Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969/Archive 107

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 100←Archive 105Archive 106Archive 107Archive 108Archive 109Archive 110

Archive 107: October 2022

Expo 2024/Lodz redirect

I don't understand why the Expo 2024 page would redirect to the Polish city of Lodz. There is no such event as Expo 2024 anyway, but since I don't know how to delete that redirect page, I simply removed the redirect. If you know how to do it, could you delete the Expo 2024 page? Cheers Nyoome — Preceding undated comment added 03:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Page triage

Hi Onel5959, I have seen that you can tag pages without marking the page as reviewed. If I tag a page for maintenance, the check of the NPP toolbar becomes green, and then I have to unreview the page again myself, if I am not so comfortable with approving the article. So my question is how do you do tag an article without marking it as reviewed? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:19, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

I think that has changed now, so that when you tag an article, the "mark as reviewed" button no longer is auto checked. But if it is, simply click on it to uncheck it. Onel5969 TT me 09:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the helpful reply.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 12:38, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Tanushree Chatterjee

Hello Onel5969. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Tanushree Chatterjee, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanushree Chatterjee was in 2017 with the substantive deletion rationale neatly summarised as WP:TOOSOON. No prejudice to a second nomination. . Thank you. User:Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 10:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi there... not quibbling with your decision, I routinely send these to G4 since I can't see the originally deleted article. But you state "the substantive deletion rationale neatly summarised as WP:TOOSOON. No prejudice to a second nomination." Are you saying that's why YOU are rejecting the G4? Or that that was the AfD rationale? If the former, cool, thank you, if the latter, where did I miss that? The way I read the AfD, the result was simply, "The result was delete." Again not quibbling, just want to make sure I'm not missing something. Thank you. Onel5969 TT me 10:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography tagging

Thank you for all the NPP work you're doing! As a small suggestion, I wanted to say to watch out when setting the "living" parameter on WikiProject Biography, as I've noticed a few you've done for living people where it's set to "living=no", e.g. Anjali Kusumbe. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up... I never "set" the parameter to "no". When using the rating tool, you have to click on the box to mark it "living", but not clicking it shouldn't mark them as dead. The next time I use that tool, I'll double check after I make the edit, and see if it's an issue. Onel5969 TT me 18:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Ah, not ideal if it sets "no" by default. I assume the tool creator thought that was a better outcome than them being flagged up on Category:Biography articles without living parameter. Setting it to something appears to be mandatory. -Kj cheetham (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Okay, so I just checked, and if you do not check the box, it does default to dead. Thank you so much for spotting that, I'll make sure to always check the box for living in the future. The issue will be when I can't ascertain whether or not the individual is still alive. For instance, sometimes, the article will not have a date of death, and if they were born from 1920 on, there is the chance they are still alive. Onel5969 TT me 18:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
I guess it's up to our best judgement when using the tool in that case. Personally I'd be inclined to say for anyone after about 1920 assume they are alive unless it explicitly mentions they died (doesn't need a date). -Kj cheetham (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Emptying the articles

What are you doing? I have put two sources from a highly credible football site. How can I put a source for the match schedule? What you do is not constructive. Sakiv (talk) 10:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Just left a message on your talk page. The two sources you have put on both of those pages do not include the information in those tables. The tables you have inserted have a place to insert the report for each match. You have used it on other pages you have created (or someone else has). All info on WP must meet WP:VERIFY. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 10:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
You can find the matches in the first source of Mallorca and in the second source of Osnabrück. You are wasting our times for no reason. Tag the articles!--Sakiv (talk) 11:00, 3 October 2022 (UTC

I had a similar experience with respect to blanking content and redirecting page Rajyotsava Awards (2022). I have busy the last two weeks to add more references. A simple search would have let you see numerous news articles covering the topic. It is the second highest civilian award in state of Karnataka. And a list of awardees is clearly notable. I would have rather had you WP:RFD instead. Someone else would have rescued it or helped with adding more references. Perhaps you could have added a reference too than blank content and redirect. As a courtesy to a fellow editor who has been around, a note in my talk page would have be appreciated. Please restore content and I will quickly add multiple references to the page. Going forward please desist from blanking content unless the content is objectionable or factually incorrect. Thank you. Arunram (talk) 06:43, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Additional comments: Also the WP:GNG guidelines clearly specify in the case of WP:FAILN, the remedies were for you to 1) "Look for sources yourself" 2) