Disambiguation link notification for September 12
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
The article Discomagic Records has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
unreferenced stub about long-defunct record label; meant to be genre-defining, but cannot find any RS references
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:20, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Title Card for Walang Hanggang Paalam
Hello! can you request that you upload a Title Card of Walang Hanggang Paalam? because the show starts tomorrow so we need to put a Title Card, thank you friend. Jangmi20 (talk) 05:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Jangmi20, done uploading its title card. Unfortunately, I can only find those in the show's trailers. I'll update it in a couple of days once I find a clean one. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 08:56, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for October 30
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited DXYZ, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Zamboanga.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
I want to start working on a new article for this musical artist. I discovered him via my Filipino partner, who watched the Miss Universe Philippines and we love his song. I found out he was on Tawag_ng_Tanghalan_(season_2). What do you think? Bearian (talk) 18:45, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
- Bearian, here are the sources I can find about him:
- I hope he's good enough to pass WP:GNG or perhaps WP:SINGER with these. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 02:10, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
Epoch TImes reference at China Uncensored
Hi. The Epoch TImes reference you added at China Uncensored needs to be replaced or removed. It is not considered a reliable source. See WP:RSP. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Orphaned non-free image File:SparrowUnit.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SparrowUnit.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: SPO4 Santiago: Sharpshooter has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Theroadislong (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Nomination of The Nielsen Pearson Band for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Nielsen Pearson Band is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Nielsen Pearson Band until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969 TT me 16:23, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:NielsenPearson1980.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:NielsenPearson1980.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Nielsen/Pearson (album) for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nielsen/Pearson (album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Onel5969 TT me 17:07, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of DWET-AM for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DWET-AM, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/End-Time Mission Broadcasting Service until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Empire AS Talk! 18:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:NielsenPearson1980.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:NielsenPearson1980.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The article Babayaran Mo ng Dugo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable film, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE to help this pass WP:NFILM
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 13:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Superastig. An AfD discussion for Harajuku Girls (song) has started. Please feel free to comment if you are interested. Thank you very much, HĐ (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello my Friend! I miss you so much!
how are you friend, we haven't talked for a long time, how are my edits on Ang Probinsyano Page? Is there a lot of vandalism? Gardo Versace 2 (talk) 08:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Just fix all the Errors on The Page of Ang Probinsyano, because I can't edit first because of my Online Class so I just leave it to you to Edit all the Pages of Ang Probinsyano here on Wikipedia, and thank you very much friend. Gardo Versace 2 (talk) 08:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Gardo Versace 2, I'm alright. I've been busy cleaning up articles related to PH radio for the past few months and I occasionally visit articles of various TV shows to do some clean-up. Ang Probinsyano has been taken care of admins like ChompyAce whenever they spot any disruptive edits. BTW, what happened to your other account? ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 01:08, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Due to Covid-19 Schedule
I want to decrease the Radio Time until 8:00 PM thanks Kearl Lago (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- This schedule went sign off til 10:00 PM. Please do not edit until COVID-19 is disappeared Kearl Lago (talk) 12:14, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kearl Lago, although I usually don't meddle with the schedule, I believe it's NOT necessary to indicate the broadcast schedule of every station, whether it's still in pandemic or not. That's why I removed the schedule. Please read WP:NOTDIR first. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 13:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- Pandemic Kearl Lago (talk) 12:10, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kearl Lago, whether we're still under pandemic or not, it's not necessary to indicate the broadcast schedule of every station as per WP:NOTDIR. It's not hard to understand. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:48, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Pandemic Kearl Lago (talk) 12:10, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kearl Lago, although I usually don't meddle with the schedule, I believe it's NOT necessary to indicate the broadcast schedule of every station, whether it's still in pandemic or not. That's why I removed the schedule. Please read WP:NOTDIR first. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 13:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Smart signature
I thought of doing the Ice-T/Ice Cube combo too! But I'm glad that you actually went for it. If I had, my signature would look something like this:
History DMZ (Ice-T)+(Ice Cube)
- History DMZ, thanks. I made my current signature out of boredom. I've changed signature styles a few times before just for fun. 😅 ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 01:18, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
AFDs (February 2021)
Hi, Superastig. Two AFDs discussion have started for The Real Thing (Gwen Stefani song) and I've Just Begun (Having My Fun). Please comment if you are interested. Thank you very much, HĐ (talk) 04:22, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 3
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bandera News Philippines, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Catarman.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Re: Make It with You and Pamilya Ko
Hi! can you clean-up the Make It with You (TV series) Page? because many users have already edited it but what they edited seems to be scandalous and include the Pamilya Ko Page as well. thank you. Jricaplaza (talk) 02:46, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- Jricaplaza, I already cleaned up Pamilya Ko a week ago, but I have yet to clean up Make It with You. If you encounter disruptive edits from unregistered users for the following days, it's best to go here to request semi-protection for those 2 pages. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 14:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
- All right thank you very much for the Reminder. Jricaplaza (talk) 02:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
- I've cleared up the Make It with You Page, did I clean-up correctly? or is there anything missing? and also please check my editing, thank you. Jricaplaza (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Jricaplaza, Not bad. Though, I already made a few corrections in the page. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 00:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- I've cleared up the Make It with You Page, did I clean-up correctly? or is there anything missing? and also please check my editing, thank you. Jricaplaza (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- All right thank you very much for the Reminder. Jricaplaza (talk) 02:28, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Do you have a Title Card of "Huwag Kang Mangamba"? please upload, thank you. Jricaplaza (talk) 16:46, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- Jricaplaza, already uploaded. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 06:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much men! :> Jricaplaza (talk) 07:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I just wanted to thank you for your input at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In Honour of Icon E - A Tribute to Emperor - I've been meaning to respond there but it kept slipping my mind. I've made the article into a semi-decent album stub (or so I hope) using most of the sources you provided. By the way, do you have any experience with uploading cover art? The article currently doesn't have any. Lennart97 (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
- Lennart97, you're welcome. I already made some minor clean-up and added the album cover as you requested. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 01:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
April 2021
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. HiwilmsTalk 14:10, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Image tagging for File:HotshotsMovie.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:HotshotsMovie.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
all Ang Probinsyano page
can you Clean-Up the Pages of Ang Probinsyano? and List of Ang Probinsyano guest stars, List of Ang Probinsyano characters, List of Ang Probinsyano episodes and Ang Probinsyano season 1 to 8. because it lacks information and not all of its information has been Updated because there is no Editor on this Page at maraming The user also vandalized it, but if you can't edit all my requests for you, just edit it with someone who is as good at editing it as you are. and because many still enjoy this program. Thanks a lot. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:04, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
many Users vandalize it. So please fix and clean-up all the Pages. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
I also can't Clean-Up the Page because there is a lot of Suckpuppetry on the Page. so to the Expert Editors I am asking for help to just Clean-up all the Information on all The Page of Ang Probinsyano etc. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
but if you can't do what I'm asking you to do, just have the Editors you know do it as long as all the information is in order. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
and there are also names on the Cast and Characters and Guest Stars that are not really part of the show. so I hope you can Clean Up. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
as well as Ang Probinsyano season 1 to 8 more Clean up thanks. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
as well as all the References on all the Pages of Ang Probinsyano you also cleaned up. Billy Argenta (talk) 16:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
- Billy Argenta, Ang Probinsyano and List of Ang Probinsyano episodes are already semi-protected. I suggest you go to RfPP and request List of Ang Probinsyano guest stars and List of Ang Probinsyano characters to be semi-protected for at least 1 year to prevent IP users and banned users from editing them. You can also use Twinkle to perform those actions if ever. I hope that will help. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 07:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Billy Argenta, I see no problem with the guest stars page. While it is true that there are cast members there that were not given on screen credits, nonetheless, other outlets have credited them as appearing on the show and the citation thereto is attached. So that isn't problematic as you make it out to be. Gardo Versace (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the reminder, but can you please Clean-Up all the Information as the Editor used to do on the Ang Probinsyano Page? like always updated. Billy Argenta (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Especially Ang Probinsyano (season 1 to 8) Billy Argenta (talk) 09:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
- Billy Argenta, I see no problem with the guest stars page. While it is true that there are cast members there that were not given on screen credits, nonetheless, other outlets have credited them as appearing on the show and the citation thereto is attached. So that isn't problematic as you make it out to be. Gardo Versace (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Yera Calma of Twitter
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. However, please do not use unreliable sources such as blogs, your own website, websites and publications with a poor reputation for checking the facts or with no editorial oversight, expressing views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, that are promotional in nature, or that rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions, as one of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. If you require further assistance, please look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia, or ask at the Teahouse. Thank you.TheHotwiki (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hotwiki, alright then. I have your word. But, I still stand by my edits, even without those sources mentioned. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 06:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Stand by your edits? meaning unreferenced edits, yeah no. Follow Wikipedia rules.TheHotwiki (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- I take it that you won't have a problem explaining yourself to the administrators by still posting references from that Yera Calma of Twitter (which is not a verified account and reliable), after you've been not told to. These are recent edits after you've been warned.[8][9][10]
- Hotwiki, I barely meddle with articles on series. I only inserted citation templates instead of the links from Yera Calma in the main article. There's honestly nothing wrong with that. I know there must be sources about the ratings of every episode, but they are barely found anywhere than Twitter. Posting the ratings of every episode is no big deal at all, regardless of the sources. But, if you wanna have it your way, then fine! You win. You the man. You a better editor than me. You happy? ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- You reverted the deleted unreferenced edits. Simple as that. You don't need to restore it when you didn't have a reference to back up the information to begin with. TheHotwiki (talk) 12:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hotwiki, I barely meddle with articles on series. I only inserted citation templates instead of the links from Yera Calma in the main article. There's honestly nothing wrong with that. I know there must be sources about the ratings of every episode, but they are barely found anywhere than Twitter. Posting the ratings of every episode is no big deal at all, regardless of the sources. But, if you wanna have it your way, then fine! You win. You the man. You a better editor than me. You happy? ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- I take it that you won't have a problem explaining yourself to the administrators by still posting references from that Yera Calma of Twitter (which is not a verified account and reliable), after you've been not told to. These are recent edits after you've been warned.[8][9][10]
- Stand by your edits? meaning unreferenced edits, yeah no. Follow Wikipedia rules.TheHotwiki (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
The article Magkasangga sa Batas has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable film, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE except film database sites (and a film database book), promo material, a blog review, and videos. Fails WP:NFILM
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donaldd23 (talk) 17:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Blocking IP address
Please soft block this user User:136.158.32.175 for making disruptive edits and not following how the main page of a series works like it’s supposed to be cast and characters but puts only cast instead. Hopefully you can find a way to do it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.226.215 (talk) 00:03, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep in mind that User:124.106.226.215, User:58.69.105.139, and User:210.213.203.206 are the same disruptive IP sockpuppet (per WP:SHARE). Those three are something suspicious. -136.158.32.175 (talk) 06:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- 136.158.32.175, thanks for informing me regarding the IP users. They've been making disruptive edits in the articles of 2 of the TV series, in which I had them semi-protected. Unfortunately, I'm not an admin to take action on the IP users. It's best if you report them to WayKurat. I believe he knows what to do with the IP users you mentioned. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 14:42, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:KWDC-LP
Hi. Could you please expand your closing statement at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:KWDC-LP? I find it hard to understand how you found consensus for something other than delete give the clear delete arguments. SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:24, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- SmokeyJoe, the participants who voted to redirect the draft to article space are spot on with their arguments. If there's anything in the draft that any editor wants to include to the article, then its history is preserved. Besides, drafts are usually moved to article space once accepted and therefore serve as a redirect to the latter. Therefore, a redirect will be a valid alternative whatsoever. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 08:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Please revert your close on this, it's a clear supervote. SportingFlyer T·C 11:27, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- SportingFlyer, no can do. I did not vote in the discussion as I barely meddle with American stations. I close the consensus based on how strong the arguments are. The argument of one "keep" is spot on and the two "keep" votes seem to agree with the former. Therefore, the "keep" arguments are stronger and do have merit whatsoever. So, you have no choice but to drop the stick and accept the consensus. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the response. I've listed it at DRV. SportingFlyer T·C 17:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry about this. I had an EC and sometimes they will correct themselves. I went back to add a replyto template and then when I came back it resolved itself. Apparently I overrode your post instead. :S Sorry! - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:56, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Neutralhomer, that's alright. Such flaw is understandable since I can easily find my comment in the previous revisions and restore to where I used to post it. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 06:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Just glad some things are easily worked out. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:15, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
