User talk:Sarahj2107/Archive 15
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Semen Hitler
Why did you delete Semen Hitler — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:84E0:696:EC98:6CB2:F2AA:491A (talk) 01:04, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Jack hart
You deleted jack hart boxing referee ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C4:9A0C:8100:3C4A:4410:A4AD:FDAA (talk) 19:51, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, appoligies for the delay in answering you. The Jack Hart (Boxing) article was deleted following a descussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Hart (boxing) where concensus was to delete because there was not enough evidence that he meets the notability guidelines. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Euromonitor International Article Deletion
Hi Sarah Jane,
The article on the company Euromonitor International was deleted in October 2016 due to the notability guidelines. I believe this was an error. I have listed evidence that should support the articles reinstatement. I don’t have a copy of the original text, but I am more than happy to ensure that all factual information is backed up by verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability. I can see from Google data that around 75 people a month are specifically searching for Euromonitor’s Wikipedia entry.
Many thanks
--OlivierEuro (talk) 17:57, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Sources
|
|---|
|
Euromonitor International Notability Delete discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Euromonitor_International Companies House (UK.Gov) Established 1972. Turnover £122 million. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/01040587/filing-history Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC) Private Business of the Year http://pwc.blogs.com/press_room/2013/09/euromonitor-wins-private-business-of-the-year.html Winner Queens Award for Enterprise 2014 (UK Government) 90% of revenue earned from overseas sales. https://www.ft.com/content/bc36dbb4-c3ec-11e3-870b-00144feabdc0 http://queensawardsmagazine.com/business-winner/euromonitor-international-plc/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen%27s_Awards_for_Enterprise Wikipedia Top 10 UK market research organizations in 2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_research Corporate Social Responsibility: Supported Charities • Unity in Health. (Healthcare Development Agency) “UiH would like to thank Euromonitor International, the world’s leading Independent provider of strategic market research, for supporting our work in Nepal. Through a well-structured and meaningful CSR Programme, Euromonitor has a long tradition of engaging in responsible business activities and of providing essential funds for social causes worldwide. “ http://unityinhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Newsletter-Feb-2017.pdf • The Walkabout Foundation (Wheelchairs for South Sudanese Refugees in Uganda) https://hopehealthaction.org/news/war-wheelchairs-blog-3-felix/104/ • Refugee Empowerment & Support Taskforce (REST) https://www.the-rest.org/partners • United Nations Global Compact https://www.unglobalcompact.org/system/attachments/cop_2017/379801/original/Euromonitor_International_United_Nations_Global_Compact_Communication_on....pdf?1493635724 Global Business Press Citations (190 articles in just one month, January 2018) BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42619887 Wall Street Journal https://www.wsj.com/articles/outfoxed-by-small-batch-upstarts-unilever-decides-to-imitate-them-1514910342 CNN http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/23/news/economy/washing-machines-trump-tariff/index.html |
- Hi OlivierEuro, appoligies for the delay in responding to you. I've had a look at the sources you have provided and I to me they all appear to be either not independant or just mention Euromonitor in passing rather than being about them. The Guardian article for example just mentions them in the sourceing for a graph. However, it's been a year and a half since the deletion descussion, which had a weak keep and a weak delete, so they may meet the notability guidles now. I'm not willing to restore the article as it was, but you could try creating a draft with some better sources and submitting it for review. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Responses to past messages
I have been away from Wikipedia for about 9 months and there are a few messages from this time I have not responsed to. If your message was one of these and you would still like an answer then please feel free to ask again and I will be more than happy to help. You can find the original message in my archive here. I will be taking some time to get back up to speed with things and read up on any changes that have happened since I've been away but will now be around to respond to any messages. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Commune by the Great Wall
@Sarahj2107:, sorry for the ping as urgent clarification needed. Thanks admin for cleanup, but then [1] this Afd? Can I replace the Afd tag on the page? Need advices --Quek157 (talk) 13:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Quek157: I didn't see the AfD template, thanks for letting me know. I've now added it back. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:11, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Panihati Dandomahotsav
Panihatichidautsav.in website link was given to the wikipedia page. Why are you deleted this pagge ? I was want to share this festival to all public not for business purpose. already in my wiki pagge, i mentioned thhe website link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subherjeesr (talk • contribs) 04:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Subherjeesr, I'm sorry but I had to delete Panihati Dandomahotsav as copyright infringment. Even if a link to the source is provided, Wikipedia can't legaly host copyrighted material. If you hold the copyright you can consider donating the material to Wikipedia. Information on how to do that is at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. However, if you want to recreate the page I would suggest you write it in your own words and only use the linked website as a source. If you need any more help let me know. Sarahj2107 (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
why delete my article ????
sir why delete my article (saqlain baqir)???? this is my personal biography . please tell me Saqlain5 (talk) 10:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).
- Hi Saqlain5, I'm sorry but your article was deleted because it did not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. Wikipedia is not a social media site or a place for personal biographies. Subjects need to meet the notability guidelines or at the very least say why they should have an article. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:56, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Vincent Edwards
Vincent Edwards does have a son with autism. I think everyone at least knows he has a son, there are many articles that mention him. At least leave that in there. As for the autism diagnosis, he has posted on his ig story about it. And trace edwards mom is constantly discussing it on her IG. Maybe you could properly add that back.
- I'm not saying he doesn't or that it shouldn't be in the article, just that if it is, it needs to be supported by an independent, reliable source as per our biographies of living people policy. Sarahj2107 (talk) 14:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).
Administrator changes
None
Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington
Guideline and policy news
- Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
- Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.
Technical news
- IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
- There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
- It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.
Arbitration
- A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.
Miscellaneous
- In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.
15 days
Dear Sarah, Thanks for your post on my talk page. Have you read 15 days? The page (after the lead section) seems to serve no purpose except for to disparage the game, saying it is boring and had no suspense. I agree it is not your typical attack page, but it does not meet any of Wikipedia's guidelines, does it? I guess I will nominate the page for a non-speedy deletion. CheeseCrisps (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
- @CheeseCrisps: I did read it. While it may be a little one sided, I don't think it meets the criteria for G10. We'll see what other people think at the AfD. Sarahj2107 (talk) 16:46, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
AOAC INTERNATIONAL
Hi Sarah-Jane, My name is Bob Rathbone (rrathbone@aoac.org) and I’m the editor at AOAC INTERNATIONAL, and I’d recently updated AOAC’s Wikipedia page. I’m writing this because I believe you just reverted this page back to old and outdated information? I’m just learning about Wikipedia, so please let me know how to make the needed changes. A lot of the information now displayed is more than 15-20 years old. 73.134.219.236 (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Bob. The information that was added to the article was removed for two reasons. One, it was a copyright violation. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material. Two, it was overly promotional. As an encyclopedia the content must be written in a neutral and unbiased tone. The type of language used on company/organisation websites is not suitable here.
- As someone who works for AOAC International you also have a conflict of interest so should be careful when editing the article yourself. I understand that it is out dated but I think the best way to improve it is to make suggestions on the article talk page and allow other editors to make the changes for you. Sarahj2107 (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sarah,
Thank you for the fast response. The article was edited before it was deleted. Can we please go back to the unedited version as that one had many sources and was also no promotional in nature.
Hi Sarah-Jane, Thank you. As one editor to another, could you then help and make the changes for me? I need to somehow update our site (AOAC is now a standards development organization!) in line with the Wikipedia rules, and I’m wondering if you could somehow paraphrase from the information I’d posted. I’m happy if you’d also edit whatever you deem to be overly promotional. Bob73.134.219.236 (talk) 12:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sarah-Jane,I read AOAC’s Wikipedia page this morning, and I want to thank you for adding some new information regarding sections, publications, etc. But, I still need you to update the information about AOAC’s business. The page incorrectly states that “AOAC International's technical contributions center on the creation, validation, and global publication of reliable analytical test methods.” In fact, AOAC changed what it does. We no longer develop and validate analytical methods, but instead, we develop voluntary consensus standards against which methods can now be judged. A lot has changed over the past 15-20 years.
