I assume you are not from Southern California, but if you were, or have visited, then you would have known of Urth Caffe because it is actually pretty notable/popular here. I did not intend for it to be an advertisement, that was just the easiest reference for me to find. Thx. Yallayallaletsgo (talk) 21:08, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Time zones and Dear TommyEdit

How an experienced editor like yourself doesn't know or seriously forgot what time zones are is a bit beyond me. If you had read any media relating to Closer to Grey, you would know some even said "the album wasn't even announced prior and we only know it exists because it's out in New Zealand". In future, please don't change or revert text relating to release dates again just because you live in a later time zone, as any editor can change text relating to a release date if an album is already out in part of the world. It was October 2 in Australia and New Zealand when I added that text to Dear Tommy. In fact, I had already even listened to the album by that time. Ss112 19:44, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

@Ss112: Please, you're coming on overly strong over a simple misunderstanding about the release date of an album. Please assume good faith: unless I misunderstand, the statement I added at 19:46 BST on 1 October ("Closer to Grey, is scheduled to be released at 2 pm BST on October 2, 2019") was sourced to the NME which said "‘Closer To Grey’ will arrive on streaming platforms at 2 pm BST tomorrow (October 2)". So you see I did read "media relating to Closer to Grey", a reliable source which said it hadn't yet been released (and that "Fans were first made aware of the project through a listing on Apple Music"). -Lopifalko (talk) 20:12, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Yes, a listing on Apple Music that was enabled to listen to for users who lived in time zones where it was October 2. NME is based in England, that's why they were saying "yet to be released" there. A source (whether the one I used or not) said it was already out in New Zealand. Whether the source said it or not, it was out on October 2 and it was already October 2 in parts of the world. Ss112 20:15, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
@Ss112: The NME said it was out at a very specific absolute (not relative) time: 2 pm BST October 2, not just any old October 2nd but _my_ October 2nd. So you can see that this looks like a case of the otherwise reliable source getting this wrong, rather than me; and that I am working from one source where as you are working from another. Seems like a storm in a teacup to me. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:22, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Well yes, it does look like NME is wrong here, as the album was out to stream in Australia (where I live). Ss112 20:24, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for stopping by... -Lopifalko (talk) 20:38, 5 October 2019 (UTC)


Hello. Help copy edit and proofreading the article Akane Yamaguchi. Thanks you very much. (talk) 07:02, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, it doesn't spark my interest. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:09, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Regarding article at John Maguire (Irish Journalist)Edit

Thanks for your input. I have added more references - as far as I can tell these are all independent. As regards a definitive article on he subject I cannot see one - but surely the references validate the subjects position? If someone is behind the scenes at a media organisation (And France Media Monde is quite a large Media organisation) they can be significant contributors to the world's media/news without celebrity status or being in front of the news. I think this subject's contribution is there to see from the references without one definitive article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by COLIND (talkcontribs) 06:10, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello Lopifalko - do you not agree? Need you have celebrity status? I am not affliated with the subject (Maguire). If I publish this page will you once again more to draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by COLIND (talkcontribs) 17:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
@COLIND: Hi, I will look at this soon. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:19, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@COLIND: If the sources aren't there then there's no justification for an article about a subject that reads like a resume, merely listing the subject's employment record without any claim of significance that tallies with the exceptions described in WP:BIO. Wikipedia's notability policy is clear on this and it does not tally with the metric you have come up with yourself above. WP:GNG is very clear on this: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list."; as is WP:ANYBIO, which in this person's case would require any one of: a) "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times"; b) "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field"; or c) "The person has an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication." For b), note "Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer." As I hope you can see, it is all about the independent significant coverage, not passing mentions or routine business announcements, not even interviews with the subject, and not one of your current sources is anything but these I'm afraid. -Lopifalko (talk) 06:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Ok Lopifalko - I accept that. Thank you for your time. COLIND — Preceding unsigned comment added by COLIND (talkcontribs) 16:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Therapeutic PhotographyEdit

