User talk:Seraphimblade/archive 23

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Why was "List of My Little Pony Earth ponies" deleted?

Why was "List of My Little Pony Earth ponies" deleted? --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Jax 0677, you cited the reason in your comment. It was deleted as the result of that discussion at AfD. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

• Reply - Can you please be mote specific as to how the decision was actually reached? --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

• You can certainly review the AfD discussion. Most of the editors who commented there agreed that the article is an excessive level of detail for a fictional work, and not adequately supported by out of universe sourcing. The editors who argued to keep mostly did so on the basis of "size splitting", which is not, in itself, a valid keep rationale. (One editor did find some source material that was possibly promising, but no one looked at it more to find out if there was actually anything of note there.) A merge was discussed, but many editors were against that (including even several who argued to keep, since they felt it would make the target articles overly long), so there was not a consensus for that result. Therefore, since the consensus was that this is not an appropriate topic on which to have a full article, the result was to delete it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Popcorn555

Unless the deleted page is substantially different from Draft:Carnival Magic theme park, I would question whether the G11 deletion and spam-only blocking was appropriate here. The topic is notable with lots of coverage and reviews, and statements like "The project was plagued with problems right from the start" aren't what I'd consider unambiguously promotional. (Though of course it's unsourced so it should stay in draft until that is addressed). Yes the account is an SPA, but I'm not seeing clear evidence that they violated policy. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:46, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I would say that I find it rather rude that you would go ahead and delete the draft without any explanation after I explicitly disputed that G11 should apply, but it's not something I'm going to fight over, so meh. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:36, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

If this is indeed a notable topic, you can still create an article about it. The fact that the previous one was an advertisement doesn't change that if you would like to write an appropriate, neutrally worded article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 60

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023

• Three new partners
• Google Scholar integration
• How to track partner suggestions

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Notification: Feedback request service is down

Hello, Seraphimblade

You may have noticed that you have not received any messages from the Wikipedia:Feedback request service for over a month. Yapperbot appears to have stopped delivering messages. Until that can be resolved, please watch pages that interest you, such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

This notification has been sent to you as you are subscribed to the Feedback Request Service. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

• News and notes: Wikipedian Osama Khalid celebrated his 30th birthday in jail

• Opinion: Until it happens to you

• Disinformation report: How paid editors squeeze you dry

• In the media: Katherine Maher new NPR CEO, go check Wikipedia, race in the race

• In focus: The long road of a featured article candidate, part 2

• Recent research: Croatian takeover was enabled by "lack of bureaucratic openness and rules constraining [admins]"

• Comix: We've all got to start somewhere

• Traffic report: DJ, gonna burn this goddamn house right down

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:14, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Dance Loud

Hello, you just deleted this page. Is it possible you can restore it to drafts so I can work on it some more and fixing any promotional issues and such. In addition, the subject had more citations that I didn't yet use. FYI, I do not have any COI. I specifically picked this Band to make a page for because they had the most citations on the request for new page creations here --> Wikipedia:Requested_articles/music/Performers,_bands_and_songwriters. It is still listed there. I didn't use the last 4-6 citations on the page as thought there was already plenty.Breakfazt (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Breakfazt, I think you may be getting a little ahead of yourself. If you think it's appropriate to write something like Together, they form a dynamic and diverse entity. Fawn's classical training in live instrumentation blends seamlessly with Sanchez's expertise in electronic production and DJing. Praised by the Chicago Tribune and honed into a formidable live act through numerous performances since their inception in 2008, the duo fully realizes their combined capabilities in their 2020 independent debut album, "The Moment". in an encyclopedia article, I think you, first, need to thoroughly review what is meant by writing in a neutral tone, and secondly, you're probably not ready to create new articles yet. I think you would do well to edit some existing ones before you try to cross that bridge. That said, I do not restore advertising material, to draft or otherwise, but will give you the references which were used in the deleted article if you want them. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:50, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree, that sounded promotional, without me realizing it. My intention was merely to reword the content I discovered about them, without aiming to give it a promotional tone. I used ChatGPt to rephrase some sentences, and it obviously has the tendency to pump up the subjects. This task was sourced from the Request Articles list, and I saw it as a valuable exercise. I was not previously familiar with this band. I don't need their citations since they're still mentioned on the Requested Articles page. But please, would you restore it to drafts so I can re-attempt a new version? I'll reach out for your feedback once I've finished making adjustments. Breakfazt (talk) 00:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I already said what I would and would not do. That answer will not change if you repeat the question. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:55, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, please ensure you do not use ChatGPT to write anything here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Denver gathering

WikiProject Colorado

We will hold a casual Wikipedia gathering at the Gonzales Library at 1498 North Irving Street in Denver, on Sunday afternoon, February 11, 2024, from 2:30 to 4:00 PM MST. See details at Wikipedia:Meetup/Denver#February 11, 2024: Denver, Colorado Wiki Meetup.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from the Wikipedia:Meetup/Colorado/Invitation list. Thanks.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

U.S. Mountain West Online Meeting

Wikimedia US Mountain West

Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MST, Tuesday evening, February 13, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. All guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes

• Red-tailed hawk
• Robertsky

• Ameliorate!
• Ancheta Wis
• Anthony Bradbury (deceased)
• Cobi
• Ev
• Moondyne
• Worm That Turned

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

• Enterprisey
• Izno

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bouriema Kimba

I would argue against that having a consensus of "delete". In terms of numbers, it was four deletes to three keeps. Each of the "deletes" were basically "fails GNG" whereas the keeps provided in-depth reasoning as why significant coverage should exist, including noting that he passed WP:NSPORT (which itself states that the coverage is likely to exist) and that we have 0.00% access to any of the sources that were basically certain to have covered him. Habst's last comment was not rebutted and I personally felt my IAR keep provided decently good reasoning as well, especially since it was also not rebutted and actually got another user to vote keep in agreement. Would you be willing to close this as "no consensus", "relist", or should I bring it to DRV? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

BeanieFan11, while IAR is valid policy and one can argue for a "keep" (or, I suppose, a "delete") on those grounds, that would require an exceptionally strong consensus behind it, as it would mean going against the normal consensus of policy and practice (and of course, one arguing IAR is more or less acknowledging that other, more standard grounds for retention do not exist). I do not see such an exceptional consensus in this case, so I believe my close was correct and will not alter it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I will be taking this to DRV then; I am unaware of IAR requiring "exceptional consensus" to be considered a valid reason – rather, it should be given due weight proportional to how strong the argument is, which, in this case, is rather strong. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Bouriema Kimba

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bouriema Kimba. 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. ==

BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you help review this before I publish

I have taken my time to compile a new article (Draft:Derby Ozioma Chukwudi)and would love to have your feedback before I push live to avoid any future deletion

Thanks Inegben (talk) 13:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Inegben, to request that a draft be reviewed, please use articles for creation. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Done. Thanks Inegben (talk) 14:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Athletes Unlimited

Hi there. You recently deleted a page I tried to publish on Athletes Unlimited. Although I am affiliated with the organization, I did write this page on my own accord and spent a lot of time trying to keep it as fact-based as possible, as I believe this is an important topic for wikipedia to have information on. As you'll see, everything I wrote about was sourced and unbiased. I am newer to wikipedia, and was not sure how to disclose my affiliation with Athletes Unlimited (and am still a bit confused there), so I do apologize for not following those guidelines. Is there anything I can do to enable this to be published as I've spent a lot of time drafting the article on wikipeda? If not, can I please have access to my draft back? Janef99 (talk) 20:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Janef99, you may find how to disclose paid editing at the paid editing disclosure policy, as well as the message I left on your talk page. (If just an affiliation, but you're not being paid or expected to edit as part of your employment, that's a conflict of interest, and can be declared that way instead, but normally affiliation with an organization counts as a financial stake in the editing). I do not restore advertising material, but will if you like give you a list of the references which were used in it, and it in any case would need a total rewrite. Before you attempt writing anything else, I strongly suggest you read what we mean by neutral writing, as essentially nothing in that deleted draft complied with it (and it was about the opposite of "unbiased"; if you think that was, I am not certain that editing Wikipedia is a good fit for you). If you are used to normally writing promotional or marketing material, you will have to get used to a very different style of writing on Wikipedia. It actually does look to me like this company might indeed be notable, but if so, an article about it will need to just stick to neutrally summarizing facts verified by reliable and independent sources, not breathlessly go on about how neat and innovative they are. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I wasn't trying to break any rules and wasn't trying to be promotional by posting this. I will learn from this, and read what you've noted. I won't attempt to write another Athletes Unlimited article as it seems like you do not want that from me. I tried to model my draft after the WNBA page, and other similar pages, and I do see where maybe the beginning portion got a bit fluffy, but after that is simply just a breakdown of facts about stats, how the league works, and player performance. Janef99 (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

That's actually why we generally recommend against writing about subjects you're close to or have a strong interest in. It makes it pretty difficult to remain neutral, and also to refrain from using personal knowledge and just stick to the sources. I've been doing this a long time, and I'd even have a hard time doing that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Unprotection of "Movez" Article

Subject: Request to Lower Protection Level for "Movez" Page

Dear Seraphimblade,

I hope this message finds you well. I am reaching out regarding the "Movez" page, which you had previously protected due to repeated recreation and unambiguous advertising or promotion.

At the time, it seemed to be more than appropriate. However, I believe that the protection level for the "Movez" page may no longer be necessary for the following reasons:

1. Notability: I have prepared a draft version of the "Movez" article "Draft:Movez", which demonstrates the subject's notability with primary sources. The draft showcases the significance of the software company, citing primary article sources/mentions in a neutral and objective manner.

2. Unaffiliated Contributor: I would like to emphasize that I have no affiliation with the organization behind "Movez." My intention in creating the article is purely pragmatic, as someone who has observed the growth and impact of their app.

3. Digital Identity Clarification: Considering the digital history of placebo companies arising with the company's IP, lowering the protection level would allow the article to be published for the web to correctly decipher the real company versus the copycats. This would contribute to a clearer online representation of "Movez" and help prevent confusion among users.

I respectfully request that the protection level for the "Movez" page be reconsidered to allow for the publication of the draft article. Lowering the protection level would enable constructive contributions from various editors and ensure that accurate information about "Movez" is available on Wikipedia.

Thank you for considering my request. If you require any further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me. I appreciate your time and attention to this matter.

Sincerely, Kinshipmaster Kinshipmaster (talk) 12:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Kinshipmaster, please first utilize the articles for creation review process. If AfC accepts the draft, then at that time I will be happy to help do the actual move. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Close of Isla Phillips AfD discussion

Hi Seraphimblade. Could you please provide a rationale for your no consensus close of the Isla Phillips AfD discussion. I think that there was consensus to revdel the diffs here, for the following reasons:

• One keep !vote argued that one of the children was notable and so the diffs for that page should not be revdel-ed, whereas three editors (myself and two others) explained why the sourcing that was provided was trivial tabloid coverage.
• One keep !vote argued that These are great-grandchildren of a sovereign, members of the most famous family in the world, in line to the throne and easily meet WP:GNG. This is clearly incorrect per WP:INVALIDBIO, which I cited in the discussion, a well as WP:NRVE and WP:NOTINHERITED.
• Another keep !vote argued that the diffs don't look that bad to me compared to examples from REVDEL categories 1-4; this argument was contested with policy-based reasons by myself and another editor, who argued that it's "bad" per WP:NPF and that Trivial and tabloid coverage are not acceptable for biographies, and the fact that these keep getting recreated suggests the potential for BLP harm from their existence in redirect history.

In sum, two of the keep !votes were based on misapprehensions of relevant guidelines (SIGCOV and GNG) and one was a gut check based on a misreading of an informational page. By contrast, the three delete !votes were all rooted in policy (WP:NPF) and a proper understanding of what constitutes SIGCOV. Thus, there was a rough consensus rooted in P&Gs and the keep !votes that ignored the P&Gs or misinterpreted them should have been discounted.

Thank you, voorts (talk/contributions) 21:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Notes

Voorts, I don't think much of a "rationale" is necessary—there is clear disagreement on the matter, and no consensus emerged from it. Certainly I am aware of what your position was, but several other editors disagreed and argued for retention. As such, I believe the close to be correct and will not alter it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the prompt response. As you can see, I've brought this to DRV. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 23:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Isla Phillips

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Isla Phillips. 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. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia Russia director declared "foreign agent" by Russian gov; EU prepares to pile on the papers

• Disinformation report: How low can the scammers go?

• Gallery: Before and After: Why you don't need to touch grass to dramatically improve images of flora and fauna

• In the media: Speaking in tongues, toeing the line, and dressing the part

• Serendipity: Is this guy the same as the one who was a Nazi?

• Traffic report: Griselda, Nikki, Carl, Jannik and two types of football

• Crossword: Our crossword to bear

• Comix: Strongly

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Internal inquiry on User:AaravVideosYT

Hi, I'm CSM, just need to know about the information of a recent banned user whose sock account User:AaravVideosYT has been blocked by @Izno. The sock said that you blocked their master account. Atleast, if I know it's master account and it's fault, it would be appreciated. Now that's upto your discretion. CSMention269 (talk) 04:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

CSMention269, I honestly do not know. I deleted that editor's user page not too long ago, since it was promoting their YouTube channel. I delete a lot of spam and block a lot of spammers, so if I blocked a previous account of theirs, it was very likely for that reason—but unless it was very recent, I almost certainly would not remember what account it was or even that I had done it. Still, they helpfully self-admitted to it, so guess a bonus point for that? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

Hmm I understand that, it's difficult for you to remember as you block many users for abusing Wikipedia, hardly possible to know any one who was blocked at long time ago. Anyways thank you for the info you shared. CSMention269 (talk) 04:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

No longer able to respond at AE, and off-wiki linking

It is frustrating to no longer be able to respond at AE, especially in terms of false and misleading allegations. As has been documented over email. This AE is being linked to off wiki, and seemingly brigaded. The most recent user's post is part of a pattern, they recently went through 18 years of my post history at ANI trying to claim that I had been Battleground/Pointy sticks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1141#Drsmoo_and_WP%3ABATTLEGROUND_behaviour), including starting with a non-live diff that had been posted repeatedly by this user, and off wiki by someone, despite only being live for 15 minutes. Along with the off-wiki brigading, in which a user is repeatedly linking to my posts advocating for a "boomerang", I am very concerned that something very uncomfortable is occurring. Drsmoo (talk) 14:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

In order to ensure everyone is looking at the same information, I do not discuss open AE requests outside of AE. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:06, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

That said, Drsmoo, it looks like part of your post addresses the word limit. For parties, that's enforced a bit less strictly (hence why I told Nableezy flat out to stop, but not you). If someone is directly accusing you of something, you can hardly be blamed for a response to that, but for the rest—please be more judicious in what you choose to respond to; a response is not needed for every statement that gets made. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:18, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, understood Drsmoo (talk) 19:31, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Retrieval of Deleted Draft Content_YogiGuruSaugaato

@Seraphimblade, I am reaching out to you on behalf of YogiGuru Saugaato, I am writing in connection with a recently deleted draft by the name: YogiGuru Saugaato.

We don't have a copy of the draft content. How can we retrieve it back? Debottama23 (talk) 11:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Debottama23, if you are acting "on behalf of" this individual, you are engaged in paid editing, but you have not made the required disclosures. You will need to do that before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:23, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I, Debottama23, am a paid editor affiliated with YogiGuru Saugaato and employed by Aastitva Being Foundation. This disclosure is in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines, and I am committed to transparency and adherence to the conflict of interest policy. I have no other paid contributions or contributors listed on my page. You can visit my Linkedin Profile for authentication: https://www.linkedin.com/in/debottama-ghosh-9a8772b4/ My Employer - YogiGuru Saugaato is the co-founder of the organization. You can view his profile on: https://www.linkedin.com/in/yogiguru/ Debottama23 (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You need to actually read the policy I linked you to, and make that disclosure on your userpage. You are not required to disclose your own identity, but you are required to state who is paying you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:11, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It did say I could disclose in the talk page. Apologies if this is not the way. However, my main user page says it does not exist. Kindly guide me as this is my first time. I only require the deleted draft. Please help. Debottama23 (talk) 12:27, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You will need to use the paid editor template on your user page. It doesn't exist yet because you haven't created it. If you are being paid by this individual, you would place {{paid|YogiGuru Saugaato}} on it. I can't do that for you; you have to be the one who does that. As to the rest, do you plan to put the deleted material back on Wikipedia? If you do, I will certainly not provide it to you as it was promotional and completely unacceptable. If you just want to use it elsewhere and will agree not to put it on Wikipedia again, I will place the deleted material somewhere for you to use for that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:34, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I have added the {{paid|YogiGuru Saugaato}}

To my user page.

I will not be using the same content on Wikipedia. I require it for other purposes as it was dictated and I have no copy. I will create a fresh article only after checking all the guidelines before I draft anything else. Debottama23 (talk) 12:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Seraphimblade, awaiting your response. Kindly share the content draft as it is urgent. I assure you none of it will be used on Wikipedia. Debottama23 (talk) 06:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

You do realize, I hope, that I am not required to do that at all, and am doing so for you as a courtesy. If you continue to be pushy about it, I am likely to change my mind. I will get to it when I have the time. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

My apologies if you felt that way. The intention was not to be pushy.

Appreciate you taking the time to help me out. Thank you in advance. Debottama23 (talk) 06:57, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Debottama23, you may find the final revision of the deleted article at [1]. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:35, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much @Seraphimblade Debottama23 (talk) 08:24, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, they attempted to make the paid declaration but malformed it, I've fixed it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Request to return content to page

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Ramkripalyadavg Content in this page Help us return content to this page I will always be grateful to you Thank you so much Wikipedia team Sofig57 (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Sofig57, the deleted material was promotional, and also was not in English, as is required on the English Wikipedia. As such, there would be no value in undeleting it, and I will not do so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:24, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Help us add more content to this page in English Your favorite item forever Sofig57 (talk) 11:28, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. This subject is almost certainly not notable; the vast majority of YouTube channels are not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:29, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Ramkripalyadavg is very famous in Jamui district, all the people of Jamui district recognize each and every child. Sofig57 (talk) 11:33, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

You can also search Ramkripalyadavg on Google. Sofig57 (talk) 11:34, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Ramkripalyadavg [2] [3] [4] Help Sofig57 (talk) 11:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The answer was "no", not "keep pushing at it". That answer is final. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:42, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

in review page

Please review this user page in English and add content to the Wikipedia team. I will always be grateful to you for helping us. [5] User_talk:Seraphimblade Sofig57 (talk) 11:44, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Genocides in history (1946 to 1999) on a "History and geography" request for comment, and at Talk:Battle of Bakhmut on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Closure of the NFL Draft RfC

Thanks for reading the discussion, but surely you can't mean that you are overriding the RM process by endorsing this RfC. The RfC was fine in analyzing editors opinions about upper or lowercasing, and of course can be used as a major point of evidence at an RM. But it could not overturn WP:RFCNOT which is linked as determinative for "Dispute resolution". Randy Kryn (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I neither endorsed it, nor the converse. The discussion by the community did that. I just noted that as the result. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

If I understand what you're saying, we can now take things usually requiring a WP:RM directly to an RfC, and a "requested move" now has at least two pathways? Is this correct (just trying to tie-it down) although I don't think the original close actually stipulated that, so an endorsement of the original close did not endorse actually moving pages, it seems if I'm reading it right, or sanctioning such moves. If it did it that will play havoc with the notification process (I hope you understand that, people can open an RfC and the pages they are requesting to be moved do not have to be notified, pretty much silent page moves would be allowed). Next step, can the entire question now move to Arbcom - is that the appeal route? Thanks, I'm not savvy on the details of something like this. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Nothing in our processes has changed. I've added some text to WP:RFCNOT to clarify, though it needs a little finessing. The short version is that the normal "pathways" are unchanged. If discussions fail to establish a consensus, or are unusually contentious, seeking wider consensus at an RfC can be a good idea. That section was never intended to ban the possibility of an RfC resulting in page moves. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I've reverted your good faith language until the wording is clarified at Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Text added to RFCNOT, as your description added explanatory language that doesn't seem to be agreed to at either the close or the endorsement. The original RM at NFL Draft was closed as no-consensus, with no move review. The process was already broken (a move review is required, or used to be, as the next step after an RM) and now some repair work seems to be needed. Is there an appeal process which can be followed, to Arbcom or somewhere, or are the drastic changes to the RM process now baked in? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Again, there have been no changes to the RM process. You've been told this repeatedly, your understanding of the RFC and page moving process is incorrect. My edit was to add explanatory text to describe what is and always has been the way our processes work. Regarding Arbcom, they primarily handle user conduct issues. They don't hear appeals to an RfC close, you already had an appeal at WP:AN. MoS/Article Titles as a topic area is already under the Contentious Topics umbrella to handle issues of user misconduct. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 01:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Certainly no one can stop you from asking ArbCom to take up the case, if you think that's warranted, but I really don't see what you would have in a case request there. "I don't like the outcome" is not an issue ArbCom would typically handle, nor would ArbCom overturn the results of a community discussion outside of some gross impropriety with it. As to the rest, Wikipedia does not have any absolute rules, so a decision that the community is otherwise willing to go along with is not invalid because it happened in a less usual way. The community was willing to endorse the outcome, so that is the outcome. There really isn't any avenue of appeal I can think of from there; the close review is the appeal process for an RfC closure. Discussion over the wording of WP:RFCNOT should take place at WT:RFC, which I see it already is. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Seraphimblade. The Wordsmith, if it's always been this way, you're saying that at any time in the past someone could have appealed an RM decision directly to an RfC and not to a move review? That's not how I understood the process, so if that's true then I missed it. WP:RFCNOT seemed determinative, but you seem to be saying that not only was something else always determinative but that it had already been determined when you made your close. I thought your close made the change. So yes, maybe I'm wrong, won't be the first time. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

RfCs resulting in consensus for page moves have been successfully held at VPP before, and in fact per our policy on article titles such discussions affecting a whole class of articles would fall under naming conventions and guidelines, which does not require RM involvement at all. See e.g. here and here for VPP RfCs on rail article titles. JoelleJay (talk) 06:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

And the NFL draft RfC close had cited other precedents as well. —Bagumba (talk) 06:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Alex Heckler

I was so sad to see the results of the deletion discussion. I have not been on Wikipedia that long, but I did put so much work into creating a new article. I read all the policy pages and tried to conform to what is considered a proper entry for Wikipedia and was surprised by the hostility of certain editors who jumped up and tagged this article before I even wrote two sentences...I continued to work on it and improve it and bring in more data and sources. There were many editors who felt the article did not deserve to be deleted, but for some reason, the ones who were demanding for it to be deleted from the beginning began to shame all those who felt otherwise. It makes me feel really bad and quite unwanted, although I was really enjoying being a Wikipedia editor. Sorry if this is not the place to pour out my heart, but I was wondering if you could at least send me a copy of the article. Since it's one of the first I have written, I thought of keeping it for sentimental value...I appreciate any help or advice you can give me.--Hazooyi (talk) 08:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hazooyi, not a thing wrong with that. It's frustrating not to have consensus go your way, especially when you were sure you had it right, and I certainly get that—I've been in those shoes more than once, and it still is for me too. It is something you'll have to get used to if you want to edit here, though; it will happen from time to time. I put the final revision of the deleted article up at [6]. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I did not see any consensus, but thanks.--Hazooyi (talk) 09:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Gokul Rajendran

How can we get the information written on it back.? it was waste of time writing on wikipedia. Please help me get those information it was a lot of research, I had to do. ClimaFilms (talk) 08:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Question for administrator  

Need help with getting back the Draft, it was one of many days of research. Don't want to loose all that work, for no reason. Please help me get the draft back. Thank you.

Answered on editor's talk. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Administrator changes

• Sdkb
• The Night Watch

• East718
• Isabelle Belato
• Mzajac
• Staecker
• Stan Shebs
• Sugarfish
• Tamzin

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 March 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia enters US Supreme court hearings as "the dolphin inadvertently caught in the net"

• Recent research: Images on Wikipedia "amplify gender bias"

• In the media: The Scottish Parliament gets involved, a wikirace on live TV, and the Foundation's CTO goes on record

• Obituary: Vami_IV

• Traffic report: Supervalentinefilmbowlday

• WikiCup report: High-scoring WikiCup first round comes to a close

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Govind Dholakia

Hello Seraphimblade, I hope you are doing well. You salted Govind Dholakia article back in 2018, and now there's a draft at AfC for this subject. It's gained notability under WP:NPOL and also meets the GNG criteria with significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. Could you please lower the protection so I can proceed with accepting it through the AfC process? – DreamRimmer (talk) 08:15, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, I've removed the protection so you should be able to accept the draft now. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you :) – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Sarah Rose Karr

Hello,

You closed this Afd as keep. Would you be so kind as to explain how you came to that (for me very surprising) conclusion? 3 users (including me) stated that she met WP:NACTOR (they explained why; and the article, even badly sourced, was rather proof of that). Would you mind relisting the discussion one last time? Thank you in advance. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Mushy Yank, after reviewing the AfD, one editor handwaved at "NACTOR", but the challenge was instead to notability. Another stated that she had received "substantial media coverage", but apparently did not see any need to specify what that might be. Several other editors made a good case that they had made a good-faith effort to search for reference material, and not come up with anything sufficient to establish actual notability. As such, I believe I correctly interpreted the discussion and will not reopen or alter the result. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. The page will probably be recreated in the future, considering the various pages (films, awards) she was linked to (as you have seen yourself when you removed the link to her deleted page from all those) and the fact that she really does appear to meet NACTOR. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

About Deletion of RUET Career Forum

Hello and greetings, Hope to have a great day. Recently, you deleted the page RUET Career Forum in cause of Unambiguous advertising or promotion. I believe there might have been a misunderstand, RUET Career Forum has been serving the students for it's career development since 2014. I am sorry for there might content some texts that might not follow the standards and I should have overlooked them but it's not completely an unambiguous advertising or promotion. There's a significance about the organization, the organization is contributing for the career development for young and fresh graduates from not just RUET, also from the Rajshahi City.

