User talk:Reading Beans/Archives/2023/February

Hi

Thanks. I saw your handwork on the Emmyblaq page. I also created the Kristy Scott page. Cheers Amaekuma (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Janae Johnson

Hi. Just letting you know I draftified this article which you had marked reviewed, as it had clear indications of UPE/COI editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:41, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Draft: Mike Afolarin. Thank you. User:Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Gerschnialpbahn

This doesn't seem like an obvious candidate for draftification, and a generic note about "more sources" when the article already had four (with external links that could become additional sources) doesn't provide much guidance to the editor. The article's much more likely to get improved in the article space, and a funicular railway shouldn't have much trouble passing the GNG. I think sending this to AfC is unnecessary and you should just move it back. Cheers, Mackensen (talk) 03:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mackensen, the creator of the page should be faulted for making an original research. There is an entire unsourced section which failed to be verified (I mean, how do I verify an unsourced section). Anything could be notable but like I said, it needs more sources for verification. He has all the time in the draft space to add sources to each statement/section.

And no, s/he knew what I'm talking about. If they needed clarification they'd have come to my talk page and not complaining to you.

Again, no, I'm not overeager about moving new articles to draft space.

For an article to be in the mainspace, it should have independent reliable sources for verification. If the article that is currently on draft space fulfills these criterions, I'll gladly accept the draft. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 05:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Well, I thought I'd ask anyway. I think it's quite a leap to equate an unreferenced section with original research, and there is no requirement that I'm aware of that a new article be fully referenced, though of course that's preferable. Lack of notability and original research are two separate issues and you seem to be conflating them, and the original research issue was not communicated to the author. The article does have independent sources, though you'll have to accept offline German sources in good faith.

overeager about moving new articles to draft space was not primarily aimed at you; but reflects my experience over the last few months. My objection to the practice is that it leads to articles that would easily survive a subsequent AfD getting subjected to a different and far more backlogged bureaucratic process, and in my experience (your mileage may vary) the articles in question don't gain much from the process. Articles develop best from collaborative editing, and AfC is not that. Mackensen (talk) 12:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mackensen, every statement is an original research unless it's sourced. The mainspace is where constructive edits should be done. AfC would not accept an article that is almost unsourced.

All I'm saying is, the informations that are in the unsourced section were gotten from somewhere, yes? Good. Just attribute every statement from where you got them. It's that simple. If you can’t, don't add them because that is what original research is. Isn’t it?

And oh, by the way, if I think that an article is not notable, I’ll use CSD or nominate it for deletion and not move it AfC. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 14:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Every statement is an original research unless it's source. Well, no, that's not really what Wikipedia:No original research says. I can understand that reading, but I think that would strike most folks as a little strained. Verifiable (if unverified) facts that are unattributed aren't the same thing as new analysis or synthesis.

I'm at a loss to reconcile if I think that an article is not notable, I’ll use CSD or nominate it for deletion and not move it AfC with your comment to Enhancing999 that it needs more sources to establish notability. The implication is that you do actually think the topic is notable, but you moved to AfC because of original research concerns, which weren't communicated to the editor. Mackensen (talk) 15:10, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Mackensen, no. It seems as though you don't understand my point. I only made the comment about original research because up till now, no source has been added to those statements/section.

I did not move it to draft space because of original research, I moved it to draft space because it needs more source on those unsourced sections.

Whenever an article I create is moved to draft space, I usually add more sources to the page—and most times, I end up ref bombing.

All I'm saying is, the user does not want to add sources to those sections/statements and that, my friend, seems to be problematic. I mean, why shouldn't they?

C'MON! THIS IS SIMPLE! ADD CITATION TO UNSOURCED STATEMENTS/SECTIONS! THAT IS THE BOTTOM LINE OF WHAT I AM SAYING!

God. This is stressing me.

I hope you understand what I'm saying this time because I don't seem to know how to explain this to you further.

Best, Reading Beans (talk) 15:19, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for Class (Indian TV series)

Thanking you doe Class (Indian TV series). I am just inclined towards films and TV programs and I hope it's not a violation in Wikipedia. Thanking you again. Twinkle1990 (talk) 13:24, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Keep up the good work, mate. Always make sure your articles are sourced with reliable sources and we’re good. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 14:44, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:NPPDRAFT

Hello Reading Beans. I just wanted to leave you a friendly note about Fayzur Rahaman. I have accepted the article and marked it as reviewed. The article at the time had established its notability when you draftified it per WP:NPOL point two: he was a politician "who ha[s] held international, national, or (for countries with federal or similar systems of government) state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels" (emphasis mine). Happy editing, HouseBlaster^talk 00:14, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster, the sources there were not reliable for a BLP and a WP:BEFORE showed Faizur Rahaman. I was unsure if it the same person (I was also getting Fayzur Rahman in the searches), so I just had to move it. And I knew that if the article was to be factual that he is notable.

If he's better known as Faizur Rahaman, then, I think it should be moved to that title to avoid further confusions. Anyways, thank you. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 00:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Ashish Dixit‎

Hello @Reading Beans, I hope you're doing well. I have unreviewed a page which you have reviewed as it is the similiar version of Draft:Ashish Dixit. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 09:49, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@C1K98V, it's against the rule to review a page with similar version in the draft space? Reading Beans (talk) 09:51, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reading Beans I don't think so, if you check the version draft and the mainspace both are pretty much similar. Its a clear case of copy paste by a new editor. I accept I should wait for an hour to tag for speedy. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 09:58, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@C1K98V, you should have requested for a merge or redirect the draft to the main space. My opinion. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

@Reading Beans I agree with you on that part, but the content is totally the same, just few sentence, external link and infobox seems to be missing. So that's why I did tagged the article for speedy. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 10:06, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review!

Cheers =) BoomboxTestarossa (talk) 20:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The New Page Patroller's Barnstar
		Just wanted to thank you for your efforts over at NPP. It's a truly thankless job, so, well, thank you.Onel5969 TT me 15:05, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Page mover granted

Hello, Reading Beans. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

• Wikipedia:Requested moves
• Category:Requested moves, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:01, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:New Sahara Reporters logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New Sahara Reporters logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. 185.172.241.184 (talk) 16:07, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Identical draft and article

Thank you for reviewing the Sanctioned Suicide article, I accidentally also made a draft Draft:Sanctioned Suicide that was identical to the current article (there are now more additions to the current article that aren't in the draft, but there isn't anything in the draft that isn't included in the article), and I was wondering if you knew how to get the draft removed? Thanks! Freedom4U (talk) 01:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

@Freedom4U, waiting for the deleting sysop. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 06:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2021 Nigerian television series debuts

A tag has been placed on Category:2021 Nigerian television series debuts indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Thank You for reviewing St. Francis Church, Abu Dhabi - Apostolicus (talk) 12:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Ponzi scheme in Nigeria

Hello, Reading Beans. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Ponzi scheme in Nigeria".

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 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! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Columbia Steel

acompany worth $40m in 1930, subsidiary of U.S. Steel, operating the largest steel mill in the western united states at some point, involved in a supreme court case.

how is this not notable enough. i can pick one out of every 100 books on google and provide more additional references than 50% of matured long-tail wikipedia articles have now.

please advise. Nowakki (talk) 15:04, 26 February 2023 (UTC)