Hello Lopifalko! If you look at the talk page for the user that created the above, you'll see they are new and might need some help. They started out with some COI on another page, but quickly admitted. The TP article is coatrack material removed from that article. Also your perspective on the photo side is valued here. It seems like a notable topic but the structure and content needs something. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks ThatMontrealIP, I'll check all this out. -Lopifalko (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! There might be some crossover with something called phototheraphy. I found this Routledge book with TP as part of the title. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
@ThatMontrealIP: The Routledge book is enough to get this reviewed. The Amazon description for Judy Weiser's Phototherapy Techniques: Exploring the Secrets of Personal Snapshots and Family Albums (1999) makes that topic sound distinct from Therapeutic photography: "PhotoTherapy techniques use ordinary personal snapshots and family photos (and the feelings, memories, thoughts and information these evoke) as catalysts for therapeutic communication and personal healing, reaching areas inside a person that words alone cannot access." -Lopifalko (talk) 17:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
I agree. I had head of TP before, but did not know it was now a "thing". Thanks for your kind assistance!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
@ThatMontrealIP: I hadn't heard of it. Sorry I missed the massive copyvio, I forgot to check on that. I'm not yet sure how to proceed with this article, it's tempting to move it to draft whilst we consider, but perhaps it has too much reliable sourcing for that, though possibly not enough to prove it's a credible thing yet. Though I did find "Jo Spence's camera therapy: personal therapeutic photography as a response to adversity". -Lopifalko (talk) 14:49, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Lopifalko: FYI, on Pinehouse, I deleted numerous good refs as they were used to source exact copy-paste copyvio. I am pretty sure 90% of the article is copyvio. If you are up to rewriting, the sources are in the history. the creator is blocked for sockpuppeting, sadly.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 04:47, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Reverted editEdit

Merely stating that a person has won/earned a specific award is not "puffery." Calling that person "award-winning" without referencing the specific award is puffery. Perhaps it is a fine line, but there is a definite difference. Besides, winning awards is one thing that makes a notable person notable and worthy of an article in the Wikipedia. This is why I reverted your edit on Zach Brock. GWFrog (talk) 06:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@GWFrog: Hi. OK I see that I'm taking it too far in applying WP:PUFFERY's "award-winning" to "Grammy Award winning". My personal preference is to never put "Grammy Award winning" before a person's name, it feels like a marketing strategy devised by The Recording Academy to promote their award. Certainly in the first sentence I prefer a more direct description of what a person does. My take from MOS:FIRST is that "The first sentence should tell the nonspecialist reader what, or who, the subject is." and "Try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject. Instead use the first sentence to introduce the topic, and then spread the relevant information out over the entire lead." -Lopifalko (talk) 10:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Pablo Miller for deletionEdit


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

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pablo Miller until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mock wurzel soup (talk) 16:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)


Kindly indicate the article which you think is a secondary source. Kelvinsage1 (talk) 15:53, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

@Kelvinsage1: cutxsewnmagazine is the only 1 of its 5 sources that isn't an interview., Respect, therapfest and elevatormag are all interviews. Interviews are primary sources. I'm not even sure if any of these sources apart from Respect are even independent reliable sources, they may or may not be. -Lopifalko (talk) 16:23, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019Edit

Hello Lopifalko,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon.

Getting the queue to 0

There are now 725 holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action.
Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays.
Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox.
Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards.


Admin Barkeep49 has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers.

This month's refresher course

Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources.

  • It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
  • It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
Reviewer Feedback

Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13.

Second set of eyes
  • Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
  • Do be sure to have our talk page on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
Arbitration Committee

The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights.

Community Wish list

There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion.

To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

How to remove "Check date values in: |access-date="??Edit

Hi Lopifalko I saw you did some helpful edits on the article I was working on of Senam Okudzeto. There are these red marks in the references for apparently wrong format of the acess date. I have not been able to remove this - do you know how to? Thanks! Artsy_cdh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artsy cdh (talkcontribs) 17:39, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

@Artsy cdh: Hi, like this: access-date=3 November 2019. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:50, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

please give time to improve don't just delete it The Independent Pharmacy pleaseEdit

Hello @User:Lopifalko please give me a chance to edit the article of The Independent Pharmacy I will remove the CSD G11 content you can help me instead tagging me quickly for speedy deletion this is unfair. why other article does not get deleted with many violations and just tagging for ads template and but tag also to improve it. Marknamz8931 (talk) 06:30, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Babies' BabiesEdit

Hi why did you move the Babies' Babies article back to draftspace? It's just a stub, but it meets notibility since they're on Allmusic, Brooklyn Vegan, and they have a feature on The Deli Magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GreenVolvox (talkcontribs) 20:54, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

@GreenVolvox: Hi. I did so because I didn't consider any of the sources to be WP:SIGCOV. As for the reliability of the sources, AllMusic is only "an online music database"; and BrooklynVegan is a blog. -Lopifalko (talk) 21:30, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
@GreenVolvox: Your Brooklyn Vegan source goes into no more detail about them other than to say the name "Babies' Babies" in a listing for a gig, for which they are the support band. This in no way whatsoever contributes to their notability. -Lopifalko (talk) 18:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Harith al-SudaniEdit

Hello Lopifalko, thanks for the few clean ups on this article. It cheered me up into making it that long. I don't know the process to suggest new article to the "Did you know" homepage section. Any idea ? Could it be submitted ? I still may improve a bit this article. Yug (talk) 17:30, 11 November 2019 (UTC) (for today I need to go to sleep)