- I appreciate your continued help. Regards, Bob50.249.43.187 (talk) 15:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Sarah-Jane, With our newest update to the AOAC page, I’m surprised you immediately reverted back to the old outdated information. The new copy was finely edited, and wasn’t promotional, and by posting it, we accept that it can be and will be edited in the future by the Wikipedia community. I’m not indicating any copyright status. Did you read it before you reverted back to the old?50.249.43.187 (talk) 14:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
- I think I have been more than patient with you about this, but with you now calling me a vandal and accusing me of acting in bad faith that patience has worn out. I will be having nothing more to do with this article eccept reporting any more edits that go against Wikipedia policies. Sarahj2107 (talk) 15:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
Erik Gatenholm page
Hello Sarah,
I hope you're doing well and that you're having a great start of the day. You recently removed the page for Erik Gatenholm, it was a few days ago. I'm not sure why this was removed. Was there something incorrect on the page? I'd like to see how we can resolve this.
Have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egatenholm (talk • contribs) 07:23, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Egatenholm,
- The page was removed following a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erik Gatenholm. At Articles for Deletion, editors will assess the article to see if it meets our guidelines and policies. After at least 7 days, 17 in this case, an uninvolved admin will determine the overall consensus of the discussion and close accordingly. In this case I determined the consensus to be to delete the article as it didn't meet our notability guidelines and was overly promotional. To prove notability there would need to be significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources.
- If you are the subject of this article you will have a conflict of interest. I would suggest reading our guidelines of autobiographies.
- If you have any more questions just ask and I'll be happy to help. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:14, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sarah,
Thank you for the fast response. The article was edited before it was deleted. Can we please go back to the unedited version as that one had many sources and was also no promotional in nature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Egatenholm (talk • contribs) 08:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm afraid not. The editors who took part in the deletion discussion will have looked at the history of the article and will have done an independent search for reliable sources before giving their opinion. It's isn't just the most recent version of the article that is looked at. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for that update Sarah. But this is very surprising... the sources that are presented are BBC and many other globally reliable newspapers and media outlets. And none of the articles are paid or considered to be promotional or marketing.
Hi Sarahj2017. You revdeleted some content from Sahuarita Unified School District because it was flagged as a copyright violation by Whpq. Nathanl01444 appears to be a new editor who is employed by the school district and who has been assigned to update the article; unfortunately, Nathanl01444 seems to misunderstand WP:COPY and appears to have basically re-added the same content again. I've removed it, but was wondering if you'd take a look at it a revdelete anything that needs to be revdeleted. Perhaps you can also post something on Nathanl01444's explaining why they shouldn't do this again. I'm trying to keep the links to a minimum but the content appears to come from susd30
- Thanks for letting me know Marchjuly, I've done the revdel and left them a note. I'll keep an eye on the situation.Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for checking on this Sarahj2107 and thanks for taking the time to add a message on the editor's user talk page. FWIW, the Duplicator Detector showed quite a bit of overlap, but Earwig came up empty probably because of the way the source website is formatted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mulpatrick, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fitzpatrick (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
On improvment of Ujjawal Krishnam
The article, which I created and disclosed as WP:COI has been nominated for deletion. It is not a method of canvassing that I approached you, but I wish that article must be kept. May you please highlight your independent view point? AchaksurvisayaUdvejin (talk) 04:58, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Hi!
Yes, I can back up my information with sources. What do you need to see? I have screen captures, twitter links, ect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poiena (talk • contribs) 12:45, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Poiena: Any controversial edits about a living person need to backed up by reliable sources, especially something as serious as accusing someone of being involved in issuing death threats. Screen captures and twitter links are not reliable sources and cannot be used to support such claims. Any re-addition of these allegations using those sources may result in a block. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:07, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Edits to AOAC page
Hi Sarah, I am the consultant that updated the AOAC page. Bob Rathbone (you had a discussion with him earlier) asked me to make the updates. I read that you removed some things, not sure what the where. All of the edits I made were from Bob at AOAC. Can you Identify the problem items and I will check with Bob.
Thanks, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.134.24.178 (talk) 21:32, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
- I will repeat what I said above
- The information that was added to the article was removed for two reasons. One, it was a copyright violation. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material. Two, it was overly promotional. As an encyclopedia the content must be written in a neutral and unbiased tone. The type of language used on company/organisation websites is not suitable here.
- As someone who works for AOAC International you also have a conflict of interest so should be careful when editing the article yourself...I think the best way to improve it is to make suggestions on the article talk page and allow other editors to make the changes for you.
- I'm aware that there are still some inaccuracies that need to be updated, and I will try to do this. However, you need to understand that Wikipedia articles are summaries of the information found in independent, reliable sources. This is not a social media site, or somewhere like LinkedIn where an organisation has complete control over that appears on the page; AOAC has no control over what is on their page here. So, I'm sorry but while I will try to make sure it is as accurate as possible, it will never look exactly like you want it to. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:08, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).
Administrator changes
- Pbsouthwood • TheSandDoctor
Gogo Dodo- Andrevan • Doug • EVula • KaisaL • Tony Fox • WilyD
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
- A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.
Technical news
- Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
- Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon (
) in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates. - IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
Miscellaneous
- Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
Justification
Hi,
I didn't find the any promotional in my page. I was sharing my opinion on that, it was just my first draft my page. May I know why page was sent to deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakthi24 (talk • contribs) 11:30, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Shakthi24: - Things like "We have debut in 2010 and have hosted over 75 seminars with more than 1000 participants.", "Mix with the Masters residential seminars are held at the Studios La Fabrique in South of France which is the perfect setting to both learn and relax." and "Andrew Scheps has an incredible career of achievements..." to list a few are defiantly promotional, it doesn't matter that your are not connected to the subject or are not making any money out of it. Wikipedia is not a place to share your opinion, article must be a neural, unbiased way summary of information in reliable sources. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:04, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
I have told you it's just a first draft which got published, it would be very kind if you undo the process, so that after completion of the page. you will be able see the justification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakthi24 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter that it's a first draft, and it has been "published" even though it is not in the main Article name space. Everything saved after clicking the Publish Changes button is published. All content on Wikipedia regardless of if it is an article, a draft or in your user sandbox, must comply with our policies and guidelines on promotional content and spamming. I cannot undo the process and there is no "justification" that will allow such promotional content to be published here. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:54, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Smarkets article
Hi Sarah-Jane, I wanted to get in touch to contest the deletion of an article I contributed: the page on British technology firm and betting exchange Smarkets.
This article was deleted for failing notability criteria, however these criteria - WP:GNG - state that "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". I'd argue that all of these criteria are met. The organisation has received significant coverage (being the main topic) from numerous reliable sources that are independent of the subject, such as The Guardian[1], Sky[2], BBC[3], AFP[4][5], Moneyweek[6], and RTL[7] (in French, starts at 2:30).
I recommended keeping the article when deletion was proposed, but this was disputed on the grounds that the sources fail WP:NCORP independence criteria, specifically that they are not "intellectually independent".
The criteria according to WP:NCORP are:
- Independence of the author (and clearly this is the case).
- Independence of the content, or "intellectual independence", meaning that "the content must not be produced by interested parties. Too often a related party produces a narrative that is then copied, regurgitated, and published in whole or in part by independent parties (as exemplified by churnalism)."
I would strongly argue that the coverage by Moneyweek, The Guardian, Sky, RTL, and AFP all represent significant, intellectually independent reporting on the subject by a reliable source.
Not least because the Sky and AFP coverage specifically sets the company's salary review policy in the context of the wider societal discussion of the UK's gender pay gap; the RTL piece addresses the salary policy in the context of employee freedom (an analysis of Smarkets' company culture); and the Moneyweek piece, despite mentioning an employee, analyses the company's chances of success on its own merits, without recourse to primary sources. This coverage, which includes three major European broadcasters ostensibly travelling to the offices of the company, is clearly a very long way from churnalism.
I would love your thoughts on the above and am hopeful the article can be reinstated. I propose, if it is, that I add in a couple of extra sources (specifically the Moneyweek and Guardian articles, which I had not included) to further demonstrate the qualifying coverage, and therefore notability.
