User talk:Feminist/Archive 16

Your GA nomination of The dress

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The dress you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ribbet32 -- Ribbet32 (talk) 21:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The dress

The article The dress you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The dress for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ribbet32 -- Ribbet32 (talk) 17:02, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

The stupid way in which you moved "Embrace, extend, and extinguish"

The way you moved that article "without leaving a redirect" created a mess, which I had to clean up. Next time, DO NOT MOVE "without leaving a redirect" (unless in in special circumstances which did not apply to that article). Thank you. AnonMoos (talk) 19:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Celebrity Nazis

Tila Tequila self-identifies as a Nazi - look, so calling her a "Celebrity Nazi" in a discussion thread is simply fair comment. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:54, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I know. She also claims to believe that the Earth is flat. Does it mean such a comment is appropriate in an AfD discussion for an article about another topic, especially when it doesn't add anything to the discussion? Absolutely not. feminist 13:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:Batsmen with a ODI batting average above 40

I would like you to reconsider your close of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2017 September 2#Template:Batsmen with a ODI batting average above 40. I don't think Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket was informed of the deletion discussion, and if they had been, I think the consensus would have been in favour of keeping. As it is, there were only two deletion !votes. One was based on 40 being an arbitrary number, but in fact in ODI cricket 40 is always used as a benchmark average. So, please relist. StAnselm (talk) 20:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Already done by Plastikspork. feminist 10:33, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

your closure of AFD

Your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sanbashi-dōri-yonchōme Station did not address the multiple other articles nominated. Perhaps you could amend your closure to be more explicit? --doncram 05:07, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

What other articles? All articles included in the AfD received the same closure: merge to Tosaden Kōtsū Sanbashi Line. feminist 14:16, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

When I read your close, I thought it seemed possible you did not see that multiple articles are covered by the AFD. You just say "merge", not "merge them all" or anything indicating a plural. Right, one can read what you wrote as applying to all, but it is not explicitly clear that you see that it involves multiple articles. Not a huge problem, but you could slightly revise the closure to make that clear. Or not. --doncram 15:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. feminist 15:18, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Cara Mund

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Worshipers of the Mandarax has been nominated for discussion

Category:Worshipers of the Mandarax, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. VegaDark (talk) 03:17, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Feminist, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 22:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Deplorable listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Deplorable. Since you had some involvement with the Deplorable redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 15:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Questions at RfA for Megalibrarygirl

Hi, regarding the questions you left at the RfA for User:Megalibrarygirl could you please see the notes left there? Could you either elaborate on how those two terse questions relate to adminship, or remove them? In isolation, the second one comes off as obtuse and jarring. That may not have been your intent. But some elaboration or clarification might help. (diff) Also, the talk page of the RfA has a discussion as well. Thanks. -- Fuzheado | Talk 14:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Take the Wheel listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Take the Wheel. Since you had some involvement with the Take the Wheel redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Europe's last dictatorship

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Europe's last dictatorship, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for Deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discusion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ibicdlcod (talk) 16:14, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

The Downs (anchorage)

Hi Feminist: Makes sense. Thanks. Acad Ronin (talk) 13:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Feminist. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Feminist. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

IABot Job 1153

Hello! Just a heads up, your IABot job 1153 job has been frozen for several days at 878/4604 pages complete. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 13:36, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Noted. feminist (talk) 00:49, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Feminist and @Balon Greyjoy:. The bot job number 1178 was not running since it was submitted. I think it is because the page Claude Debussy caused the bot not to run the job. I have just performed the job 1181 without the Claude Debussy article, and the bot is running through the pages you've asked it to do. Thanks, Iggy (talk) 11:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Drafts

I notice that you have taken an interest in my drafts. My first priority for these would be building the disambig resolvers, which will replace disambiguation pages with missing primary topics for the terms. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:53, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

IABot Job 1178

Hello! Similar to my last post, you are showing a job on IABot (1178) as frozen. It has not completed a single page since it was submitted, and @Iggy the Swan: submitted your job without Claude Debussy, which was completed. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 01:29, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. feminist (talk) 13:49, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

RM system is running at maximum capacity

Please let the current multi-move requests for train station moves get processed before entering any more. The system is stressed to its limits and running at maximum capacity. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 17:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Okay. feminist (talk) 17:11, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Sigh. See Wikipedia talk:Requested moves#Merging move requests. You can combine these if group them together in reasonable amounts. wbm1058 (talk) 02:19, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I created them separately because they concern different metro systems. feminist (talk) 10:22, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:World Taekwondo 2017.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:World Taekwondo 2017.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) 18:50, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

station disambiguation

I notice you're adding station disambiguation tags to many dab pages. In a few cases like Grand Central Station (disambiguation), Columbia Station (disambiguation), Alexandria Station, the page contains entries that are not railway stations. I don't know if that makes any difference, but I thought I'd bring it to your attention in case it does. If not, no problem. Station1 (talk) 07:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

I check whether the disambiguation pages only list railway/public transport stations before using the {{station disambiguation}} template, but I am human and I make mistakes. Thanks for the heads-up. feminist (talk) 07:38, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

No problem. If I see any other I'll just revert. Station1 (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for the recognition. It is very much appreciated!
Regards, Spintendo ᔦᔭ 18:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Bilzerian

Hi, this closure does not seem non-controversial to me. I wonder if you would be open to letting someone else close it? K.e.coffman (talk) 20:49, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

I disagree, but okay. feminist (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for considering my request. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

. codes Disambiguation Page

Hello, and thank you for your nomination. My argument is which policy group seems to be in question or conflict (CoI)? Habatchii (talk) 18:10, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Flow Free screenshot.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Flow Free screenshot.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:31, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Digiday

On 28 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Digiday, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a website run by Digiday generates random absurd Twitter bios followed by profanity-laced commentary? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Digiday. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Digiday), 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.

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1976 Anapa mid-air collision

Hello! Your submission of 1976 Anapa mid-air collision at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

'Murica!

Hi, Feminist. Bit confused about what happened at 'Murica. You closed the RfD as retarget, a closure I agree with. But then seven hours later the redirect was deleted by RHaworth per WP:G7. Can you clue me in as to what happened in those intervening hours? Thanks. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 01:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

The page should not have been deleted. Although the redirect creator requested its deletion at the RfD discussion, consensus was for a "retarget" closure, so G7 does not apply. feminist (talk) 06:24, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Gender disproportion on Wikipedia

Hi!

I am not sure this is the correct way to reach you (user Feminist), but it's the only way I found after roaming around in your profile for half an hour. I am a third year student in Winchester school of art and I am starting a project about gender inequality in Wikipedia. Seeing your username, I was instantly interested in hearing your viewpoint and would like to know if you're happy to discuss this topic via email. Could you please give me yours ? I am not sure how Wikipedia's works yet and am sorry if this is not the right way to contact you!

Regards, Daniela Danielleiv (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Please send an email via Special:EmailUser/Feminist. Thanks. feminist (talk) 06:14, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Gabriel (footballer) listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Gabriel (footballer). Since you had some involvement with the Gabriel (footballer) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 18:26, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Feminist. 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. Danielleiv (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Korean railway lines

Hi! Please undo the moves you made/are making with Korean railway lines - they absolutely *are* proper names. In Korea and Japan there is a practice of naming railway lines, much as in the Anglophone world we name roads. I can give a lengthier explanation if you like, but one thing that's indicative of them being proper names is the fact that the names are sometimes changed - for example, the line between Seoul and Gyeongju, which is named Jungang Line today, was named "Gyeonggyeong Line" during the colonial era. If it was just a descriptive, then you wouldn't be able to change it... 2Q (talk) 05:07, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes I absolutely agree that "Gyeonggyeong" and "Jungang" are proper names, just as Jubilee, Sokolnicheskaya, Richmond–Warm Springs/South Fremont, etc. are proper names. It does not mean that "line" is part of the name. feminist (talk) 07:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, actually it does, because the 선/線 is part of the name - just like in Main Street, Sunset Boulevard, Piccadilly Circus, Trans-Canada Highway, etc. It's the same situation. 2Q (talk) 07:45, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

To go a bit further, the first part (e.g. Gyeongbu) isn't a standalone name for the railway line, as it's often used in the names of other things. So, you have the Gyeongbu Line for the railway line, and the Gyeongbu Expressway for the freeway; Jungang is used with the Jungang Line, the Jungang Expressway, the Jungang University, the JungAng Ilbo newspaper, etc. So, like "expressway" or "university" or whatever, the "line" is part of the name. A local (for me) example is Vancouver's SkyTrain lines, which are named Expo Line (we also have an Expo Boulevard), the Canada Line (we also have a Canada Way and a Canada Place), the Evergreen Extension, and the Millenium Line. 2Q (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough, I guess that would need more discussion then. feminist (talk) 08:09, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps, though to me (as a native speaker of English) it's pretty clear-cut as being no different than how we capitalise "street" etc. when referring to a named street. 2Q (talk) 08:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI, I have reverted my moves. feminist (talk) 09:34, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Achasan station#Requested move 20 January 2018 set limits on Seoul, Daegu, Busan, and Daejeon metro stations. There is no consensus about railway stations like Seoul Station. Please revert your moves. And open the new WP:RM. Sawol (talk) 11:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

I consider there to be sufficient consensus at the RM discussion for Korean rail stations to drop the capital in "station". feminist (talk) 12:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Excuse me, but you are mistaken. That RM is not sufficient because Achasan Station is not representing the whole South Korean railway station. A general consensus should be built on the issue of stations in Template:KTX lines and services. Sawol (talk) 12:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Support !voters at the Achasan station RM discussion mentioned that Korean (and Japanese) railway stations should be decapitalized. None made any distinction regarding metro stations versus rail stations. If you want KTX station articles moved back to "Station", start a new RM. feminist (talk) 15:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Achasan Station, Anjirang Station, Anpyeong Station, and Banseok Station are all metro stations. There is a big difference between metro stations and Korail railway stations. See Daejeon Station (Daejeon Metro) in ko:File:Daejeon_Subway_Line_1_Map.jpg. The station has the 'Station'. User:R22-3877 pointed out that the names of metro stations are without the 'Station'. So, Talk:Achasan station#Requested move 20 January 2018 says that Daejeon Station (Daejeon Metro) should be moved to Daejeon Station station. Your moves for Korail railway stations have procedural defects. The nominator you made bad choices. Please open the new WP:RM for Korail railway stations at Talk:Seoul Station. Seoul Station is one top station in South Korea. Sawol (talk) 07:39, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

If you want to move Daejeon station (Daejeon Metro) to Daejeon Station station, you are free to move it yourself, or start an RM discussion on its talk page. feminist (talk) 07:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Daejeon Station station supports Daejeon Station, no Daejeon station. Sawol (talk) 08:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

No, see for example Shanghai Railway Station station named after Shanghai railway station, Convent Station station named after Convent Station, New Jersey, or West Rail line, named after the KCR West Rail. feminist (talk) 08:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

They are not for Korean stations. Your bad choices Achasan Station draw to the new WP:RM consensus for Korail railway stations. Good choices at Talk:Seoul Station. Sawol (talk) 08:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Changing posts

Hi, please don't do anything like this again. First, it's not clear that the comments violate WP:NPA. Second, you're involved. Third, you left no edit summary. If the comments rise to the level of personal attacks, in your view, you can ask an uninvolved admin to look at them. (To be clear, I'm involved there too.) SarahSV ^(talk) 17:03, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

DYK for 1976 Anapa mid-air collision

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of My Struggle (disambiguation)

The article My Struggle (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unnecessary disambiguation page after moving the only other two articles to the hatnote of the primary topic.