Also, I'am not a native English speaker. If you have energy to copyedit the article it would help. Yug (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Tagging of Samma GroupEdit

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Samma Group. I do not think that Samma Group fits any of the speedy deletion criteria  because "It has also been involved in developing a $400m pipeline in Melbourne" is a claim of significance. I request that you consider not re-tagging Samma Group for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:22, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Yeah I saw. Before putting it up for CSD I re-read WP:SIGNIFICANCE's "Identifying a credible claim of significance", and concluded that it didn't sound notable as there was none of the "first" and "won" described there; and because there was no article on the Camberwell Junction tower that would help indicate that this project was notable; and though Samma Group has "been involved in developing a $400m pipeline", the sources in the article and in the Web search I did for Samma Group didn't satisfy WP:ORGCRIT — I know CSD's "indication of importance" "is a lower standard than notability". Anyway you live and learn, I'm constantly honing my understanding of how to apply the various CSD criteria. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:42, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Admins differ a bit on exactly how to apply A7. My view is that any statement, sourced or not, plausible enough not to be rejected out of hand, which would if reliably sourced, significantly contribute to a finding of notability, or which would suggest that sources showing notability might well exist. I don't look at cited sources at all. But an A7 declien does not at all mean that the article would pass AfD as it stands. What edits might be made during an AfD no one ever knows. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Article on Jose Mejia VidesEdit

I am an art history professor and teach a class on Latin American artists. For one assignment, students create a new Wikipedia article on an artist or art movement that has been overlooked. I assist them by creating a stub that they then complete. This afternoon I have a student who will be working on the article on Jose Mejia Vides, so I started the stub this morning. You may have been speedy in your review of the new article, but if you had waited even another hour, the article would have been longer with proper citations. By moving it to drafts so quickly, you have made it significantly more difficult for this student to make a contribution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redbaron10 (talkcontribs) 20:49, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Follow-up. I see now how the student can find the draft I started and work on it himself. I still wish you had given me some time.Redbaron10 —Preceding undated comment added 20:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

@Redbaron10: Hi. I'm sorry you had that experience. I am thoroughly admiring of the fact you are introducing Wikipedia to your students. However articles come up in the New Page Patrol queue for review and there is no requirement on reviewers to wait, unless the article is nearly blank. I saw an article in article space that lacked the requirements that it should have to exist in article space. There are 6,000 articles in that queue that we are reviewing. I admit I could have been more charitable and tagged it as having no sources, being as it is not a biography of a living person. My working assumption is that articles should be developed in draftspace, but I understand that once ready there is a lengthy queue to having them reviewed and potentially accepted into article space.
I feel you could have communicated all of the above on the talk page of the article for new page patrol reviewers like me to see. Usually one sees a formal notice that an article is part of a course, but I understand the formal process around setting up your course in such a way may not have been appropriate for your situation. I also feel you could have waited until you had the requisite sources before publishing it in article space, so as to circumvent it getting potentially deleted via CSD or sent to draft. If you disagreed so strongly with what I did then you could have recreated another copy in article space. I don't think it demonstrates good practice to your students to be creating articles in articles space without the requisite sources.
The only claim of tangible significance made for the subject was that they had won the El Salvador National Cultural Award. Before sending it to draft I first checked to see if we had an article on the National Cultural Award and we did not. I also checked the Spanish Wikipedia article and it had no sources. The first page of Web search results didn;t show up any independent reliable sources for the subject. Thus a quick search like this didn't make me feel that notability was certain. I could have put the Spanish Wikipedia article through a translator, but did not.
I now notice that your whole article is in fact a WP:COPYVIO of If this were noticed at the time then the correct thing would have been to delete it straight away, rather than send it to draft — please read WP:COPYVIO. Again I do no think you are setting a good example to your students. I hope this is helpful information as I applaud what you are looking to achieve. I would be happy to help in this and any other ways in future, please just ask on my talk page here. -Lopifalko (talk) 07:10, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Swedish Kitchen OrchestraEdit

Hello Lopifalko. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Swedish Kitchen Orchestra, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: having a notable member indicates significance, consider merging/redirecting to his article instead per WP:ATD. Thank you. SoWhy 10:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Re editing Yannis KontosEdit

Hello Lopifalko,

Few days ago I made some changes to my CV & Life and Work at "Yannis Kontos" page. Since it hasn't been updated for many years, I would like to revert it to my edited version as it is more close to reality. Please advice. Kind Regards, YK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elenitsa71 (talkcontribs) 11:02, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello, talk page stalker here. No. Consider for example:
As a Commercial Photographer, he has over 15 years of Professional Experience in Advertising and Corporate Photography providing Premium Quality services to Yachting, Real Estate, Tourism, Portraiture, Architecture, Creative, and Industrial markets alike in Europe and Middle East.
This is blatantly promotional. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it does not say who provides (or would like to sell) "premium quality services" to whom. (And neither does it use Trump-tweet-style capitalization.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:14, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter messageEdit

 Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Contesting speedy deletion of the page I created RobertoEdit

Hello, I would like to contest the speedy deletion of the page mentioned because the information written has sources and it does not violate copyright and it's promotional as stated. Kindly read the sources I have added, you will agree with me. ThanksKing Onyx (talk) 08:02, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

@King Onyx: The article was written like an advert to such an extreme extent that it would have had to be entirely rewritten to comply with Wikipedia policy. Consider for example where the subject did something with the wife of another musician, the article first described the other musician in terms of the awards they had won before even mentioning it was the wife of this person that the article's subject had worked with. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Terry O'Neill (photographer)Edit

 On 19 November 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Terry O'Neill (photographer), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:25, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Nan GoldinEdit

No appetite for an edit war here, but just because something receives news coverage doesn't make it notable. Goldin has participated in 10 plus other similar protest-type events that are not on the page. Shall I add them? Or will you? I will be keeping an eye on all your edits now. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

I think the notability of an event reported on in the broadsheet media is debatable; I believe it lends considerable weight to notability, but needs to be judged on a case by case basis. I take your point if this is one of 10 other such events she has been part of. I think I might be interested in listing them all, if independent reliable sources exist for each. However I would want to read reports on them first so as to get a wider feeling for this campaign, of which I know too little. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Question about speedy deletion of pageEdit

Hi Lopifalko I'd like to kindly request a reason for the speedy deletion of the new EliteSingles page (and ideally a copy of the content!)

I've been reading the possible reasons for speedy deletion, and I truly do not believe the page in in violation of any of the terms.

Notable content - It's my belief that this page is worth having alongside the pages devoted to other dating sites such as eHarmony, Match, OKCupid and more. With pages for sites like Crazy Blind Date given space, I cannot see a reason why EliteSingles is an exception

Advertising - While the article does describe a company, everything in the article is sourced, and a clear effort has been made to create a neutral article in line with the pages mentioned above (eg to cite sources in the same manner, and to state the facts about the company rather than the company line). I am happy to change these sources if need be.

Previous deletion - there was a three-year waiting period between publishing attempts to create time to build up clear sources. The article was also fully rewritten and streamlined to only include the main facts.

Above all, I think that this case applies: the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. CurlyKiwi (talk) 12:56, 20 November 2019 (UTC)CurlyKiwi

@CurlyKiwi: Hi. The article lacked independent reliable sources with significant coverage of the subject. The sources were either not independent reliable sources (being dating-related web sites) or they were routine business announcements (see WP:CORPDEPTH). It also didn't make a credible claim of importance or significance for the subject. The fact that other articles exist is not a valid reason to keep this one. I'm not an administrator so cannot see deleted aricles, please see Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion for how to accomplish this yourself. -Lopifalko (talk) 13:11, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Page movesEdit

When you move a page, please could you consider using the "what links here tool" in the side menu to see what pages link to the change. It would be helpful if you edited those pages to update the link to the page you moved. Toddy1 (talk) 12:05, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

@Toddy1: Hi. I'm only renaming brand new articles, so was assuming nothing linked to them, but now that you point this out I realise I shouldn't make that assumption at all, so thanks for letting me know. I was often choosing not to leave a redirect because the names were not ones we would expect to have redirects for. I will in future leave redirects if anything is linked to the old name, or amend the upstream article. (I made a particular mess of page moves today on British media, racism and Islamophobia.) Thanks. -Lopifalko (talk) 12:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion per A3Edit

I deleted Sommer Motor Car Company per your tag, but you tagged the article in less than a minute after creation. For both A3 and A1, you should wait at least 10 minutes before tagging. Please don't misuse the tags again.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

@Bbb23: OK thanks, I just forgot the rule. I'll be more vigilant in future. -Lopifalko (talk) 18:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Sonia Handelman MeyerEdit

Lopifalko, please feel free to take a shot at improving the above article that I cobbled together from some decent sources. I'm good at finding them bit not as goo as you are on putting a fine point on the writing. I keep seeing articles on the New York Photo League, do you think their members merit a category?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your edits on the above article. I found another one, in case you are interested! Vivian Cherry.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
@ThatMontrealIP: Thank you. And thank you for catching Meyer, a worthy subject for an article. I'm not particularly familiar with the New York Photo League but yes it probably is worthy of a category. I will indeed have a look at Vivian Cherry. -Lopifalko (talk) 10:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Lopifalko".