Thanks in advance, Chopz Chopz (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/oct/03/ibas-bet-declared-void-should-be-paid-out
- ^ https://news.sky.com/video/large-firms-to-justify-fat-cat-pay-11400294
- ^ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-london-44045911/the-london-company-allowing-employees-to-decide-your-pay
- ^ https://www.yahoo.com/news/london-firm-revamps-pay-letting-staff-set-salaries-031253635.html?guccounter=1
- ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6t4fNMk4jY
- ^ https://moneyweek.com/betting-on-politics-a-new-betting-exchange/
- ^ https://www.rtl.fr/emission/rtl-monde/rtl-monde-du-04-avril-2018-7792896915
- Hi Chopz. All I did was determine consensus at the AfD, which was very clearly to delete. You put forward the above sources during the AfD and other editors reviewed and commented on them. I can't go against that consensus and restore the page, even with these sources included. You have two options at the moment. 1) If you think that one of the criteria listed here is met you can open a discussion at WP:Deletion review. 2) You can create a draft and work to find and add additional sources to support notability, and then submit it through WP:AfC. If you need any help with either of those options, let me know. Sarahj2107 (talk) 17:20, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi Sarahj2107. Thanks for your explanation and kind offer to help. I'll look this stuff over and let you know. Chopz (talk) 18:05, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
Deletion of Bobby Nelson
July 15, 2018
Hello Sarahj2017,
I am composing this message to inquire about your recent deletion for the article Bobby Nelson. I would appreciate some insight and direction on the possibility of restoration for the article. All of the reviews and deletion posts from the editors were all taken into consideration while re-editing the article. I made sure to add corrections, references, verifiable sources, and necessary revisions.
I also added credible references from sources such as IMDB, PR sites, and other articles where Bobby Nelson and his notable work were mentioned - as there was questioning as to whether Bobby Nelson's television appearances were credible and able to be proven. Also, there are several other television appearances made by Bobby Nelson that had not yet added onto the page yet - in response to one user mentioned that one television co-star appearance was not enough to have a Wikipedia page.
Would you be generous enough to undelete the page and give me and other editors time and opportunity to add more credible work from Bobby Nelson, in which will be able to be proven and cited from multiple reliable sources, on top of the ones that were already added? I was in the process of adding more references, additional television work, and citations before the page was deleted. Hope to hear back soon -- appreciate your time and consideration.
Best, NJPRWORK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Njprwork (talk • contribs) 08:13, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Njprwork, I deleted the article as a result of the outcome at the deletion discussion, where consensus was clearly to deleted. I cant go against that consensus and restore the article.
- References from sites such as IMDB are not considered reliable and PR sites will not be independent as they are usually written by a business or person hired by or affiliated with the the subject. As such, these types of references cant be used to support notability.
- You have two options at the moment. 1) If you think that one of the criteria listed here is met you can open a discussion at WP:Deletion review. 2) You can create a draft and work to find and add additional, reliable, independent sources to support notability, and then submit it through WP:AfC.
- On a final note, you username suggests you may be editing here as part of a job "prwork". If this is the case, you need to declare that as outlined in our policy - Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, which you need to fully read and understand. Users who do not follow our policy on paid editing are blocked from editing.
- If you require any further help, please let me know. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
Hello Sarahj2107 - I appreciate you for providing me with useful information and knowledge regarding Wikipedia's guidelines for references & credibility standards. I have made the decision to compose a new and improved draft with all of your suggestions in mind. Just to be clear, I am not paid to create any articles - I create content for recreational purposes on my leisure time. Lastly, I wanted to know if you would be kind enough to provide me with the last updated/saved edit file of the 'Bobby Nelson' page that is now deleted? Just so I know where I need to correct my mistakes when I begin creating the new version. Hope to hear back soon, thanks!
Best, NJPRWORK 1:58, 19 July 2018
- Hi Njprwork, I have restored the article and moved it to Draft:Bobby Nelson for you to work on. You will need to get it approved through WP:AfC before it can be moved back. If it is moved back without addressing the issues raised in the deletion discussion, it will be speedy deleted. Let me know if you need any more help. Sarahj2107 (talk) 06:40, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Request for page Opening
Dear Sarahj2107
Can you kindly open this page Joseph Kalimbwe you protected from creation? The page was deleted for not having notable sources. I have sense found more reliable sources and wish to first submit as a draft for review rather than create instantly as it will need to be reviewed beforehand.
Best regards
105.232.255.39 (talk) 17:56, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, I was not the person to protect this page, that was User:RHaworth so you will need to speak to them about getting it unprotected. However, it is very unlikely it will be unprotected until an acceptable draft has been created and has been approved through article for creation. Any draft created needs to be significantly different to the version that was deleted, including multiple reliable, intendant sources to prove notability. Sarahj2107 (talk) 18:13, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
paloma monappa deletion
Hi Sarahj2017, please can you explain why the article was deleted. THANKS Teemah 24 (talk) 12:21, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Teemah 24. I deleted the article after determining the consensus of the deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paloma Monappa. The other editors there agreed that there was not enough evidence that the person met our notability guidelines, specifically notability of actors and general notability. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:39, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
- Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.
Technical news
- The WMF Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input on the second set of wireframes for the Special:Block redesign that will introduce partial blocks. The new functionality will allow you to block a user from editing a specific set of pages, pages in a category, a namespace, and for specific actions such as moving pages and uploading files.
Eliot Cutler
Hi there, I did not notice that Eliot Cutler was up for AFD until you closed the discussion. Given that so few people participated, including other members of the Maine Wikiproject, will you reopen discussion? I believe there is evidence that he passes WP:GNG. Thanks!--TM 10:22, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Namiba, sorry for not getting back to you sooner, I somehow missed this message. The AfD was open for 8 days and had a pretty normal amount of participation by AfD standards. It was listed at WP:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Maine, there is is no requirement that it be listed anywhere else or that Wikiproject member participate. I will not be reopening the AfD, if you believe there is now evidence the he meets GNG then you are welcome to take it to WP:DRV. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Sarahj2107, will you userfy the page so I may continue working on improving it?--TM 20:09, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Deletion of Michael Skolnik's page
Hi Sarah,
I hope this email finds you well. I am inquiring about the deletion of my wikipedia page, /Michael_Skolnik. As this page has been up for more than three years, I have been surprised as to why it has been deleted and restored and then deleted again. I understand that the reasoning was that it was flagged for "promotion," but I am not sure why. I have never had problems with this page in the past and then all of a sudden it was being looked at by several editors. As I am really trying to learn and understand what was done wrong, I would greatly appreciate any insight and how we can get this page restored. With gratitude, Michael. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mskolniksoze (talk • contribs) 10:25, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Mskolniksoze, the reason it was deleted, recreated and deleted again was because someone deleted it under the speedy deletion criteria as promotional and then decided that because it had been around for 4 years it should have a 7 day discussion. The result of that discussion was that the article was not written from a neutral point of view and there was insufficient evidence of notability. To get the page recreated, these issue would need to be addressed. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:24, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).
Administrator changes
- None
- Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz
Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam
Interface administrator changes
- Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux
Guideline and policy news
- Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.
Technical news
- Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
- Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says
Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example isarticle_textwhich is nowpage_title. - Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is
page_age.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.
Deletion review for Eliot Cutler
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Eliot Cutler. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --TM 23:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).
Administrator changes
- Justlettersandnumbers • L235
- Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter
Interface administrator changes
- Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333
Oversight changes
- Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
- There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.
Technical news
- Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
- The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
- Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
- The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
- Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
- Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.
Administrators' newsletter – November 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
- A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
- A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
- A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.
Technical news
- Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
- A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
- The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.
Arbitration
- Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
- The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-en
wikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.
Hi Sarah, your edit on that disambiguation page which was part of your AFD-closing turned it into nonsense. I've just redirected it ... please be more careful in the future. Graham87 14:46, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
- Please don't leave me condescending messages about a mistake as a result of a semi-automated edit I did 4 months ago. I'm happy for you to fix it but I don't need you to come and tell me off about it unless you think its part of an ongoing pattern. Sarahj2107 (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
Hello, Sarahj2107. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
| | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |