Premeditated Chaos (talk | contribs) |
→Brother Lion: new section |
||
Line 309: | Line 309: | ||
There's a [https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-brouhaha-cryptocurrency-exchange-okex-denies-price-tampering-1522841694 WSJ] article, some Bloomberg articles, and likely some local news articles to be found once I do a deeper search. It also seems to be a separate company from OKCoin per Bloomberg "[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-19/furious-traders-slam-crypto-exchange-for-fiddling-with-contracts OKEx, which was founded by Star Xu, the entrepreneur behind Chinese crypto exchange OKCoin, has been criticized by traders before]" and this [https://twitter.com/OKEx/status/908694302070513665 OKEx tweet]. [[Special:Contributions/Џ|Џ]] 18:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC) |
There's a [https://www.wsj.com/articles/bitcoin-brouhaha-cryptocurrency-exchange-okex-denies-price-tampering-1522841694 WSJ] article, some Bloomberg articles, and likely some local news articles to be found once I do a deeper search. It also seems to be a separate company from OKCoin per Bloomberg "[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-19/furious-traders-slam-crypto-exchange-for-fiddling-with-contracts OKEx, which was founded by Star Xu, the entrepreneur behind Chinese crypto exchange OKCoin, has been criticized by traders before]" and this [https://twitter.com/OKEx/status/908694302070513665 OKEx tweet]. [[Special:Contributions/Џ|Џ]] 18:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC) |
||
== Brother Lion == |
|||
Hello Premeditated Chaos When I Checked The Brother Lion Article It Said Anthony Appleseed Restored And This Morning When I Checked It Again You Deleted The Brother Lion Article. Would You Be So Kind As To Bring It Back Because I'm Making A Prequel To The 2003 Disney Animated Film [[Brother Bear]]. If You Bring It Back Would You Like To Sign Up For Brother Lion? Thank You And Happy Editing In 2019. APaoloL |
Revision as of 16:44, 28 December 2018
♠ New messages to the bottom please. I will reply here without pinging unless asked otherwise. |
|
|
Bradford Clay
Hi, I've reverted your merger of Bradford Clay, as it's part of the Forest Marble Formation, not Cotham Marble, see Figure 3 here. You were, no doubt, misled by Forest marble redirecting to Cotham Marble, which was an error, now fixed. Mikenorton (talk) 08:55, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
- Mikenorton, that is exactly what happened. Thanks for fixing it for me. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Notice
PROD on article Intermere has been (sadly) removed by the article's creator, so you will have to take it to AfD. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 20:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Requesting undeletion of Draft:Alanna Arrington
Hi. To make a long story short, I came to ask you, the closer, for undeletion of this draft because I strongly believe that I, myself, can once and for all fix this draft for approval at this time; as she has more than accrued significant coverage and notability by now. The problems is other people kept messing up this this draft with their crappy editing. If I submit it and it gets rejected I wouldn’t ask again. Thanks.Trillfendi (talk) 20:47, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- Trillfendi, can you give me a few examples of the kind of significant coverage you're talking about? I usually prefer not to restore content that was deleted at an XfD discussion without some indication of notability. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 11:21, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- Vogue UK, Maxim cover, Cedar Rapids Gazette - one of her home state’s local newspapers, InStyle, Vogue, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, V magazine, Vogue Italia Harper’s Bazaar W, Vogue Arabia, This is Insider, St. Louis Magazine, some local radio station, the Daily Mail, WWD are examples. Trillfendi (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
- Trillfendi, sorry about the delay. Coverage looks good, I'll restore it for you to work on. Cheers. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- Vogue UK, Maxim cover, Cedar Rapids Gazette - one of her home state’s local newspapers, InStyle, Vogue, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, V magazine, Vogue Italia Harper’s Bazaar W, Vogue Arabia, This is Insider, St. Louis Magazine, some local radio station, the Daily Mail, WWD are examples. Trillfendi (talk) 14:12, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Requesting undeletion of https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Homeschooling_Day
There is no reason other than any subjective one to have deleted this page. Do you expect people to be on Wikipedia 24/7 editing pages? Do you even think about people having difficulty reading, writing? So far, comments are not true. The topic of the page is pure and simple the International Homeschooling Day. It is a page about the day itself. Other information on the page is added to learn more about homeschooling and various types of homeschooling. The page is not even up for debate. The page will grow in the future. There are tens of millions of families around the world homeschooling, the majority of them chose homeschooling because the public schooling system is not offering what their children need. In this digital age there is a giant world of knowledge to find online, which is one of the reasons it is completely normal to chose to homeschool. The page is to be published on Wikipedia, therefore I suggest undeletion of the page. mvsa 16:47, 12 November 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marlies van St Annaland (talk • contribs)
- Marlies van St Annaland, sorry for the delay in response to this. The article was deleted by consensus at AfD in this discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Homeschooling Day. It was not a question of being on Wikipedia 24/7 or not, as the discussion was open for just over a week, which is typical. No one found any substantial independent sources that discuss the topic of International Homeschooling Day, so in accordance with our guideline on notability, the page was deleted. Unless there are sources available, I have no intention of restoring it and undoing the community's discussion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. The reason why you did not find resources is that we are the source;it is a new day, installed for all homeschoolers around the world. The purpose of celebrating this day is to support homeschoolers of all nationalities, lifestyles and communities around the world. If there would be posts or links shared by homeschoolers, foundations, online classes businesses, around the world, would Wikipedia then be willing to undelete? It has been shared though on a few websites. Probably you did not find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marlies van St Annaland (talk • contribs) 20:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
The reason why you did not find resources is that we are the source
- exactly, and this is the problem. We are not a platform for the promotion of new things (see WP:NOTPROMO). We are a tertiary source that summarizes the opinion of reliable, independent secondary sources. If there are no secondary sources, there is nothing for us to summarize, so we cannot retain the article. Unless the day has been reported on in multiple reliable sources that are independent of you and your organization (see WP:RS for our definition of what constitutes a reliable source), we will not undelete or restore it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Auckland & District Pipe Band
Hello,
would you mind restoring a copy of Auckland & District Pipe Band to User:Ostrichyearning3/ad? I can then work on getting it sufficiently referenced for namespace. Many thanks! Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- Ostrichyearning3, it's done. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:22, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks very much!! Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Interesting de-orphan
Hey PMC,
Going through the Feb '09 orphans I found Forgotten Cats. I've looked for coverage and I'm really on the fence as to whether it's notable or not. If it is notable, it could be improved and de-orphaned by linking it from Trap–neuter–return. Any thoughts as to whether to AFD it? Or maybe WP:BLAR would be appropriate?
Best,
SITH (talk) 10:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- StraussInTheHouse, I think it would probably pass at AfD. If it was newer, maybe not, but there's multiple reasonably substantial sources spanning a decade or so. There's coverage from mainstream news in Delaware and Philadelphia, so IMO it scrapes by WP:AUD. If you're interested in what I found:
- Philly coverage: [1], [2], [3]. Delaware: [4], [5], [6], [7]. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- Beautiful, I'll get onto that just after I've gone through the February 2013 orphans with AWB and removed any that shouldn't be tagged as orphans. A surprising amount of the ones which also have unreferenced tags need converting to refimprove but that's the same thing in AWB I guess! Best, SITH (talk) 21:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Ways to improve List of Norwegian sportspeople
Thanks for creating List of Norwegian sportspeople.
A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:
Please add your references.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Boleyn (talk) 21:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Recusal request
Since you have deliberately ignored my requests (which by nature is incompatible with WP:ARBCOND: "Respond promptly and appropriately to questions ... from the community, about conduct which appears to conflict with their trusted roles
" for you to provide evidence on your accusation on how I am making "mischaracterisation", deliberating misinterpreting my question while accusing me of making "insinuations", in addition to prejudging of the case by reaching to the conclusion that Maxim "jumped the gun" when the evidence/workshop phase does not close until the November 30th. Therefore this is my official request for you to recuse from the Fred Bauder case. Of course you are free to decline/ignore the request, but this needs to be said and go on the record. Alex Shih (talk) 09:41, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- My initial comment is a sufficient explanation as to why I used the word "mischaracterization".
- My opinion with regards to Maxim acting in haste is a restatement of what I said in my response to the original case request. It's also quite similar to opinions that my fellow arbitrators have voiced (see Euryalus's accept [8] here, and Opabinia regalis's [9], as well as their other comments on the Evidence and Workshop pages). I notice you are not asking Euryalus and Opabinia regalis to recuse over their comments.
- You indicated that you had some unspecified evidence about the Committee "acting" in this kind of situation, presumably negative based on your use of scare quotes to emphasize the word acting. You did not provide any information as to the nature of this evidence, or even its relation to the case at hand. Alluding to the possibility of something negative in this way is an insinuation. I invited you to share any relevant evidence openly on the Evidence page, where Evidence should be put, so that it could be seen and discussed by everyone. I see that you have not done so, which is certainly a decision you are free to make. In any case, there is no prohibition on an arbitrator disagreeing with someone's comments on the case pages.
- At this point I see no reason to recuse from the case. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:23, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
Requesting undeletion of Stump the Experts
I'm requesting undeletion of the Stump the Experts page. I found the discussion about potential deletion. I received notice of the deletion. I did not receive notice of the deletion "discussion" (it wasn't one, really).
The event ran as a rogue adjunct to WWDC for two decades, and was a source of great enjoyment for thousands of developers from all corners of the globe. The deletion discussion acknowledged the existence of the event, video footage confirming the long-running existence of the event. Getting coverage was never the point, so using lack of coverage as a basis for determining whether to keep it documented seems a bit off. The event served to bring together, in an interactive venue, a very large group of people who have built community as they crafted a substantial portion of the world's software.
I would also appreciate a copy with the edit history (which contains useful info for possible reconstruction on Wikipedia or elsewhere).
Wofe (talk) 04:16, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- Existence is not proof of notability. Wikipedia exists to summarize information about notable topics as discussed in reliable third-party sources. If no one wrote about this event in reliable third-party sources, we can't maintain an article, per our policies on verifiability and notability.
- Notifications about article deletion are a courtesy, not an obligation. They are usually made to the article's creator. A given article can have dozens, if not hundreds of other contributors, so notifying everyone who's ever edited a page when it gets nominated for deletion is not expected. I see that you are not the article's creator, nor even its most prolific contributor (your contributions occurred in 2012 based on the history), so there is no reason anyone would have thought to notify you, let alone be obligated to do so.
- The deletion discussion was left up for just over three weeks; ample time for anyone with sources to chime in, which no one opted to do. As there were no contesting voices, and the discussion had already been relisted twice, I deleted it in accordance with the consensus that developed. I am willing to email you a copy, along with the edit history, but I am not undeleting the page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:53, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
As I recall, and it's been a long time, but I recall creating the page using a friend's account on-stage at Stump the Experts to comedically rebut an audience member's assertion by pointing out that my answer must be correct because it was on the Internet. And now it's not. That's actually funny!
While I did not mean to suggest that anyone owed me notice of the discussion, I would have appreciated an opportunity to engage in the deletion discussion (I'm reminded of the Vogon's response about the plans for the demolition of Earth). As you see, my response to the deletion notice was immediate; I might well have engaged in the discussion with similar alacrity.
Stump is so well known among the large community of developers that its noteworthiness is a matter of lore (if not of well-regarded record), e.g., comments like this (which _are_ on the Internet), Translated: "The Stump the Experts event is next to the Apple Design Award "must attend" sessions of every WWDC."[1] "One of the more popular events at WWDC is "Stump the Experts",…"[2] Translated: "We must go back to 1992 to see the first "Stump the Experts" at WWDC. Unknown to the general public, this event is reserved for the developers present at the conference and each year, many eagerly awaited it."[3]
Thank you for offering to email the page with the edit history. I'd appreciate that.
Wofe (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- I don't mean to be rude, but as I've said, you had just over three weeks to see that the article had been nominated for deletion and participate in the discussion. I'm not sure why you didn't see it, but it wasn't because there wasn't sufficient time.
- Being well-known within the lore of a niche group isn't the same as being notable per our standards. We need multiple reliable sources reporting on something to give an indication that it is notable. Those sources aren't reliable or in-depth enough to indicate notability. Two of them (mac4ever.com and macnotes.de) are basically Mac rumor/news aggregators, and the Engadget source is way too short to hang an entire article on.
- I've emailed the page content at deletion, and the history, as two separate emails. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:52, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
References
Material from an article you deleted
Hello. Recently you deleted the article List of 18th – early 19th century sources on Souli and Souliotes which I created. Although you didn't give any explanation on that, there are users who suggest that the material can be included in the article Souliotes. Therefore, I request access to the deleted article, so as to salvage it in my talk page for future use. If possible, post the text in my talk page.
I don't mean to bother you, but I might draw your attention to the article Souliotes in the future, if the same users who wanted the deletion of the list, want to delete the material from the article as well. Thanks in advance.--Skylax30 (talk) 14:42, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- I've userfied it at User:Skylax30/List of 18th – early 19th century sources on Souli and Souliotes. I don't have the article on my watchlist and I'm not particularly interested in the topic, so if there are future issues with how much of the list should be placed in the main article, please take them to the article's talk page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:55, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- How about the Stampeders, eh? I'm watching virtually with Kelapstick. Drmies (talk) 01:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks.--Skylax30 (talk) 20:25, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Tarl Warwick draft
Hey Premeditated Chaos,
Would you be able to move the deleted draft of "Tarl Warwick" to my sandbox, and secondarily would you be able to explain how i could show that the reasons of the previous two AfD (Notability) threads is no longer applicable?
Cheers, ReaIestTruth (talk) 05:10, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sometimes willing to undertake such requests, but in this case I'm going to decline. It's been deleted twice at AfD and your references are almost entirely YouTube videos, which are not accepted as reliable. A subject's notability is determined by the existence of multiple reliable sources about it: sources which are independent of the subject, generally accepted to be factually accurate, and discuss the subject in some depth. If you can demonstrate the existence of such reliable sources, I am willing to reconsider. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
TODALS deleted?
It was pretty sad to see the TODALS page get deleted. I see what you mean but my school still uses it. I really wish I still had the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdrianWikiEditor (talk • contribs) 14:35, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
- I can email it to you if you enable the "email this editor" feature. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
File:Dril.jpg nominated for deletion
I don't know if you've seen, but Dril.jpg (the image of his avatar) has been nominated for deletion. Since you understand the context of dril's persona, it'd really help out if you weighed in there. I've just posted a pretty massive, thorough defense of the image's uses in the article, as well as updating the image rationale so that it justifies each use of the image on the page with specificity (which, as I see it, was the nominator's sole approximately legitimate gripe). —BLZ · talk 21:05, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Well, looks like the discussion is tipping the other way, but thank you for weighing in all the same. Your analogy to Magritte was perfectly apt, eloquent, and thoughtful. —BLZ · talk 23:00, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Reception list for Granny Smith (video game)
If you suspect these the review lists is look like ads, I can remove it from the page. I promise to remove any unwanted contents as you warn me. But don't haste to delete the article, examine deeply. Video game task (talk) 16:47, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- You didn't answer my question. Are you being compensated in any way to produce these articles? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- No, I'm neutral person. I'm a normal editor, like Wikipedian. My mere work is for creation of video games to contribute Wikipedia. I'm so distant from any company or organization. There is not any external force that prompts me to build article in Wikipedia. If you have any complain that my articles are wrong, you can order me to remove these mistakes. Then I'm obedient. Video game task (talk) 17:05, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's not about ordering whether or not you made a mistake. It's about the fact that you've now created two articles about barely-notable mobile apps, both formatted in a very formulaic way that reads like ad copy rather than fan enthusiasm, and are anxiously inquiring on multiple talk pages about when they will be indexed on Google. Why is that so important to you? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:22, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
In fact, most contents, such as gameplay and descriptional material about the games is entirely written by myself. For the former article, it's entirely done by me you can check the citations. The citations actually derived them through Google search. Most citations are enough for reliable sources. Some sources mentions about the genres of the games. I have collected from TouchArcade, that explains about the gameplay. They are all websites, not mobile-apps. Video game task (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2018 (UTC) Fishy fishy Legacypac (talk) 18:01, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).
- Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz
- Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike
Interface administrator changes
- Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
- A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
- A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
- A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.
- Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
- To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
- Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.
- Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
- In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
- Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.
- Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.
DYK for Ma'adin Ijafen
On 4 December 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ma'adin Ijafen, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that French explorer Théodore Monod discovered more than 2,000 brass ingots from the 11th or 12th centuries at the Ma'adin Ijafen archaeological site in Mauritania? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ma'adin Ijafen. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Ma'adin Ijafen), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Alex Shih (talk) 00:01, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
A beer for you!
Thank you for creating an article on Elizabeth Moorhead. E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC) |
- E.M.Gregory, I'm so embarrassed, I meant to reply to this earlier. Thank you very much :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:43, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
New account
Hi, I'm just here to inform you that I have set up a new account. I think I read somewhere on Wikipedia (can't find the page to hand atm) that a member of the Arbitration Committee should be notified if someone sets up a second account so not more than one account is being used by any user. My old account is/was Helper201 but I have been unable to log in as I've apparently been entering the wrong password.
I really want to find a way to get my old account back but I am unaware if there is any way around this problem as I did not set up an email address with my initial account. If you know of any solution I'd really appreciate it, there has been an awful lot of work put into my old account with thousands of edits over three years and I have hundreds of pages on my watch list. Would it also be alright if I continued to try and log in to my old account and if successful then let you or another member of the Arbitration Committee team know so this one could be terminated?
Thanks for your time,
Helper201V2 (talk) 04:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Helper201V2. If you never set an email and you don't have a committed identity set up, I don't think there's much that can be done to regain control of your old account. If you've ever identified yourself to the Wikimedia Foundation, you could try to email meta:Trust and Safety to see if they can help you, but otherwise you're unfortunately out of luck. For now, I'd make a note on your userpage about what's happened, so people don't get confused. Accounts can't be deleted, so if you do get control of that one back, just put a note on both userpages identifying this one as an alt and then stop using this one. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:36, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Would it be acceptable to pin that note about the alt account to the top of my talk page, as I've never liked the idea of having a user page?
- (edit conflict) LOL well that's good to hear :) Glad I could be of service. Talk page is fine. It's not exactly a big deal since you basically never edited on the new one. If you don't plan to use it in the future I wouldn't worry about it too much. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:44, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Jay_Sarraf was deleted, help recover and recreation with Wikipedia guided norms
Hi PMC, the page Jay_Sarraf was deleted, your kind support and guidance is needed to help recover the page and complete it according to Wikipedia expected guidelines. Fearlessniki (talk) 07:24, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but no. It was deleted by consensus at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Jay Sarraf. Mr. Sarraf is far below meeting our notability criteria for academics, so there is almost no chance of the article making it into mainspace. Therefore, at this time I do not think it would be beneficial to Wikipedia to restore the draft to be worked on. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 15:53, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am sorry, for incomplete information, if given a WP:Chance, and allow the article to be in the draft for editing, will.help provide relevant information. Fearlessniki (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- It's not about the information being incomplete. The subject absolutely fails our notability criteria for academics with zero ambiguity. All the editing in the world is not going to make him notable. When he has achieved enough academically that he is likely to pass those criteria, that is when an article should be made about him, not before. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
- I am sorry, for incomplete information, if given a WP:Chance, and allow the article to be in the draft for editing, will.help provide relevant information. Fearlessniki (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Thank you
I edited the sources on Gratuitous Type (magazine) to improve them as suggested. Removed your template but let me know if you want to place it again. Arispool —Preceding undated comment added 01:20, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Advice
Ok, I will comply. Besides, my initial advice to him wasn't in bad faith. Tgeorgescu (talk) 03:42, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Doesn't matter. Try to imagine yourself on the other side of that - you've just posted somewhere asking for help, and some dude who already reported you shows up out of nowhere to leave a comment. No one likes to get advice from someone who's been telling them they're wrong. At best it's annoying, and at worst, it looks like an intentional poke in the eye. It serve no purpose and you're better off not doing it at all. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, this is something that I have learned now. Good to know in the future. Tgeorgescu (talk) 03:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Gastropod pages
If you are considering any gastropod pages for deletion, please post at WT:GAST rather than my bot’s talk page. — Ganeshk (talk) 04:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Rationale for PROD of Ryūzōji_Tanehide
While I appreciated your nomination rationale, I did feel compelled to slightly slightly alter it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- LOL, no problem. As you can tell, I was somewhat...unimpressed with the sourcing :P ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:30, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Happy Holidays!
Happy Holidays! |
--Cameron11598 (Talk) 04:38, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas PMC!
- Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message
Wishing you and your family all the best in 2019 PMC! --TheSandDoctor Talk 07:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2019! | |
Hello Premeditated Chaos, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
Yo Ho Ho
What should we do with these?
These 10,088 all have exactly two incoming links from other articles in the mainspace. On the one hand, that's 8.6% of orphans that shouldn't technically be orphans as we only require one incoming link to remove the tag per Wikipedia:Orphan#Criteria. However, the same page also says it's best to have at least three incoming links. Looking at the articles on the list, it's a mixed bag but they're definitely not orphans. Some of them may even be eligible for deletion but I have an idea. If I can figure out a way to link the Quarry query which generated that list up with something like PetScan which can do ORES predictions on massive batches of articles, I could de-tag the ones which aren't orphans but keep the ones behind which either need more work (or deletion) so they won't be forgotten.
Obviously, this will mean 10,088 edits will need making in quick succession so I don't know whether to put a bot request in or just get consensus for the change at AN and do all the edits via an AWB script, but I'm erring on the side that most of them aren't orphaned and are well-networked enough.
What are your thoughts on it?
Best, SITH (talk) 18:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Blaaah...I'll be honest and say I don't think it should be automated. Not because I don't think they qualify to be de-orphaned (I'm not a stickler, one incoming link is sufficient for de-tagging IMO), but because in general I'm not a fan of automated de-orphaning. I've written elsewhere about seeing an orphan tag as a symptom; often it's the only reason that weird unloved old pages ever get looked at. For that reason alone I usually argue that it's better to have human eyes reviewing them, just in case they're crap. Even with ORES, I'm hesitant to say it's a good idea to automate the process. If you're still set on it, I'd say definitely get consensus somewhere either at BAG or AN, but it's not something I'd support. That being said, I'd be happy to work on the list with you - we could probably knock it out together pretty quick if we made a point of focusing on it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Also, it's worth checking that the links are valid: that they are supposed to point to the page in question and aren't disambig pages or hatnotes. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Both good points. I'll hold off, and if there are ones where it isn't a problem I can just manually do it. Best, SITH (talk) 22:38, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Undelete OKEx PROD
There's a WSJ article, some Bloomberg articles, and likely some local news articles to be found once I do a deeper search. It also seems to be a separate company from OKCoin per Bloomberg "OKEx, which was founded by Star Xu, the entrepreneur behind Chinese crypto exchange OKCoin, has been criticized by traders before" and this OKEx tweet. Џ 18:06, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Brother Lion
Hello Premeditated Chaos When I Checked The Brother Lion Article It Said Anthony Appleseed Restored And This Morning When I Checked It Again You Deleted The Brother Lion Article. Would You Be So Kind As To Bring It Back Because I'm Making A Prequel To The 2003 Disney Animated Film Brother Bear. If You Bring It Back Would You Like To Sign Up For Brother Lion? Thank You And Happy Editing In 2019. APaoloL