- Neutralhomer, that's alright. Such flaw is understandable since I can easily find my comment in the previous revisions and restore to where I used to post it. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 06:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
Danko Jones EP close
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I'm a little concerned about your close here. I know there was minimal input, but the only "keep" argument was that it had a single Allmusic review, which wouldn't be policy based on itself considering it's a single source. It doesn't particularly sit well with me that an article looking like this survived AFD either. Would you please consider relisting one more time? I'll contact the Wikiproject neutrally and try to garner some more input too. Thanks. Sergecross73 msg me 11:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, I was initially thinking of relisting it for the 3rd time, but I'm afraid participation would be as low as the previous relisting. The "keep" vote seems to be weaker, but it does have some merit like the "redirect" vote. That said, my decision on closing the AfD as "no consensus" is final. I hope you understand. If you have any sources about the EP, feel free to improve the article to prevent it from future renomination. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 12:12, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- No, I don't understand, as you didn't actually explain your close when you closed it, nor did you give an actual explanation just now. Look, I'm trying to be nice here, but come on, there's no way a close like this is going to hold up under scrutiny if I take it to WP:DRV. Can you just save both of us the time and hassle and just relist it once more? Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, I don't know how to revert any closure. And I don't have any plans in doing so with this AfD. I'm not gonna relist it for the 3rd time, fearing that, like I said, there would be barely any participation. Besides, there are some AfDs, which were closed as "no consensus" due to minimal participation after they were relisted for the 2nd time. I can only add a brief explanation on why I closed the AfD as "no consensus". Other than that, my decision on closing it is final. So, it's either you respect the consensus and wait for a week or so to renominate it yourself or be bold enough to turn it into a redirect. The choice is yours. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 14:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- You've got someone literally saying they'll work on drumming up more interest. And your comment on choice is equally baffling. Those aren't my only two options - there's DRV like I've already said. Looks like I'm heading there if you refuse to do something as simple as revert your own that you didn't even put in any time into when closing it, as you wrote zero commentary on it there. Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, fine! I already reverted the closure, but I'm doing it just because I'm pressured with your hissy fits. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE)
- Thank you got reconsidering. I really didn't think it was that big of an ask, and I didn't mean for it be this big thing...but you're bound to get push back when you make all these "my decision is final" comments when we both know it doesn't need to be like that, and you lay out my "options" as if I don't know about DRV or something. I know my options, and I know that was an incomplete summary of them. Please don't try to bluff editors like that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:00, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, the initial closure of the AfD was carefully thought of, whether you like it or not. I did understand your concern, but the decision to close the discussion as "no consensus" was final. I don't mind if anyone questions the closures I've done. But, I don't like it when anyone insists me on reverting or relisting them, just like what you did. It was 1 "keep" and 1 "redirect", both which have merits, and it was clear that, after a week of no participation after the 2nd relisting, there was "no consensus". I could've added an explanation to back up the closure as it's much better than reverting the closure. Had you dropped the stick and accepted the consensus in the first place instead of insisting me to revert it, then this issue wouldn't have gotten any bigger. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 15:00, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Look, it's extremely normal procedure to ask questions when you notice a closure you don't agree with, and it's perfectly acceptable to ask for explanation or a relist. And taking it to WP:DRV would have been the appropriate next venue had you refused to budge, and it's entirely appropriate for me to tell you I'd take you there. I did nothing wrong in any part of that. And case in point, doing what I proposed worked out exactly how I said it would - it was reopened, I notified a Wikiproject, and we got it closed with a much better, policy-based consensus. All in like 24 hours too. Your complaints are ridiculous- I followed policy and guidelines perfectly and got a better result for it. It's insane that you'd try to chastise me for that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, I'm fine with the discussion being closed as "redirect". I never dared to touch it after reopening it, I was never against the final consensus. Had you tagged other editors to participate on the discussion at an earlier time, then I would've closed it as "redirect". Taking it to the DRV will take you a week to get what you want, depending if anyone will endorse or oppose your decision. That's gonna take you a longer time than to accept the consensus. I follow policy and guidelines too. I really do. 7 days and a few hours is good enough for anyone to close a discussion, whether or not you participated there. So, don't ever blame me for closing the discussion as "no consensus". The closure was clear, but you were the one who refused to accept it. Whether you like it or not, there was really nothing wrong with the closure I did. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 07:42, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
- Look, it's extremely normal procedure to ask questions when you notice a closure you don't agree with, and it's perfectly acceptable to ask for explanation or a relist. And taking it to WP:DRV would have been the appropriate next venue had you refused to budge, and it's entirely appropriate for me to tell you I'd take you there. I did nothing wrong in any part of that. And case in point, doing what I proposed worked out exactly how I said it would - it was reopened, I notified a Wikiproject, and we got it closed with a much better, policy-based consensus. All in like 24 hours too. Your complaints are ridiculous- I followed policy and guidelines perfectly and got a better result for it. It's insane that you'd try to chastise me for that. Sergecross73 msg me 15:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, the initial closure of the AfD was carefully thought of, whether you like it or not. I did understand your concern, but the decision to close the discussion as "no consensus" was final. I don't mind if anyone questions the closures I've done. But, I don't like it when anyone insists me on reverting or relisting them, just like what you did. It was 1 "keep" and 1 "redirect", both which have merits, and it was clear that, after a week of no participation after the 2nd relisting, there was "no consensus". I could've added an explanation to back up the closure as it's much better than reverting the closure. Had you dropped the stick and accepted the consensus in the first place instead of insisting me to revert it, then this issue wouldn't have gotten any bigger. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 15:00, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you got reconsidering. I really didn't think it was that big of an ask, and I didn't mean for it be this big thing...but you're bound to get push back when you make all these "my decision is final" comments when we both know it doesn't need to be like that, and you lay out my "options" as if I don't know about DRV or something. I know my options, and I know that was an incomplete summary of them. Please don't try to bluff editors like that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:00, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, fine! I already reverted the closure, but I'm doing it just because I'm pressured with your hissy fits. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE)
- You've got someone literally saying they'll work on drumming up more interest. And your comment on choice is equally baffling. Those aren't my only two options - there's DRV like I've already said. Looks like I'm heading there if you refuse to do something as simple as revert your own that you didn't even put in any time into when closing it, as you wrote zero commentary on it there. Sergecross73 msg me 15:48, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, I don't know how to revert any closure. And I don't have any plans in doing so with this AfD. I'm not gonna relist it for the 3rd time, fearing that, like I said, there would be barely any participation. Besides, there are some AfDs, which were closed as "no consensus" due to minimal participation after they were relisted for the 2nd time. I can only add a brief explanation on why I closed the AfD as "no consensus". Other than that, my decision on closing it is final. So, it's either you respect the consensus and wait for a week or so to renominate it yourself or be bold enough to turn it into a redirect. The choice is yours. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 14:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- No, I don't understand, as you didn't actually explain your close when you closed it, nor did you give an actual explanation just now. Look, I'm trying to be nice here, but come on, there's no way a close like this is going to hold up under scrutiny if I take it to WP:DRV. Can you just save both of us the time and hassle and just relist it once more? Sergecross73 msg me 13:14, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- The nominator have a valid nomination - citing a failure of WP:NALBUMS and lack of sources.
- There was a valid "redirect" stance for the same reason - NALBUM and lack of sourcing.
- There was an editor who voted "keep" due to finding one source - ALLMUSIC.
- Multiple editors, including one who didn't formally !vote, pointed out that 1 single source is not enough to meet GNG/NALBUMS, and that even that 1 source may be too short to be considered significant coverage anyways. While significant coverage is subjective, one source is objectively not enough to meet our notability requirements.
- It was erroneous to equally weight an invalid "keep" argument against two editors with valid reasons for the article not to exist. That's not some sort of deadlock situation, especially with that third editor who didn't take a stance but pointed out the fallacy of the keep stance.
It wasn't an awful take, but it wasn't a very nuanced look at the situation. I imagine you realize this as, as you never really offered much of a nuanced explanation either, instead opting to focus more on repeatedly saying things like "decision is final". Anyways, regardless, it's resolved now, so I'm done discussing unless there's future questionable closes. Sergecross73 msg me 13:28, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
- Sergecross73, I've seen a few discussions like this, where each of them has only 1 "keep" vote and 1 "delete" vote. Either of them is weaker than the other. But after two relists, it was closed as "no consensus". The same case as this discussion. The "keep" vote is weaker than the "redirect" vote since the voter only mentioned nothing else but AllMusic. But, whether it is rebutted or not, it is still valid like the "redirect" argument no matter what. It doesn't sound fair to say that it's not valid. For the nth time, there was really nothing wrong with the closure I did. I did what I could to make the closure fair and square, though I could've added an explanation to back up the closure in the first place. Therefore, even if you throw hissy fits all day long, I really did a good job in giving proper weight to the given arguments. And there's nothing you can do about it because I am telling the truth. This conversation is now over. I'm not gonna waste my time responding to this again. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 15:30, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
AfD
Hi. There are a couple of deletion discussions where I voted to redirect the articles to their networks as an ATD, but they ended up getting deleted instead. Do I have to take them to the DelRev to change the closer's mind? SBKSPP (talk) 01:37, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- SBKSPP, no need to take it to the DRV. It will be a bit of a hassle, you have to wait for a week for the decision. Just be bold to create a new redirect to the desired target. It's that simple. ASTIG😎 (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 15:00, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Superastig: Noted. Thanks for the advice. Will get to them soon. SBKSPP (talk) 06:18, 17 July 2021 (UTC)