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. -- Alex^TW 19:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Alison (company)

Rather than make edits to the Alison (Company) Profile, you erased the entire updated version. Can you please share why you did that? The narrative that is there now is five years old, incorrect, and outdated, yet you appear to remark that the old version should "at least be better"??? If what is proposed is too long, we can make it shorter. Every statement added was referenced and in our opinion notable. We had only one link from the page to the Alison website. We have 12 million learners worldwide - they deserve and we deserve better. AlisonComenius2016 (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Feminist - you erased this revised profile in Feb - however the editor you suggested I discuss it with has not responded to me. Other editors made edits on the profile after my posting - but did not erase the whole lot. Can you work with me please to identify what part of the revised profile you had issue with? I put a lot of time into the revision - it has over 80 links and is an important depository of verifiable, notable information on the topic. Can we connect more directly? Greatly appreciate the work you do. I contribute / edit other websites on topics where I have expertise - have not done so on Wikipedia - although I may start given the many issues being highlighted to me in this instance. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comenius2016 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Your job is unstuck

Well it took two months, but I finally got your job unstuck. It's now running normally.—CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:07, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Station template case

Hello and thank you for fixing the calls to {{station}} to make titles lower case. This is a big improvement but I've come across a few cases where there is a further parameter after the upper case flag and we need to keep the vertical bar. Example: editing Daejeon station turns {{station|Jungangno|x|Daejeon}} into {{station|Jungangno|Daejeon}} rather than {{station|Jungangno||Daejeon}}. I've fixed the ones I spotted but I suspect there may be more. Do you have a list? Thanks again, Certes (talk) 15:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Another problem is that some of the links use redirects which only exist in upper case, e.g. Jungangno Station (Daejeon) → Jungangno station (Daejeon Metro) but there's no Jungangno station (Daejeon). I looked through redirects of the form Foo Railway Station and Foo Railway Station (Bar) a few months ago and added lower case equivalents where necessary, but sadly we may now have to do the same for Foo Station and Foo Station (Bar). Certes (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the fixes. Regarding {{station}} fixes, looks like I did 22. IIRC other metro systems I fixed (mainly in China and Korea) use system-specific templates instead of {{station}}, so these should be unaffected. In cases where the links use redirects that only exist in upper case, both updating the links and/or creating redirects would work. feminist (talk) 16:15, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

That's a useful tool. It looks as if we'd already caught all the Foo|x|Bar cases. I'll get to work on creating redirects, as they will also be useful for other purposes. For Railway Station there were 777 redirects of which about 200 needed duplicating, but I would expect far fewer for Station. Certes (talk) 16:53, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Feminist

Are you really a feminist? If you are, tell me what you think about it. You can see what I think about it in my talk page. Hope to hear from you soon! :) DaisyCarpenter7 (talk) 22:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

DaisyCarpenter7 (talk) 22:51, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Feminist seems to support Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red and closing the gender gap, so I would say that's a "yes". A diversity of views and experiences helps to make a better encyclopedia. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:59, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

9/9

Hello feminist - I'm puzzled: you re-created the 9/9 redirect today, against the consensus to delete it at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 18#9/9 (in which you contributed), closed by User:Amorymeltzer. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:05, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

The consensus was to delete a redirect from 9/9 to 0.999.... It doesn't mean I cannot create a redirect that points to a different article. feminist (talk) 09:23, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

It does mean exactly that, since retargeting the redirect to September 9 was specifically discussed in the RFD. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:56, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd hold off. While Tavix' efforts were noble, plenty of participants explicitly considered the option and dismissed it. There is enough other stuff that I won't take umbrage if you go to DRV or canvass the other participants, but I do agree that the participants specifically opted against what you just did. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:38, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Amory. I will give my efforts a score of 9/9 (read: nine out of nine). While I think it is possible, though not likely, to find a "no consensus, retarget" result out of the discussion (but then again, I'm biased), the correct course of action would be to challenge it in WP:DRV rather than taking a unilateral action that several participants argued against. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 9/9

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on 9/9, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I've downgraded this to a RfD debate - I don't think CSD G4 applies as the target is different, so it fails the "substantially identical" part of the criteria. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)