I believe it could be a great encyclopedic article if it's done completely. I request you to undelete it and let me work on that. Thanks — A. Shohag (ping_me or Talk) 16:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

ShohagS, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the question, I clarify that I am not being paid neither being asked to write it on wiki. I have volunteered in that organization once and it's seemed solid to me. And as long as I am aware that there's a lots of media coverage about organization and most of them are news footage. This is why I thought I could use the resources to write an article on that. Another thing is to clarify that the article contains some lackings of information but it completely doesn't mean a promotional article in my opinion. Further, If I am wrong please feel free to let me know. Thank you again. — A. Shohag (ping_me or Talk) 18:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, well I will take your word for it that it's boosterism rather than anything paid. That said, the result is more or less the same. As some examples (but not an exhaustive list) of issues: RCF is committed to helping... (don't care what they're "committed" to doing, we'd care what reliable and independent sources confirm they've done), It is acknowledged as one of largest career clubs... ("acknowledged" by whom, according to whom? That's weasel wording), The club’s motto is as follows: “Excellence is our obligation” (generally, a motto, "mission", "vision", and stuff like that, is marketese junk that would not belong in an article), was founded in 2014 by the passionate students of... (skip the puff editorializing adjectives like "passionate"), and it just goes on and on like that talking up the organization. Wikipedia articles should stick to facts verified by reliable and independent sources, without any editorializing or "talking up". I do not restore advertisements, but if you'd like to take a go at rewriting it in a neutral way, I will provide the sources that were used in the deleted article. If you genuinely could not see how your editing was not neutral when it that blatantly was not, I also strongly advise that you use the draft and articles for creation process rather than direct creation in mainspace if and when you would choose to do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me}

Well, thank you sir. If you can transfer the resources in a draft and let me work on that, I assure you that "That said, the result is more or less the same." is going to change for this time. And thank you very much. I might learn a couple things or more. — A. Shohag (ping_me or Talk)

I'm not sure what was unclear about "I do not restore advertisements, but if you'd like to take a go at rewriting it in a neutral way, I will provide the sources that were used in the deleted article." I will not restore the deleted material. You may request to have the sources, or not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I am so sorry. I thought you would transfer the resources into a draft. Well, provide the resources please. — A. Shohag (ping_me or Talk) 06:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have placed these at User:ShohagS/RUET references. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. And apology for the delay. I was on vacation. I will start working soon. — A. Shohag (ping_me or Talk) 03:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The No Spam Barnstar
	Thanks for all you do. You really deserve this! Maliner (talk) 07:03, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 61

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024

• Bristol University Press and British Online Archives now available
• 1Lib1Ref results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Conflict of interest management: Case opened

Hello Seraphimblade,

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict of interest management/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Spam

Hey Seraphimblade, out of curiosity, how similar is Draft:Pleng Chan to the page you deleted here? Thanks, microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 21:03, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

MicrobiologyMarcus, it's not as bad, at least. Still pretty full of puff, and you were right to reject it, but I probably wouldn't G11 that one. I've warned that editor for removing their paid disclosure. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:13, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Good catch. FWIW, I've also thrown up the coi disclosure on the company talk page. Thanks for the quick response, I won't G11 then. Cheers, microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 21:23, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Consecutive revert

I have previously asked another admin but want to make sure that consecutive reverts on contentious article like this [7][8] does not constitute a 1RR violation. To me this is an easily exploitable loophole. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 12:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Sameboat, well, I'd first say that "asking the other parent" if you don't like the answer the first time is not a good look. The answer you received was correct; consecutive reverts without any intervening edits only count as one revert. The reason is simple—in the edits you cite and in any other cases, the whole thing could have been done in one edit. So, doing it in multiple consecutive edits versus one is a distinction without a difference; it's still just all told one revert. Some editors just prefer to do larger edits in discrete chunks, either to make it easier for them to handle and catch any errors, or so that they can leave different edit summaries for different portions of it. But that's a purely stylistic decision; the end result is the same if they did one large edit or multiple smaller ones. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Another question: Do you really agree that the first two diffs ("free Palestine" and "war in Gaza" edits) provided by BilledMammal in the CPN constitute 1RR, even though my intention was never to revert the original versions? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:54, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

I can't know anyone's intent. If an edit has the effect of restoring an earlier version, in whole or part, it is a revert. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for telling to not fix any obvious editorial mistakes because it can be easily interpreted as violation of policy and only being notified after the fact. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 00:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Keep in mind that I am not here to defend Salmoonlight which I can easily see why their edits are a more clear cut case of 1RR. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 00:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Robert_Rodriguez_(writer_and_podcaster) editing

I have seen there are many suitable links in the article about Robert_Rodriguez_(writer_and_podcaster). I have added a credible link of Hal Leonard Corporation. YOu can remove the deletion tag Kurtgoodwin948 (talk) 12:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

That is a sales site. Those are neither appropriate nor independent. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Group-IB

Hello Seraphimblade, You put a creation protection on Group-IB back in 2020. It passes the notability criteria with the following sources: [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]. I have done my research on the subject and I am planning to create an article in near future. I wanted to request you to remove the protection so i can proceed with composing the article. Thank You. Synchaas (talk) 18:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Synchaas, what you will need to do is to create a draft of your proposed article, at Draft:Group-IB, and request review via the articles for creation process. If AfC accepts the draft, I will at that time remove the protection so that they can move it into the encyclopedia. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance, Seraphimblade, I will write a draft for this subject very soon. Synchaas (talk) 13:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Monopoly Massacre

Hello Seraphimblade, I hope you are doing well. I wanted to get your opinion about Monopoly Massacre. Earwig's copyvio detector is showing a 90.6% violation, and the target website clearly states that the materials and information on this portal may not be copied, printed, or used in any other form for profit purposes. However, since it was added to Wikipedia, it's available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0. I was considering tagging it for G12, but I'm not sure, so I thought I should seek the advice of an admin. – DreamRimmer (talk) 11:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

DreamRimmer, we have no way to know if it was legitimately copied to Wikipedia, so the person who copied it may not have the authority to release it under CC-BY-SA. Unless we either have VRT confirmation from the copyright holder that they are allowing that, or the site itself notes that they're releasing it under that license, we have to assume that the person who copied it to Wikipedia was not authorized to do that. That's exactly why G12 exists; we otherwise might be telling readers that something is under a free license when it's really not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. It appears that another user tagged it under G12. Your advice will be valuable for me in the future. – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:AN

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#WP:ADMINACCT demand from Rajeshthapaliya. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:31, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam on a "All RFCs" request for comment, and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam/Salaf task force on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:32, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Khalid Ali al mawlawi

Hello

I’m messaging in regards to the deletion of a page i was creating for Khalid Ali al mawlawi. I would like to know as to why it was deleted from what i understand its under the idea of “promotion and advertisement”?. But the page talks about and highlights a notable figure in the Qatari community and his actions during his career and contributions towards the country and how he helped deliver it and such.

I’d like to see if its possible to reverse the deletion of the page or an aid in providing edits to the page itself “i no longer have the source code of the page btw i need it back to make the edits and such.

Looking forward to your reply.

Regards Bipbo0212 (talk) 09:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Bipbo0212, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you must make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Difference between revisions

Hi, please could you explain <nowiki> this revert and explain how i could fix it Wilfredor (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Wilfredor, to start, it's far too long. The entire article before your addition is about 50 kB, and after it would be ~60 kB. The article is about the organization as a whole; devoting one sixth of it to a single controversy is far too much. That said, I think I see the root cause of that, and that's an issue in itself—you are essentially taking text directly from the sources, not paraphrasing and summarizing it. As an example, from this source: [26], your text was: The investigations did not surprise two federal officials who, fearing workplace retaliation, spoke with CBC News under the condition of anonymity,, while the source text was: The investigations came as little surprise to two federal civil servants who, fearing workplace reprisals, spoke to CBC News on the condition they not be named. You cannot do that, where you basically copy over the sentence and just change a few words to synonyms, and that also explains why the writing is not in a neutral and encyclopedic tone—you're not changing it to one. (You did that with several sources; that's just one example.) You also have a chart based upon a tweet, not any actual reliable source of data, and that's completely inappropriate. It does seem like it bears mention, but not a huge chunk of the article worth of mention. So, take the best available sources (CBC, for example), be very wary of using material from advocacy groups and normally attribute it rather than stating it as fact (so "According to _______, Doe has...", not just "Doe has..."), and so on. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Sri Lanka Armed Forces on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Fani Willis on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 March 19

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 March 19. 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. LearnologyX (talk) 16:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Third Opinion on LiveJasmin Talk page dispute

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello and thank you for the help. I have just added two more sources, that I think are both independent and reliable, and make the exact same allegations about LiveJasmin as the parliamentary question does. Is that enough for publishing the "Controversy" section now? I would appreciate it if you took another look. Thank you! Alexfotios (talk) 13:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Let's keep the discussion at the article talk page where it started. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I just wanted to inform you that I have provided further references to our discussion on Talk:LiveJasmin#Controversy. Have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexfotios (talk • contribs) 09:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

• Technology report: Millions of readers still seeing broken pages as "temporary" disabling of graph extension nears its second year

• Interview: Interview on Wikimedia Foundation fundraising and finance strategy

• Special report: 19-page PDF accuses Wikipedia of bias against Israel, suggests editors be forced to reveal their real names, and demands a new feature allowing people to view the history of Wikipedia articles

• Op-Ed: Wikipedia in the age of personality-driven knowledge

• Recent research: "Newcomer Homepage" feature mostly fails to boost new editors

• News and notes: Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Charter ratified

• In the media: "For me it’s the autism": AARoad editors on the fork more traveled

• Traffic report: He rules over everything, on the land called planet Dune

• Humour: Letters from the editors

• Comix: Layout issue

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Markos Botsaris on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Edelman Family Foundation

Hi @Seraphimblade

I am reaching out to you because of your previous participation in one of the discussions regarding the reliability and neutrality of HuffPost/Pink News/ProPublica as sources used on Wikipedia.

Currently, there is an ongoing issue with the Edelman Family Foundation section in the Joseph Edelman Wikipedia article. The section appears to be biased and lacks a balanced representation of the foundation's activities, as it primarily focuses on a single controversial donation while neglecting to mention the organization's numerous other significant contributions to various causes.

I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion on the BLP Noticeboard to address the concerns surrounding the section's neutrality and explore ways to improve its content. Llama Tierna (talk) 18:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Unblocking

Hi.

I was unblocked by The Wordsmith around 10 minutes ago. Before I return to my dear old routine as a Wikipedian (these last few days went down slow as hell), I would like to clear the air with you. I am here because I want to make sure that there are no misunderstandings between us.

I have replied to your concerns on my talk page, but in the case that you miss the notification, I will say it here too:

As I explained in my talk page, my block evasions on 29 March were a one-time hot-headed decision in a desperate attempt to salvage my "insane streak of creations" which dated back to 29 February (childish, I know). Of course I was aware of my previous problems with multi-accounts, and that is why I stated and I quote this occasion is an exception that I do not want to repeat"; and I meant it. Furthermore, I do not think that my block evasions of 29 March should be weighted against me since it clearly wasn't intended to actually be evasive (The Wordsmith). Furthermore, all I did in my “block evasions” was appealing (albeit in the wrong place). Just as Blablubbs said and I quote If they had done (or were to do) anything other than trying to engage with community concerns while logged out, it'd be a very different story, but they haven't. This is what I'd essentially consider a "good faith" SOCK violation, as opposed to "proper" socking”.

I also don't think I should get another six month exile from Wikipedia because of this one-time hot-headed decision. The first exile was already super hard to get by. I have literally nothing else to do (apart of my job obviously) nor any other interest or hobby to persue, so during those six months I never felt so bored (and a couple of other things that I won't say to not look like I am trying to convince you through symphathy).

I took your last chance very seriously. I never ever again unlogged from this account (until 29 March for the reasons above). Just as I said and I quote, "the last time I used an IP address was in 2022". I don't think this is about giving me a third chance. This was simply one giant misunderstanding (because of the bots issue) that led me to one hot-headed decision, instead of the repeatedly and prelonged abuse of Sockpuppetry of my first block.

I know you are busy right now, so take your time; because I am not going to make any edits until we fully clear the air between us. For instance, I don’t understand why my daily checkup was so bad in your eyes. Perhaps I broke a rule, but I thought I could talk in my talk page even when blocked… I will be here to answerer to any other of your concerns, questions, or worries.

Sorry for this super long “death testament”, but the notion of getting another six month exile is making my heart pounding like never before.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, like I said before, I've no intent of wheel warring, so if you're unblocked now, then that is what it is. I didn't see a lot of good judgment, though, really from the beginning. I don't think you were running a bot either, but I can certainly see why someone could have thought you were. If you're going to be editing at a high rate, even if doing so manually, it's very important to realize that someone might become concerned by that, and say "Hey, hang on a second, what's going on here?". At that point, it's very important that you pause what you're doing while you engage with those concerns. I know it's frustrating to plan out a schedule and have it messed up, but that's something we all sometimes have to deal with, both on Wikipedia and otherwise, and in the end there's no deadline. Your scheduling can't take priority over everything else, and especially not over working with other editors. So next time you plan a schedule, maybe either leave some breathing room in it to deal with anything unexpected coming up, or just be more prepared to adjust it. Just for clarity, though, there had certainly better be no more instances of the logged out editing, even if not doing so messes up your schedule or anything else. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

To clarify, my block and unblock were solely for the suspected botting issue which is no longer necessary. I have no objection to any separate issues being handled through the normal processes, and would not consider that to be wheel warring. But your advice is good, and Barr Theo would do well to listen to it. The Wordsmith^{Talk to me} 23:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi The Wordsmith. I don't think this is the appropriate place, but I would like to thank you for your work in this giant misunderstanding.

And yes, I will listen to his advice and take it very seriously, just as I did with his previous one.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 00:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Alright then, next time I won't put my personal need to fulfill my oddly regimented self-imposed posting rules over the actual rules. Lesson learned.

And next time I make an edit while logged out, regardless of the circumstances, you have my permission (not that you need it) to block me forever, I guess.

PS: I would also like to add (in case you are interested) that I already "adjusted" (as you said) my schedule into these new circumstances. My new "insane streak of creations" will now take place in May (1-31) and hopefully I will be able to finish it this time.

Kind regards. Barr Theo (talk) 23:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aa Bhi Ja O Piya

Hello Seraphimblade,

Thank you for your work. You closed that Afd as Delete. May I ask you why? The last relist by Liz mentioned no apparent consensus and posterior !votes were 2 Ks and 2 Ds (one asserting the film is a short when it's a feature....; the other considering R as a possible fair outcome); what's more indeed, 2 D !votes considered Redirect to List of Hindi films of that year (a common practice for released films, especially Indian ones, when the page presents multiple sources; and this one received not only coverage of the production but reviews; the film being mentioned in the target page) as a suitable option.

Can I ask you to have another look, please? Thank you very much. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:16, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, if you are willing reopen it, I will change my !vote to keep as I find the arguments by Eluchil404 and voorts that came in after mine compelling enough to flip. @Mushy Yank either way this goes, I do encourage you to start a discussion at WT:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force to get broader consensus Film Information is RS and meets "nationally known critic" criteria as it appears it could be quite useful. S0091 (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

I've seen these, but have had some things come up and don't have time to look at the moment. I suspect I will within a couple days; sorry for the delay. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Btw, the reason I stumbled upon it and decided to nominate was because the creator was part of a sock farm that was creating articles to insert sneaky hoax elements to them, see [27], so when I was going to check the content to clean up any hoax elements left, I thought it looks non-notable anyway so better to nominate it for deletion instead. I still think it's not notable, apart from coverage (which includes mostly PR stuff with apparent incorrect claims), it had a very narrow, local release so failing "widely distributed" part as well, but if someone still wants an article, I would suggest to create it from scratch yourself instead of restoring the one that might have some sneaky hoax elements left (the user was also making copyvio plot copy pastes). Tehonk (talk) 03:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Mushy Yank and S0091, if there's an editor involved who was known to do inaccuracies and copyvios, I think that's a very valid concern. What would the two of you, and Tehonk, think about moving the article to draft so it could be carefully checked for any issues like that, and then could be assessed for viability once anything like that has been addressed? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, all. Draftifying seems like a very good idea in this case, yes, and would allow to addresss any potential issue (and improve the page, obviously). Or feel free to make it a page in my User space if no one agrees on a Draft except you and me. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks Tehonk for providing additional context. I am fine with draftifying or userfying. S0091 (talk) 14:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I am fine with draftifying as well. Cheers. Tehonk (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I've moved it to Draft:Aa Bhi Ja O Piya. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for everything. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 08:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Expungement on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Alexfotios (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Djong (ship) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Israel–Hamas war on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aa Bhi Ja O Piya

Thank you for taking the time to close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aa Bhi Ja O Piya. However, I believe that the WP:ATD of redirection to List_of_Hindi_films_of_2022#October–December should have been implemented rather than straight deletion. Two of the delete comments mentioned redirection as a reasonable alternative to deletion and the general concern non-notability due to insufficient coverage doesn't necessarily mitigate against redirection or retention of history. Cf. Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Amy Eden for a similar case. Thanks for your consideration. Eluchil404 (talk) 20:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Eluchil404, if you think it ought to redirect somewhere, you can do that. The title is not protected. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Opus Literary Alliance page

Hi, Seraphimblade, I was surprised and kind of shocked to come to Wikipedia and not be able to find Opus Literary Alliance (OLA) listed anywhere when I had just posted it a week or so ago. We received no notice that it would be deleted. You didn't contact me at all, so I didn't get a chance to discuss it with you. It just appears that you took down the page and moved on.

Like the Lambda Literary organization or the Golden Crown Literary Society or the American Library Association's Stonewall lit folks or countless other LGBTQ-related organizations, OLA has been created as a nonprofit to serve the needs of members, in particular, the writers of lesbian works. Everything about it is notable. Everything about it should be welcomed and approved here. A page entry here is appropriate because there aren't very many queer organizations of this scope represented on Wikipedia, and this one already has many members involved who DO have wiki-pages. I just hadn't gotten a chance to update them yet.

It sounds like you deleted it because I updated one of the member-director's pages. I intended to update quite a number of pages and link them to OLA. (Of course my team and I continue to build pages for lesbian writers which we then have to fight about with editors who don't seem to grok why queer organizations matter, are notable, and deserve a place at the wiki table.)

So your decision to delete OLA makes no sense. Could you explain to my team and me why you took down the page? We are all seriously aggrieved, and we are hoping that you will reverse your decision and restore all our hard work.

Thanks for your attention to this matter, DMT Dmthompson (talk) 04:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Dmthompson, what is "my team"? If you're affiliated with this organization, you will need to make the required paid editing disclosures before we proceed further. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:ARE

@Seraphimblade, WP:ARE#Abhishek0831996 seems to be under your consideration as per your statement there. As uninvolved user I tried to analyze content related part and one diff.

Most part of my comment was already collapsed. Idk how, it's bit strange @Haani40 is presuming on your behalf?, that you have not closed the case due to my comments which were mostly already collapsed, any ways I collapsed one more paragraph after their request at my talk page.

Admins use it or ignore it - Uninvolved users provide assessment and different and likely more neutral perspective to save admin time. I hope my effort does not get misconstrued. And look forward to your support. Thanks Bookku (talk) 16:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

To ensure everyone is looking at the same thing, I do not discuss open AE requests outside of AE. Please discuss the request on AE, not my talk page. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Hyperpure page

Hi @Seraphimblade, I'm kinda surprised of how the speedy deletion done as of the name suggest. But I really would b grateful to know why it's find promo material. Not sure, I would rewrite the article a again. would be great to know the why? Ajeesh Sudhakar (talk) 17:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Ajeesh Sudhakar, the entire thing was promotional. As some examples (but by no means an exhaustive list): Hyperpure's objective is... This approach aims... ("objectives", "aims", "vision", "mission", etc., are marketese junk. We care what reliable and independent sources confirm that an organization has actually done.), to ensure timely delivery of fresh, high-quality ingredients (brochure fluff), improve operational efficiency for restaurants by reducing reliance on traditional supply chains with their inherent inefficiencies (don't editorialize that alternatives are "inherently inefficient" or that the way this organization does things is better), The company experienced rapid growth (don't editorialize that something was "rapid"; present facts from reliable sources and let the reader draw their own conclusions about them), including fruits, vegetables, dairy, meats, and more ("and more" is marketese junk), This allows restaurants to source a comprehensive range of kitchen staples in one location with the benefit... (more editorializing; don't state that something like that is a "benefit"), and the rest goes on and on like that. I see that you have stated you are not editing for pay on your talk page, but to be quite honest with you, it sure looks like you are, and I'm not sure I believe you. What you wrote there looks exactly like a lot of the paid advertisements I've seen written here. If you're not editing for pay and it doesn't particularly matter what you edit, it is probably better that you move on to some other subject than for-profit companies, as clearly (between that and Draft:Y Mall, which I also took a look at), you are not able to write about them neutrally yet. It is also generally a wise idea for less experienced editors to gain experience editing existing articles before trying to create new ones, so perhaps that would help you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Group-IB

Hello Seraphimblade, I hope you are good. As discussed previously, I have created an AfC as suggested. Could you please have a look at that. Thank you. Synchaas (talk) 18:24, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

You have correctly put the draft in for review, so an AfC reviewer will review it in due course. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:26, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Free Democratic Party (Germany) on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 09:30, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of article about TDO Book

I'm a longtime editor in Spanish Wikipedia but this days I created my first article in english edition because I'm enrolled at the #everybookitsreader campaign for writing and enriching article about books (fiction and non-fiction). The article about de book "The discipline of organizing" has been flagged as promotional. But it's not the case, TDO Book is a well-known notable work that deserves a Wikipedia article. It's used for more than ten year in many Information Schools all over the world, and has been published and reissued by MIT Press, Berkeley University, O'Reilly and other recognised publishers. Its author Robert J. Glushko has an stable article in Wikipedia and I was enriching content about its more spread, and also contested, work. The article was newtral and with references to reviews, linking to translations and also its recent innovative version for kids. Let's talk, I'm sure we can improve together Wikipedia. Tsaorin (talk) 08:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Tsaorin, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Of course I'm not a paid editor. I use this textbook every semester and due to the recent release of a very innovative version for kids, I realize that the link to the book in the author's article didn't redirect to an own article. I've to elaborate a non promotional and objetive text, including reviews negative and positive, because other academics have concerns with the main proposal of the books. I'm editor of Wikipedia in spanish for more than ten years, and evangelist of peer collaboration, open content and Wikidata. Tsaorin (talk) 12:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Just looking at the lead paragraph of the opening text, I see: is a seminal work, serving as a foundational manual, it provides comprehensive guidance, offering invaluable, It is well known, and the rest of the article goes on and on with puffery like that. Leave out the adjectives ("seminal", "foundational", "comprehensive", "invaluable", everything like that). If you think that constitutes "non promotional and objetive [sic] text", I would encourage you to review our policy on writing neutrally. The frequent use of needless puff adjectives is not neutral writing. Stick to facts confirmed by reliable and, importantly, independent sources, and present them in an entirely neutral tone; do not in any way "talk up" the article's subject. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, in fact is a "seminal work" in the Information Science field, and also a contended text, because of its proposal of a "organizing discipline" as umbrella for LIS corpus of practice, reserach and knowledge. It's "comprehensive", becasue ir's not an opusculous or a breif reflection. It has more than 600 pages, and detailed references and cross-domain examples. I think you have to applied better the Goof faith collaboration spirit and suggest way of improving adjectives you don't think enoguh neutral, instead of deleting. It's better to foster better article writing than delete withou any conversation. It's more polite, and also better for Wikipedia as a project.

Why don't we try to write an article that fits better with your concerns? It's a notable work that deserve be at Wikipedia. Let's write the right content, not throw out editors. Tsaorin (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

If you think that you can write an appropriate article on it, you can certainly give that a go. I might encourage you to use the draft and articles for creation process, rather than trying to get it right in mainspace from the first. You will need to find more reliable and independent reference material for it; the vast majority of what was in what you wrote was "sourced" to the work itself and seemed to be what you think about it, which is original research and is disallowed. The article cannot contain any of your thoughts or observations on the subject. Rather, it should summarize facts verified by reliable, independent sources, and do so in an entirely neutral tone, just stating the facts without any editorializing or "talking up". If there is not a substantial amount of reliable and independent reference material about this subject, it is not notable and so it would not be a suitable subject of an article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I've rewriten de article. Could you take a look to it in my user sandbox? User:Tsaorin/TDO_Book_revised. I've been avoid superlative adjetives and tried to be informative. I expect your feedback to put it in the main namespace, if you consider I've resolved the issues with the first version. If all end well, then I'll do also the spanish version. Tsaorin (talk) 19:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

It still seems to be mainly your own thoughts on the subject, and has very few citations, which would be prohibited original research. Each fact in an article needs to come from a reliable published source; absolutely nothing should be what you think about it. If the sources you've cited are the best ones available about it, it may not be notable. Or it might be; a couple of full-length reviews isn't terrible sourcing, but it's pretty marginal. But regardless, stick to what the sources verify, and leave out what you think is important about it or the like. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:57, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

I see it's hard to convince you. Please, consider the content of the article as informative, because a textbook talks by itself. The article revised has similar standards that others in the category Category:MIT Press books or Category:O'Reilly Media books. You can't be serious about it isn´t notable, having been awared as book of the year by ASIST. In my opinion you are benn too strict with this article. Let it be published and it will be improved by the community. Tsaorin (talk) 09:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Besides, I have extended the references and cites. Tsaorin (talk) 09:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

That's looking a fair bit better. Still some issues with what looks like editorializing/commentary, but I certainly would not delete that version under G11. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 62

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024

• IEEE and Haaretz now available
• Let's Connect Clinics about The Wikipedia Library
• Spotlight and Wikipedia Library tips

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Naenae SC

Hello Seraphimblade,

How are you, I just wanted to let you know that I think there may be some confusion on this article as another admin, That Tired Tarantula, is helping me out, if necessary, please keep in contact with me.

I appretiate your help,

Loganmascarenhas Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I'd just like to let you know that I'm not an admin, but I'm still happy to help out. That Tired Tarantula^Burrow 13:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, i did not realize that, I apologize for any confusion.

Loganmascarenhas Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but you'll have to be a little clearer; I don't understand what you mean. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, for the confusion, please disregard the former messages. Loganmascarenhas (talk) 13:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Article on the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies and accusations of being paid

Hi, I saw that you reverted my deletion of the following message on the wikipedia page of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies: This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (November 2023)

I am one of the main contributors to this page. And I've been accused in the past of being paid for my contributions. So I think this warning message on undisclosed payments was prompted by my edits. However, I can assure you that I am not doing this for anyone else but myself, and that I am not paid to do so or otherwise instructed. In fact, I have no ties to this Institute apart from being a fan. So I'd appreciate starting a discussion on this, and eventually resolving this matter. Thank you ^{User talk:Robinsonodora} 23 April 2024 (UTC)

At the top of this page is a section entitled "Please read before posting". Had you done that, you would have found two things in it. The first states: Post all new sections under a new header at the bottom of this page, not at random. If you make it clear you ignored these instructions by placing it elsewhere, I am likely to ignore your request in turn. The second is: If you are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me. Please actually read those things this time. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

SIERRA ODC Private Limited

FYI. Wikishovel (talk) 11:38, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The McDonough County Voice

I'm curious of your A7 deletion of The McDonough County Voice. As far as I can tell it was a long-standing article and it is now the sole Gannett daily newspaper missing an article. There seems to be a good amount of mentions of it, both on Google and Newspapers.com. I don't think A7 could be appropriately considered as applying to a prominent-looking newspaper like that. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

BeanieFan11, the deleted article contained the single unsourced statement "The McDonough County Voice is owned by Gannett", so indeed made no assertion of significance. Of course if you think you have found enough material to write an article, no problem if you do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

• In the media: Censorship and wikiwashing looming over RuWiki, edit wars over San Francisco politics and another wikirace on live TV

• News and notes: A sigh of relief for open access as Italy makes a slight U-turn on their cultural heritage reproduction law

• WikiConference report: WikiConference North America 2023 in Toronto recap

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Newspapers (Not WP:NOTNEWS)

• Recent research: New survey of over 100,000 Wikipedia users

• Traffic report: O.J., cricket and a three body problem

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Barkley Marathons on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:List of states with limited recognition on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:New York City on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 10:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Seraphimblade. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.PageScribe (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

PageScribe, as stated both above in the "Please read before posting" section and in the notice you would have seen before writing me that email, I do not discuss issues like that by email. If you would like to discuss the matter you raised, please discuss it here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Draft: The Movie Institute

I did not even have time to contest the deletion flag before the article was deleted. I thoroughly researched before writing a single word by reviewing more than 20 other nonprofit writeups on Wikipedia to see what kind of content they covered. Most of the nonprofits I reviewed -- some of which were Texas-based, and others were nationwide -- spoke about the purpose of their organization, what kind of program(s) they run, how they are funded (what they do with the money they receive), and who governs their organization. Some had historical information that spoke to how they came to be, where they had been located, etc. One -- the Susan G Komen Foundation -- also had a couple of sections dedicated to scandals that had taken place in their past. After taking care to stick within similar guidelines of what was published for these nonprofits, I spent many hours writing and re-writing factual content about the 24 years The Movie Institute has existed.

You did not give me an opportunity to understand what you found "promotional" or to make adjustments to the content. This is an unfounded bias and, frankly, is discriminatory coming from volunteers of a nonprofit. I have always thought poorly of educators who would not allow students to cite content from Wikipedia, but I now understand their motivation. WorknMomma (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

WorknMomma, a G11 deletion is not a case of "adjustments", but rather that an entire thing is promotional and would need essentially a fundamental rewrite. Just at the beginning of the article, there's completely inappropriate material like "mission", "vision", slogans, and so on—those are marketese, and almost never appropriate to include in an article. From there, again just as a sampling, Having discovered their method of training was effective in training young people in life and leadership skills (no reference for that, puffery), Video production projects provide MI alumni who want to work in the movie industry with hands-on experience working alongside mentors. MI supports this through corporate video production and team-building events. (brochure style stuff), The Movie Institute is currently working on or planning for... (unless reliable and independent sources have treated those plans as somehow significant, doesn't belong in an article), and similar "About Us" type material from there. If you are used to writing marketing material, you'd have to learn a very different neutral writing style for Wikipedia, as we do not permit any kind of "copy", PR, or "talking up". Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Y'all might want to do a review of multiple other nonprofits then, as what I submitted was based on what was already published from other nonprofits. One that I reviewed was literally organized by the name of each of their campaigns. I'll agree that the Vision should be deleted, but the Mission was literally required as part of the nonprofit charter filing with the State of Texas so was part of that official document. I didn't cite it because I couldn't link to it, but it certainly seemed relevant.

Regarding the "puffery" -- if I had included metrics to back up that statement, would that have been puffery as well? I only saw outcomes spelled out on two nonprofit Wikipedia pages. One was a healthcare related one that spoke to research (difficult to tie research discoveries to dollars), and the other was related to DIFF (a film festival) and listed the films that won in each year. From a journalistic perspective, I get it that you want every sentence to be verifiable, but without drawing the conclusion on how a youth development organization helps a person beyond their youth... what is the point in covering it at all?!? Or, is that your point? It's highly subjective.

Seeing that I am a new writer on the platform and taking a drastic action like deleting every single word written and every citation -- those were from the Dallas Morning News, WFAA, and other legitimate news outlets -- was really disrespectful and revealing about what you think of writers attempting to contribute anything at all. I am personally not concerned about whether the nonprofit I support is on this platform. However, our founder has been donating to Wikipedia for years and sees it as an important place for information. I get it you're not concerned with any kind of sales-ish content, but taking the action the way you did has disillusioned someone who has been a dedicated user and donor of this platform. You could have engaged in a productive dialogue with me but elected not to do so.

You asked about what kind of content I'm used to writing. I'm used to running business units that provide global services to clients across the world. I have input to content that goes into service descriptions, proposals, marketing campaigns, websites, presentations, RFPs, job descriptions, employee reviews, press releases, etc. It's my job to be flexible and open. I expect the same of people who work with and for me. I'm not a full-time writer. I am a volunteer, and writing this just seemed like a good way I could support the organization for all it does in our community. WorknMomma (talk) 02:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:International Churches of Christ on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Hunter Biden on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).

Administrator changes

Nyttend

• JohnOwens
• Killiondude
• MelanieN
• Nihonjoe

Bureaucrat changes

Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

Joe Roe

Oversight changes

GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.

Technical news

• Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.

Miscellaneous

• This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
• Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Southlake Carroll Dragons Football

Regarding this article, there are 56 references, all directly related to the topic, and none from the school or the team. If you would point out those you believe are primary, non-independent, or database stats/passing mentions, I will start working on finding independent sources for those. Thanks in advance. PhillyHarold (talk) 23:11, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

PhillyHarold, there is a section above entitled "Please read before posting". If you had done that, you would have found it to say If you are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me. Please actually read that this time. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, my apologies. I did read the instructions, but there were so many instructions the message went past me. My fault, not yours. I will address this on the article talk page, and again, apologies. PhillyHarold (talk) 23:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Port Erin Women's Detention Camp on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 15:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Israel–Hamas war on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia U.S. Mountain West Online Meeting

Wikimedia US Mountain West

Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West will hold an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, May 14, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. All guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Biography request

Mayukh Mukherjee is an eminemt bengali film actor since his childhood. Reference of his notablity can be found in multiple biography websites. He has worked into multiple film projects. He has a great amount of followers. Joyrukh (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Joyrukh, did you just for some reason want me to know that, or did you have a point? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Hey Seraphimblade,

I have just seen that the biography of this person has been deleted and there I have seen your username. So I just wanted to inform this to you. Joyrukh (talk) 21:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

It looks like I deleted an advertisement at that title some time ago, yes, which will remain so. It does look like there's a draft for it, so if you think you've found good sourcing, you could always help work on that at Draft:Mayukh Mukherjee. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:00, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanking you. Have a great day Joyrukh (talk) 23:11, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

What do you think?

Hi @Seraphimblade and what's up? I just want to tell you how User:PNKAT1993 has recreated Draft:Naveenkumar about good information in minutes after you deleted it per the CSD tag. Should there be block because it seems they aren't here to build an Encyclopedia. It's just your thought. Thanks. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:08, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

sir this is unique content please do published i can not wait PNKAT1993 (talk) 08:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@PNKAT1993, read the message by Deepfriedokra to understand more about Wikipedia. Please desist from creating such an article. It won't benefit us. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 08:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Have to agree, I'm afraid. If you want to promote whatever it is you're doing, you'll need to use a more appropriate venue like a personal website or social media. You won't be permitted to do it here, and if you continue on at it, the result will be a block. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Leonid Brezhnev on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Elizabeth Salmón on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 04:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

• News and notes: Democracy in action: multiple elections

• Special report: Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?

• Arbitration report: Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24

• In the media: Deadnames on the French Wikipedia, and a duel between Russian wikis

• Op-Ed: Wikidata to split as sheer volume of information overloads infrastructure

• Comix: Generations

• Traffic report: Crawl out through the fallout, baby

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:AT&T Corporation on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Conflict of interest?

Hi there. I work for the non-profit Waterfront Alliance as a freelance writer. I am adding two Wikipedia pages re collaborative community-sourced programs they manage. These programs are not products but provide community assistance. I do not understand why the page on Waterfront Edge Design Guidelines was flagged nor why it appears it might be a conflict of interest. I am new to providing content and honestly, truly look for some guidance.

I am wondering if the page was flagged because the content and links have not been fully uploaded or because the name has been registered.

Thanks for your assistance, in advance.

My best to you and all the reviewers. JulieNYNJ (talk) 02:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Russo-Ukrainian War on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rafida on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Atheism on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:SpaceX Starship flight tests on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Dmitri Shostakovich on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Notice of reliable sources noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is The Telegraph and trans issues. Thank you. I am informing you because you have commented on a prior RfC on a similar issue. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 02:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Rescheduled online meeting of the Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West 05/21/2024

The online meeting of the Wikimedians of the U.S. Mountain West originally scheduled for May 14 has been rescheduled for 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, May 21, 2024, at meet.google.com/wbg-wgws-sbj. Please see our new meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Politics, government, and law request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:2022 Alaska's at-large congressional district special election on a "Politics, government, and law" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 00:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Frederick the Great on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

RE: RS Yeoman

I edited the image rationale with more detailed information. This is the first time I have ever used a non-free image, so I appreciate your comments; I'm trying to do everything the right way but I may slip up here and there. Coingeek (talk) 02:01, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Looks a great deal better! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Universal Processing Draft

Good afternoon! I saw that you just deleted my draft. I am going to recreate a new one, and is it possible for you to look again on my draft once I finish? I appreciate it. Selina Lyu (talk) 19:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Selina Lyu, not me personally, no. Drafts are reviewed using the articles for creation process. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:34, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Let Her Burn on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).

Administrator changes

Graham Beards

• Deskana
• Mets501
• Staxringold

Bureaucrat changes

• Deskana
• Warofdreams

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

• Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.

Technical news

• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
• The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.

Miscellaneous

• WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rembrandt on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 June 2024

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation publishes its Form 990 for fiscal year 2022-2023

• Technology report: New Page Patrol receives a much-needed software upgrade

• Deletion report: The lore of Kalloor

• In the media: National cable networks get in on the action arguing about what the first sentence of a Wikipedia article ought to say

• News from the WMF: Progress on the plan — how the Wikimedia Foundation advanced on its Annual Plan goals during the first half of fiscal year 2023-2024

• Opinion: Public response to the editors of Settler Colonial Studies

• Recent research: ChatGPT did not kill Wikipedia, but might have reduced its growth

• Featured content: We didn't start the wiki

• Essay: No queerphobia

• Special report: RetractionBot is back to life!

• Traffic report: Chimps, Eurovision, and the return of the Baby Reindeer

• Comix: The Wikipediholic Family

• Humour: Wikipedia rattled by sophisticated cyberattack of schoolboy typing "balls" in infobox

• Concept: Palimpsestuous

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Salted!

Hi Seraphimblade, I noticed that Sri Ganesh was salted by you. I have created a draft here. What do you think about this version? Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:46, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Jeraxmoira, fair sight better than the spam I deleted. I don't know a great deal about the reliability or significance of most of those sources, though, so I'll leave the rest to whoever reviews it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Rainbow flag on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Benito Mussolini on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Quick correction

If sanctioned by a single admin it turns into a standard admin action after a year, but when based on a consensus at AE it remains in force as an arbitration enforcement action indefinitely. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, that's true of everything but blocks. WP:CTOP states: Additionally, sitewide blocks become ordinary administrator actions one year after imposition, whether or not imposed by a consensus of administrators at AE. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:42, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Oh wow. I've read that at least a hundred times and somehow missed that every time. Well paint me embarrassed. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Not too much so, it's rather dense reading! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:01, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

On that note, I'm tempted to motion for ArbCom to assume the block. I wanted to let AE play out without interference - you all need to feel empowered to do what's right - but now that this decision has been made I think it should face a higher degree of scrutiny for an unblock. What are your thoughts? Barkeep49 (talk) 00:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Barkeep49, I know there was private material involved last time that may still be relevant. So if you think that's the way to go, I've got no problem with it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

CDK Company

Hi, I really hate to ask this of a specific person, but since I noticed you made an attempt to clean up CDK Company, I wonder if you wouldn't mind taking a couple minutes and just nominating it for deletion on my behalf. I've made a request (twice), but it's been ignored. My rationale can be copied from this section. Thanks either way. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:14, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look if I have time. If I nominated something for deletion, I would need to be sure I think it ought to be deleted. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:41, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Follow-up on Sri Ganesh

Hi Seraphimblade. Would you be okay if I made a formal request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease to move the draft I have created here. I believe drafts of salted articles are rarely accepted through AfC unless an admin stumbles upon them. If not, please let me know if this should be sent to WP:DRV instead. Thank you! Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Jeraxmoira, just wait for the review. I've had salted drafts accepted before, and of course will remove the protection should the reviewer accept. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:34, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Regarding AE Sorabino

I most likely exceeded 500 words with my statements (last being this one) - should I remove or scratch at least that last one or leave it as it is. It was unintentional, I simply lost track, it slipped my mind completely, no wonder as someone who can't remember the last time participating in AE discussion, if ever. Maybe I was a little bit caried a way too after being accused without evidence of posting "flat lie". Anyway, should I remove it, or leave it ...? ౪ Santa ౪^99° 21:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't intend to remove anything that was already there before I posted the reminder, was just noting that those over the limit should request an extension before putting anything further. Other than that, it's up to you. Of course if anyone has responded to it, then it should be struck rather than removed if you wish to do so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I will remove my last post since Levivich still didn't respond to it - is that OK? ౪ Santa ౪^99° 21:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

As long as no one has responded, that is fine. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

To be on the safe side I struck post that are left in vacuum without reply - if you think that removal would be better ping me and I will remove them or you can do it when you get there. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 22:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

• News and notes: WMF board elections and fundraising updates

• Special report: Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification vote underway, new Council may surpass power of Board

• In focus: How the Russian Wikipedia keeps it clean despite having just a couple dozen administrators

• Discussion report: Wikipedians are hung up on the meaning of Madonna

• In the media: War and information in war and politics

• Sister projects: On editing Wikisource

• Obituary: Hanif Al Husaini, Salazarov, Hyacinth, and PirjanovNurlan

• Opinion: Etika: a Pop Culture Champion

• Gallery: Spokane Willy's photos

• Op-Ed: Why you should not vote in the 2024 WMF BoT elections

• Crossword: On a day of independence, beat crosswords into crossploughshares

• Humour: A joke

• Cobwebs: Counting to a billion — manuscripts don't burn

• Recent research: Is Wikipedia Politically Biased? Perhaps

• Traffic report: Talking about you and me, and the games people play

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hi, again, just to be sure, please tell me if your Sorabino AE conclusion include AfD. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Anyone can nominate an article at AfD. The restriction doesn't affect that. If the AfD were closed as "merge" or "redirect", that would be a valid establishment of consensus to do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate it. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 01:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2024).

Administrator changes

• Elli
• HouseBlaster
• Pickersgill-Cunliffe

• Brianga
• De728631
• Georgewilliamherbert
• Hyacinth (deceased)
• ProveIt
• The Night Watch

Technical news

• Local administrators can now add new links to the bottom of the site Tools menu without using JavaScript. Documentation is available on MediaWiki. (T6086)

Miscellaneous

• The Community Wishlist is re-opening on 15 July 2024. Read more

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Security Assurance by the Building Research Establishment

I didn't create Security Assurance by the Building Research Establishment, but I don't think it was unduly promotional. Perhaps draftifying it would have been better. LeapTorchGear (talk) 16:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

LeapTorchGear, there was nothing salvageable in there to draft, as, yes, it was promotional. I'll give you the sources used in it if you want to take a go at creating a neutral article, but if

you consider an article based almost entirely on primary sources and press releases which talks up how great something is to not be promotional, you might consider getting some more experience before you have a go at that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

A goat for you!

All your friends will want one now.

Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 20:11, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I think? Never played Goat Simulator myself, but I know some people who have really gotten a kick out of it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

ba dum tsh. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrative action review regarding an action which you performed. The thread is Unilateral overturning of a close by Seraphimblade. Thank you. – Joe (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Amaravati

I have replied to you about Amaravati unblock request, without even checking my reply messages and clarfying your doubts with me, and without even updating me back, you just blocked me. This is very unfortunate, when I am clearly being polite with you. Ustadeditor2011 (talk) 16:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 63

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

• One new partner
• 1Lib1Ref
• Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

AE Sorabino

G'day Seraphimblade, we have problem with page Duchy of Saint Sava, which was a subject of AE on Sorabino, last week I believe. Now, both Sorabino and Levivich changing content without mandatory consensuses as per AE conclusion. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 17:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Prior to taking any of the actions of moving, merging and redirecting, or blanking and redirecting the article, consensus must be established for such an action. ^{(emphasis added)} ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I understand, we have whole host of problematic content disputes anyway. ౪ Santa ౪^99° 17:38, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

• Discussion report: Internet users flock to Wikipedia to debate its image policy over Trump raised-fist photo

• News and notes: Wikimedia community votes to ratify Movement Charter; Wikimedia Foundation opposes ratification

• News from the WMF: Wikimedia Foundation Board resolution and vote on the proposed Movement Charter

• Essay: Reflections on editing and obsession

• In the media: What's on Putin's fork, the court's docket, and in Harrison's book?

• Obituary: JamesR

• Crossword: Vaguely bird-shaped crossword

• Humour: Joe Biden withdraws RfA, Donald Trump selects co-nom

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

Isabelle Belato

• Ian.thomson
• Modussiccandi

Interface administrator changes

Izno

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49

Technical news

• Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
• Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Brownstones Coffee speedy deletion

Hello Seraphimblade, just wanted to get your thinking regarding what just happened with the above article. It came up on my New York-related AfD list, so I was quite curious to look into it. At first glance, it seemed like a horrendous and obvious attempt at promotion—but then again I have enough experience to not be impressed by a first impression. Indeed, I immediately began to find rather in-depth coverage; as you may know, Newsday is the major newspaper on Long Island (I remember a time when it was marketed heavily in New York City and elsewhere, and maybe still is). When I came back after a break, I saw that you speedied it. I didn't get the chance to dig any deeper, and obviously I now feel deterred from doing so. I was wondering if you noticed my quick initial attempt to bring the article up to snuff. Now, I noticed from the deletion log that the article was created years ago and discarded then for promotion, so I was wondering if that fact had any bearing on your current decision, and I'm also wondering how an article that was nominated for the normal deletion process can suddenly be removed from the queue like that without any further consideration. StonyBrook _babble 04:35, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

StonyBrook, the current version of the article was totally promotional, so it was eligible for G11. That said, if you think you have found enough source material about the subject to demonstrate notability, and can write a neutral article about the subject based on those sources, the fact that it was speedied does not in any way prohibit you from doing that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick and informative reply Seraphimblade. I would definitely be interested in taking a crack at it; but before I do, I will be checking for the quality and quantity of sources that might be out there. StonyBrook _babble 05:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

An invitation to a U.S. Mountain West online meeting

Wikimedia US Mountain West

The Wikipedia users of Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming are invited to an online meeting from 8:00 to 9:00 PM MDT, Tuesday evening, August 13, 2024, at meet.google.com/kfu-topq-zkd. Anyone interested in the Mountain West or the future direction of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement is encouraged to attend. There is no obligation to participate and all guests are welcome. Please see our meeting page for details.

If you don't wish to receive these invitations any more, please remove your username from our Wikipedia:Meetup/US Mountain West/Invitation list. Thanks.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 10 August 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

• In the media: Portland pol profile paid for from public purse

• Recent research: STORM: AI agents role-play as "Wikipedia editors" and "experts" to create Wikipedia-like articles, a more sophisticated effort than previous auto-generation systems

• In focus: Twitter marks the spot

• News and notes: Another Wikimania has concluded.

• Special report: Nano or just nothing: Will nano go nuclear?

• Opinion: HouseBlaster's RfA debriefing

• Traffic report: Ball games, movies, elections, but nothing really weird

• Humour: I'm proud to be a template

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Standard offer or equivalent?

Re this editing restriction, I think it's time for me to appeal for a "standard offer" return to normal status. Where would you say is the right place for me to make my case? Dicklyon (talk) 04:23, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

I found WP:Banning policy#Appeals of bans imposed by the community which says WP:AN is the place. Let me know if you have any advice. Dicklyon (talk) 04:35, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Dicklyon, WP:AN would indeed be the correct place to make your appeal for modification or removal of that restriction. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Nessum Alliance

Hi! I'd like to redirect this to Nessum. Can you release the lock on it? ~Kvng (talk) 14:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Kvng, I removed the protection from it so you can do that. It looks like the spamming was a while back, but if that becomes an issue again, let me know and I can protect the redirect. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Recently deleted page

According to the message I received on my first article post, it was deleted by you because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.

Pardon my lack of understanding and knowledge surrounding the wiki world as I am a newbie. I understand your concerns regarding the deletion of my Wikipedia page, and I appreciate your feedback. However, I strongly believe that my page does not solely represent an ambiguous advertisement. The sources I provided demonstrated the notability and relevance of the topic, showcasing multiple perspectives beyond just promotional content.

I acknowledge that based on a previous users feedback, my page may have required revisions to meet Wikipedia's encyclopedic standards. Unfortunately, I found the deletion notice lacking in specific guidance on how to address the issues. I'm eager to improve the page and would greatly appreciate more detailed direction on the necessary changes.

How can I remedy the article? I am looking to do more on other artists and find this extremely frustrating and discouraging. From the looks and sounds of your talk page instructions along with page boasting years of expertise in Wikipedia, your authority level seems to lack a tad of leadership and direction to fellow newcomers. It's a bit unwelcoming. Perhaps you can assist an aspiring wiki contributor on clarifying the specific aspects that need rewriting on an article for a more neutral point of view. Is there a wiki page dedicated in providing examples of acceptable sources that can be added to enhance a page's credibility. The page I created featured a write up from a credible news source / website yet it was not enough.

I'm committed to creating a high-quality Wikipedia page that adheres to the community's guidelines. Please offer more concrete guidance or direction to someone with patience or time to help me achieve this goal. I look forward to your response and the opportunity to revise and resubmit my page.

Thank you for your time and consideration — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlexanderBarrio (talk • contribs) 03:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

AlexanderBarrio, I have conversations with people, not chatbots. If you would like to have such a conversation, please leave me a message in your words with no use of bots/LLMs. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Lol. Complete disregard and arrogance at its best. This is what gatekeeping looks like for content development for Wikipedia. Instead of guidance, direction, we receive these condescending replies. Your page promotes boasting and pride of being a deletionist. You would think that 19 years of being in this community you would be a “solutionist” or leader. I get it. Taking a read on your Deletionist post, you enjoy this type of attention. You likely thrive off of conflict and debates. You’re so authoritative. No chat bots. Just someone speaking to you in terms that you would think someone of your calibre should understand. Thanks for disregarding my post, my attempts to find resolutions, my attempts to learn, my attempt to remedy the article, although I followed the directions given to me and added sources. You’re a wikipedia champ. Your tonality and lack of respect is repulsive. Go on with your day, Inflate your ego and false sense of authority by policing the mean streets of Wikipedia. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 13:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Not only am I pretty good at spotting chatbots, but I do double check with GPTZero. So, yes, it was chatbot-written, and I'm happy to confidently say that. If you would like people to be willing to help you, I suggest you consider the way you behaved just above, and think about why people might not be too inclined to do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:36, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

For you to imply for me to "consider how I behave" is telling. At first I was under the impression that you are arrogant and condescending. Now, based on "your tonality" and "choice of words", I can see that you patronize. Perhaps your insecurities and disbelief that someone would actually challenge your actions and call you out on your nonsense & unprofessionalism is worthy of some retaliatory remarks such as the language you chose. lol. "Consider the way you behaved just above" as in I shouldn't behave that way with you? Is this poor behaviour? How has Wikipedia not called you out for the mismanagement of articles, bias opinions and poor representation of what I believed to be a platform for free & credible speech? You are one of the people that we bank on for growth of a platform? You are the judge, jury and executioner. Furthermore you say "think about why people might not be too inclined to do that"; bud, you in no shape, way or form represent or speak for "the people". Step your game up and help serve the community rather than get into these prideful back and forth rebuttals with people seeking support and direction. I wonder if the seniors of this organization approve this type of behaviour from people like you. Hey everyone, watch how you speak or behave around Seraphimblade, he is ultra sensitive person and will use his powers against you lol. He will also resort to making accusations of using chatbots. Here's the kicker. We are living in a world where people with disabilities will use things like chatbots to assist them. Are they not people? That within itself is so prejudice. Believe it or not Mr "I Don't Speak to Bots", some individuals rely on tools to communicate due to disabilities or language barriers. Your comments are offensive, condescending and patronizing. Whats most concerning is that you are roaming these Wikipedia hallways with a chip on your shoulder, and, based on your tonality and choice of words & language, narcissistic characteristics that are mixed with a non inclusive mind state or empathy for others that may need to resort to "chatbots or LLms". Simply Pathetic. Assistive technology is not a BOT, it is a bridge. Let's connect on content, not assumptions. I am also going to do a deep dive and see if there is some sort of policy against the use of "Chatbots" on Wikipedia since the people that remove / delete articles demand to speak to "people", not chatbots. And still, we are here with no support, sense of direction or guidance. If you are the representation of "contributors and volunteers", respectfully speaking, Wikipedia has failed us. Put your ego aside, humble yourself. The way you handled this entire situation is a classic example of superiority complex. Humble yourself and watch how you speak to others. Perhaps help them. God bless you pal. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 18:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

You shouldn't behave that way with anyone. I'm part of "anyone", so I suppose that means me too. Realistically, you're probably better to do it with me; anything you can call me I've probably been called worse, so I don't much care and am pretty unlikely to ask that you be sanctioned for it. If you behave this way with other editors, they might request that you be blocked, and they may well succeed. And I get challenged all the time; that's par for the course for any editor, but it is expected that even when disagreeing, editors will do so civilly. As to the "assistive technology" bit, that's something like text-to-speech/speech-to-text. In that case, it's facilitating a conversation between people, but it still is between people. If it's going through a bot, I'm no longer talking to the other person at all; I'm talking to the bot. I have no idea if they understood what I said (and I can't see from responses that they probably didn't, allowing me to clarify), and actually I have no idea if they even read what I said, or just fed it to the bot. So, it's just a waste of time, and I'm rather averse to wasting my time. That's why I won't talk to bots. If someone's disabled, and that causes them some difficulty in typing or the like, I'll be every bit patient with that, but I still want to talk to the person. There's no policy per se against using LLMs on talk pages (you definitely should not in article space), but you will find, in practice, that a lot of people feel exactly the way I do about the practice, and will tell you that they are not interested in having a conversation where one side isn't actually participating. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you plan on advising me as to why the page was deleted. I changed the language and added additional notable sources as per the kind direction and suggestion of a fellow user. We have gone back and fourth many times with you consistently disregarding my questions, or requests for direction or guidance. It appears that you would rather be combative and insist on challenging my thoughts and opinions of you. It is very one sided. Clearly I am not a chat bot and whatever program you used is absolutely wrong. Furthermore, you continue to use language that suggests that I would be penalized for raising concerns or speaking out. Sounds extremely non democratic. It can make a user feel as if we have no voice, no room for appeal or honest constructive feedback. We have to tolerate people such as you telling us "I don't much care and am pretty unlikely to ask that you be sanctioned for it". That sounds threatening. Please redirect me to the right personal that can guide me on what my article lacked in and what could have done in such a little timeframe to have appealed it. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 19:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

"I don't much care and am pretty unlikely to ask that you be sanctioned for it" - interpretation: "I don't much care and although I have the means to escalate this and have you sanctioned for using free speech, I will allow you to go on."

I also do not appreciate being told "If you behave this way with other editors, they might request that you be blocked, and they may well succeed". Looks like my donations to this organization might not be as appreciated as I initially thought. This makes great content for a doc. Nonetheless, this experience with you has been eye opening at the very least. Ironincally, this experience makes me ponder how much content and "truth" is being denied from the public by its gatekeeping editors. Surely, you do not represent all of them however your choice of words sounds compelling enough to make me feel like this is a "controlled" platform ran by authoritative, one sided editors who'd rather not support, assist or guide but "waste their time" being combative with aspiring contributors. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 19:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I am the right person. As to why the article was deleted, it was written in a promotional way, and promotion is not permitted on Wikipedia. As some examples, but by no means an exhaustive list: His contributions have undeniably helped pave the way (don't editorialize that something is "undeniable"), That love came in a garage sale treasure box purchased by his father, full of vinyl & cassettes, which is where he first came face to face with (articles should be written in literal language, not flowery stuff like that, so he first heard their albums after receiving them as gifts; he did not "come face to face" with them), Notable for his influence on (don't editorialize that it was "notable", and what reliable and independent sources confirm that he was an influence?), has held several key positions in the music industry, each of which contributed to his reputation for creative leadership (full of puff terms), and it just goes on and on in a "Look how neat he is!" type of tone. Articles must be neutral in both tone and content, and stick to presenting facts verified by reliable and independent sources. Also, while the sources don't matter to a G11 deletion, which sources do you think demonstrate notability? I just had a look, and I don't see any cited in the article which would. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time and energy to giving me the feedback. That was very informative and thats the type of feedback us new writers could use for improvement. I aspire to raise awareness and information about artists and more so specific niche markets such as latin urban music. I have to admit that while gathering information and researching, I took excerpts from the official biography without properly annotating. As per notable resources, it really depends on what you consider notable. I included a write up from newswire and another from raised by latinos talking about the celebration of hip hop and the commemorative clothing launch paying homage to the pioneers of the music. "tribute to the many Latin artists who helped Hip-Hop’s inception and contributed to its ever-changing evolution." The subject of my article was within the honourable mention of all the artists. Is there a way to keep a draft of the article I wrote or has it been completely deleted from fixing? I would like to take the opportunity to learn and adhere to the writing and editing norms of wiki. I feel like with time, not only can I fix the article, I will also be able to elaborate and contribute more. I noticed that another piece that I added to an existing page dedicated to canadian hip hop was deleted as well. Some of the artists mentioned in that particular article have a wiki page and did not quite understand why it was removed. At first glance, I assumed that it could have been because I named it Canadian Latin Hip Hop however, within the article, there is sub-genres of Punjabi hip hop, indiginous hip hop and french hip hop. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 20:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't restore advertisements. I will, if you like, give you the sources that were used in the deleted article. Do note that "Newswire" sources just reprint press releases, and those are neither reliable nor independent; they're written by the subject themself and generally subject to no fact-checking whatsoever. You can find some examples of sources here with how the community has assessed their reliability, with the ones in green considered generally reliable—that is by no means an exhaustive listing of reliable sources, just ones that commonly come up, but it should give you an idea what you'd be looking for when checking whether there are reliable sources about a subject available. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:21, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I would greatly appreciate it that. To be clear, although you reference my article as advertisement, in no means or ways was I trying to project that. I have a list of fundamental artists which I wish to do articles on however, due to the time of inception and its niche market in Canada, it's difficult to pull up old interviews. Most of the articles are either gone or in the online time machine. Is there a way to present notable sources such as old newspaper clippings or youtube videos to confirm or validate as a source? i.e An interview on an American tv show owned by MTV however it is no longer on television or available online. AlexanderBarrio (talk) 21:35, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Once you become eligible for it, you can check out The Wikipedia Library; they include a lot of resources, including an archive newspaper service with archives of some papers dating back as far as the 19th century. You could also try asking a librarian at your local public library; they quite often are helpful in tracking down and getting hold of material like that or figuring out where it can be done. That said, though, interviews are not normally independent sources if they're just the subject of the article talking about themself. Some interviews do also contain some biographical material and the like, so those portions normally would be considered independent material. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Feedback requests from the Feedback Request Service

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies on a "All RFCs" request for comment, and at Talk:Mughal dynasty on a "History and geography" request for comment, and at Talk:Twisters (film) on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Megumin

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Megumin. 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. Reader of Information (talk) 13:59, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Josh Jacobson - bot

Dear Seraphimblade,

I am writing to respectfully request a review and reconsideration of the speedy deletion nomination for the article on Josh Jacobson. I believe that this article, which documents the contributions of a notable local artist, Josh Jacobson, aligns with Wikipedia’s goals of providing reliable and informative content about individuals who have made a significant impact on their communities.

Rationale for Retention:

1. Notability: Josh Jacobson is a recognized public artist in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, whose works, such as the murals "Confluence," "Inner City," and "Prairie Petals: Lilies in Luminous Frames," are integral to the city’s cultural and public art landscape. These works have been commissioned by reputable organizations and are celebrated as cultural landmarks, demonstrating Jacobson's notability in the field of public art.
2. Neutral Tone: The article was written with the intention of providing an encyclopedic overview of Jacobson's contributions to public art, avoiding promotional language. Any content that may have been perceived as promotional can be revised to ensure a strictly neutral tone, focusing solely on verifiable facts about his work and impact.
3. Verifiability: The article includes references to independent sources that discuss Jacobson’s work, such as local news coverage and official city announcements. These sources are intended to verify the significance of his contributions and align with Wikipedia’s standards for reliable sourcing.

Request for Revision Opportunity:

If the article still does not meet the required standards, I am eager to make the necessary revisions. I kindly request guidance on specific areas that need improvement so that I can refine the content to fully comply with Wikipedia’s guidelines.

I understand that the initial deletion may have been based on an assessment by the bot or model used for identifying potential issues with content. However, I believe this is a case where the decision may not fully reflect the article's intent and content. I am committed to ensuring that the article reflects the neutrality, notability, and verifiability required for inclusion on Wikipedia. Please consider allowing the article to remain in the userspace or draft space for further refinement.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 06:00, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Dfsjlk1, I am not going to have a discussion with a chatbot. If you would like to have a conversation, please post a message in your own words, without use of a chatbot/LLM. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Yes, these are my words talk. Dfsjlk1 (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

same here Dfsjlk1 (talk) 22:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

FLORIDA CURRICULUM (GRADE K DELETED)

HOW CAN AN ARTICLE PROVIDING DETAILS AND FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY IN AN EFFORT TO HELP EDUCATORS AND PARENTS THAT MAY NOT BE VERSED IN HISTORY....BE CONSIDERED AMBIGUOUS OR ADVERTISING??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JPGonz (talk • contribs) 18:30, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kuči (tribe) on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Yasuke on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Deletion Review

Hi Seraphimblade,

You recently reviewed my company profile [./Https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php%3Ftitle=Draft:Midlands_Parking_Ltd&oldid=1243529332 article], and you deemed it (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion). Please note that I feel it is a subjective assessment and that you have miscategorized it. All that article include is company profile, their services and products, and their operation. Nothing else. Not a single promotional statement as per my understanding. However, if you feel there can be some changes, could you please let me know so that I make the changes accordingly?

Thank you! Srezah (talk) 12:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

Pppery

Interface administrator changes

Pppery

Oversighter changes

Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

• Courcelles
• GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Request

Hi.Seraphimblade, I reviewed Draft:Sri Ganesh and I think draft is clearly notable then I try to accepted this draft but I see you fully protected Sri Ganesh for creation, so, I request to you please unprotect this title, after that I will be able to accepted this request from Draft namespace. Happy editing --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 06:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Aviram7, looks an awful lot better than the spamvertisements that were there before! I unprotected it so you can accept the draft. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah I see, Thanks a lot for unprotect this title on my request. Happy editing --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 07:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 September 2024

• News and notes: WikiCup enters final round, MCDC wraps up activities, 17-year-old hoax article unmasked

• In the media: AI is not playing games anymore. Is Wikipedia ready?

• Recent research: Simulated Wikipedia seen as less credible than ChatGPT and Alexa in experiment

• News from the WMF: Meet the 12 candidates running in the WMF Board of Trustees election

• Wikimania: A month after Wikimania 2024

• Serendipity: What it's like to be Wikimedian of the Year

• Traffic report: After the gold rush

• Humour: Local man halfway through rude reply no longer able to recall why he hates other editor

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Contao

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Contao. 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. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Deletion Feedback Request: VAULT Festival

Hi Seraphimblade,

You recently deleted the page on VAULT Festival as you deemed it (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion).

After the first submission of the page earlier today where it got flagged as being (unintentionally) advertising or promotion, I had made amendments to the article to neutralise the article further and add more external citations. So I wanted to check if the revisions I had added to the page had been taken into account in your review and subsequent deletion?

If they have been taken into account already, and you feel there needs further changes, could you let me know where so that I make the changes?

Thanks in advance for your help,

Andy AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

AndygeorgeHAC, as you have been writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade, just to be clear, I wasn't deliberately writing "promotional" material. It was deemed that way by others which is a perspective I politely contest.

But yes, I can confirm I am not being paid or compensated for editing Wikipedia and am not being asked to edit under employment or internship either.

Thanks

Andy AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 20:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Politely or otherwise contest it, but it sure was, both before and after your edit. From the very first sentence: VAULT Festival was one of the largest and most diverse arts festivals in the United Kingdom, celebrated annually in London between its inception in 2012 until it's closure in 2024 (the "largest" bit is sourced to [28], a clear editorial puff piece completely inappropriate as a source for factual statements, and held, not "celebrated"), underground warren of electrifying experiences, with each festival showcasing thousands of bold and brilliant new shows ("electrifying", "bold", "brilliant", etc., are puffery, leave the adjectives out), epic late night parties (do not editorialize that they were "epic"), and the whole thing is talking it up, often from unacceptable sources such as editorials. Articles should be strictly neutral in tone and content, and stick to factual information from reliable and independent sources, not editorials, fluff pieces, or the like. If you were truly unable to see how what you wrote was entirely promotional, I strongly suggest you gain experience by editing existing articles for a while before you try writing an entirely new one. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers Seraphimblade. I appreciate them. I'd love to have another go at it if you're able to revert it to a draft for me? I'd suggest that I could notify you when I've had another go at it for your review before it's re-submitted. How does that sound? AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 07:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I do not restore advertisements, but if you like I would provide a list of sources which were used in the deleted article. You do not need to notify me if you try it again, that is what the review process is for. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Article Deletion - Feedback Request

Hi Seraphimblade,

I am new and this is my first time writing a wikipedia article, and you have deleted my first article draft, which was about Georgia Rotary Student Program (GRSP). Rereading it now I can see how it may sound promotional as I am used to writing in a persuasive tone for my college essays and the tone used for wikipedia articles is completely different. I don't know if you can still see it since it has been deleted but from your point of view, how much should I rewrite or delete to make it wikipedia worth? What I am trying to ask is, if i rewrite it do you think i can submit it again or will it keep being deleted? I believe it is a notable program that has existed for decades and it derived from Rotary International, a notable organization. As such, I think it is worth informing about the existence of this program, just as many other Rotary programs that have their own wikipedia article. The problem too is that although it has been around for a long time, it has been overlooked and it has been hard to find secondary sources to write about it without relying on the official website for the most part. Can I still post an article with few secondary sources? What can be done in such cases? Like I said, I am new here and I wanted your opinion before I start rewriting this article piece.

I hope you can help me out! Thanks in advance for your time. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 05:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Wikiproject2024, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you have a financial interest in what you are writing about, including but not limited to being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't have any financial interest in what I am writing. I had to write a wikipedia article as part of a college class and I could write about anything and noticed this program didn't have a wikipedia page. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 16:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. In answer to your question, articles should be primarily based upon reliable and independent sources, since those have no motivation to "talk up" their subject or the like. Generally, stuff a subject writes about itself will be promotional, and of course no one can blame them for that, but for that reason, self-published and non-independent sources should be used cautiously and sparingly, if at all. If there isn't much source material like that about a subject at all, the subject may not be notable, which generally indicates there shouldn't be an article about it, but "not much" isn't "not any". So, you could certainly give it another go, making sure this time to stay neutral (and leave out the link farms—if an article's subject has an official website, one link to that site may be placed at the bottom of the article in an "External links" section, but article text should otherwise not have external links.) If no independent sources thought something the organization did was significant enough to write about, it's probably not significant enough to merit mention in the article either. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Ko may ko loe

Nga loe ma tha admin. min may loe? 223.206.45.210 (talk) 09:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

That makes no sense. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 64

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 64, July – August 2024

• The Hindu Group joins The Wikipedia Library
• Wikimania presentation
• New user script for easily searching The Wikipedia Library

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dropstitch_Inflatable_Fabric Deletion Request

Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Dropstitch_Inflatable_Fabric was recently deleted by you. Can I understand more? It says it was promotional? I didnt promote any company or mention a company ( except historical patent for Goodyear company)

I have no financial interest in this. Its a fascinating material that I have worked with before. I want to create the page and start researching and adding technical patents and others about its history and creation. Bellspringsteen212 (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Bellspringsteen212, well, thanks for clarifying up front regarding the financial bit, saves me having to ask. So far as the rest, I think the main issue here was a poor selection of sources. The entire article talks the stuff up, with material like he history of the fabric most likely started with velvet processes. ("most likely" according to what reliable and independent source?), interest and usage of the material increased (that's "sourced" to a YouTube channel belonging to a company that sells it, so of course they're going to say people are interested in it; do any independent sources confirm that?), Inflatable Stand Up Paddle Boards (shouldn't be capitalized; don't ask me why, but in my experience miscapitalization like that is really common in promotional material) And more examples (any variant of "and more" is meaningless marketese that doesn't provide any actual information), every point under the "uses" part links to a "reference" that's actually someone selling it (which is reference spamming), and there is not one single reliable and independent source used in the article (the patent is primary; all the others are sales sites). So, what you would need to do is first look to find source material which is both reliable and, critically, independent. Anyone selling it isn't independent. If there is not a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material available about this subject, then it is not notable and it would not be appropriate to have an article about it. If you can find a good quantity of such material, stick to facts that the actual independent sources verify, since they don't have any incentive to talk it up, and present them in a neutral tone. Maybe you think it's neat stuff, but by reading the article, I shouldn't be able to tell what you think about it at all. I should just find out what reliable and independent sources have had to say. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Good feedback. Thanks. Will work more on it. Bellspringsteen212 (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Deleted page - InMerge Innovation Summit

Dear, Seraphimblade. First of all, I want to mention that I do not and will not receive any compensation for my article. Secondly, I reviewed very carefully my article again and didn't find anything related to spam or advertising. InMerge is an important innovation event for the region and Azerbaijan. It is the first such huge initiative in the Azerbaijan, and it is organized annually since 2022. As I mentioned in the article, lots of notable business people, investors, like Steve Wozniak, J. B. Straubel participate in the event. It is not just the product of one organization or company.

I do not breach neutrality rule. In the article, I just described events which were happened during the summits. I also cited numerous references as sources.

I have been editing in the Azerbaijani Wikipedia for years. I do not usually create articles in English Wikipedia, but I am always ready to get feedbacks. Please help me improve the article so that it can be generated again. Əhməd Qurbanov (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Əhməd Qurbanov, I do not know what the Azerbaijani Wikipedia's policies are, but the English Wikipedia does not permit promotional material, and that includes any kind of "talking up". As some examples, but by no means an exhaustive list: The summit aims to... (we don't care what it "aims" to, we care what reliable and independent sources confirm it has done), with participation from influential businessmen ("influential" is puffery, don't editorialize that they are "influential"), It fosters dynamic discussions on cutting-edge innovations and offers valuable insights (same here, "dynamic", "cutting-edge", "valuable", etc., are all the same kind of puffery and editorializing), and the rest is essentially "About Us" kind of junk. Articles should present what reliable and independent sources verify in a strictly neutral way, without any kind of "talking up". Since you kept inappropriately recreating the article in mainspace, I protected the title against recreation, but you can see if you can fix the draft to stick to reliable and independent sources and write it neutrally, and then request review by articles for creation. If AfC accepts the draft, I will unprotect the title. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Dear, Seraphimblade. I edited very carefully, and removed all the points which can breach rules. Please, if you can review within the Articles for creation, assist me. Əhməd Qurbanov (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

You have submitted the draft for AfC review. You will need to wait for that to be reviewed in the normal course. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Can you give any feedbacks? Əhməd Qurbanov (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

The reviewer will do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:05, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: History and geography request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Athena on a "History and geography" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Religion and philosophy request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:International Churches of Christ on a "Religion and philosophy" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Editor abusing their second chance

I noticed that User:Nonameprivate triggered our new spam blacklist against two different sites, techbullion and techannouncer which were blacklisted by Kuru as part of a related spam ring. I then saw that Nonameprivate added a superfluous reference to a similarly dodgy site here, which I promptly removed. I was just going to give Nonameprivate a "unreliable source" warning until I saw that they'd be recently blocked for suspected undisclosed WP:PAID activity; given that, I'm inclined to reblock them, but I wanted to get your opinion first. User:Kuru, are you able to determine if verifiednews24.com is part of the same spam ring? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:03, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

This is ridiculous, it seems absolutely everything has an allegation of WP:PAID even if it isn't.

I've never seen the "new black list" and have never been aware of them even being on a black list or even considered as "spam". Nonameprivate (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Ohnoitsjamie, straight from article spamming to link/ref spamming? Certainly no problem from me with reblocking. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:33, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done, thank you! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

For the record; the techbullion nest of blacklisted domains is for an SEO group called the Rich Media Network Ltd. The "verifiednews24" domain belongs to another nest that I have not run across before, but seems to be run by "PRfire". Both SEO firms are London-based. Will have to poke around some more, but certainly bad faith sourcing again. Sam Kuru (talk) 02:12, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Evidence. Please add your evidence by October 10, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Backlash to diversity and inclusion/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Party Guide/Introduction. For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 12:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

• In the media: Courts order Wikipedia to give up names of editors, legal strain anticipated from "online safety laws"

• Community view: Indian courts order Wikipedia to take down name of crime victim, editors strive towards consensus

• Serendipity: A Wikipedian at the 2024 Paralympics

• Opinion: asilvering's RfA debriefing

• News and notes: Are you ready for admin elections?

• Gallery: Are Luddaites defending the English Wikipedia?

• Recent research: Article-writing AI is less "prone to reasoning errors (or hallucinations)" than human Wikipedia editors

• Traffic report: Jump in the line, rock your body in time

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:11, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: Biographies request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Georgi Pulevski on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 12:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Vince McMahon on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 23:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

• Asilvering
• Significa liberdade

• Good Olfactory
• Hesperian
• I JethroBT
• TommyBoy
• Woody

CheckUser changes

• Barkeep49
• Izno

• Doug Weller
• Spicy

Guideline and policy news

• Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections.
• Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
• An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
• Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

• If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Islamic Action Front on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Confused

Wasn't the Total.Caddy12459 account pro-Ashton Forbes and the MM919 against him? I reverted one for BLP violations and the other for adding Forbes' non-notable opinion to an article. Polygnotus (talk) 08:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks like bad hand sockpuppetry to me, but I suppose it could be different people. In any case, though, it's very unlikely that two brand new editors would, at the same instant, come across the same article on the same non-notable individual. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Ah, interesting. I hadn't considered that. Thanks! That Forbes guy was promoting a free energy scam on his YouTube. Polygnotus (talk) 19:39, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Human rights in China

You'd expect this to be a really short article, but I guess the topic is actually "human rights violations in China". Anyway, there is an editor who keeps posting the same stuff over and over again. Can you help them understand why they get reverted, ideally without blocking them? Should I request page protection? If you are busy I'll ask someone else of course. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 02:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Polygnotus, it looks like there's an ongoing discussion about this at Talk:Human rights in China. I might suggest expressing your thoughts there, at least as a first step. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:51, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

OK, thank you again! Polygnotus (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

File:MammalTalkBand.jpg

Hi Seraphimblade. Since you speedily deleted Mammal Talk, perhaps you could take a look at File:MammalTalkBand.jpg? I can't see the article, but my guess is that the image fails WP:FREER and could be deleted per WP:F7. I did tag it for speedy deletion per WP:F5, and it probably doesn't matter in the end; however, {{rnfu}} is faster and does let the uploader know that they'll need a free image if they want to someday take another crack at creating an article about the band. Do you think this meets F7? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Marchjuly, I would agree with you. If it turns out the band is notable and a non-promotional article is written about it, since the band still exists, someone could take a free image of them, so it would fail NFCC#1 as replaceable by free media. Though at this point, it probably makes little difference, since it will be deleted as F5 anyway, but certainly something to consider if it comes up going forward. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:17, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

Hi Seraphimblade. I've answered your question in my talk page. Lgrave (talk) 11:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Lgrave, thanks for letting me know (and I'd believe you well enough at that; I've certainly seen fan-type editing cause the same types of issues as COI editing). My advice would be to find reliable and independent sources (IMDB isn't one), and stick to presenting facts that such sources verify in a neutral tone (so, no "proud Latina" or anything like that). If there is not a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material about this individual available, that would indicate they are not notable and it would not be appropriate to write an article about them. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

OK, thank you! Lgrave (talk) 09:31, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

• News and notes: One election's end, another election's beginning

• Recent research: "As many as 5%" of new English Wikipedia articles "contain significant AI-generated content", says paper

• In the media: Off to the races! Wikipedia wins!

• Contest: A WikiCup for the Global South

• Traffic report: A scream breaks the still of the night

• Book review: The Editors

• Humour: The Newspaper Editors

• Crossword: Spilled Coffee Mug

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Time zone on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Marvel (company)

Hello, would I be able to have access to this deleted draft so I may try again? Apologies if this isn't the right place to contact you.

AlyannadV (talk) 17:52, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

AlyannadV, I see that on 2 October on your talk page, you were asked if you are being compensated for your edits. An answer to this question is required before you make any more edits. Should you continue to edit without answering this question, you are likely to be blocked from editing. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, thank you for letting me know! I am not as aware of all the rules as I should be, that's my bad. I just replied to it.

Sorry to ask but is there anything else I can do? AlyannadV (talk) 18:04, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Sure. What I would recommend doing, then, is first editing existing articles for a while. Creating an appropriate new article is hard, and an inexperienced editor trying to do that first thing is like putting someone who's never driven a car behind the wheel of a Formula 1 racer (or I suppose in your case, asking a first-year architecture student to design a whole skyscraper). So, try that for a while, review what we mean by neutrality, notability, and how to identify sources that are reliable and independent. Once you're more experienced, then maybe you can try creating a draft again, using what you've learned. I don't restore advertisements, but once you're ready to try it again, I would give you a list of sources that were used in the deleted material, so let me know and I'll do that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

DRV review

An appeal of one of your AfD closes has been brought at DRV: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2024_October_23 Posting this procedurally as the appellant did not properly format the appeal. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:58, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)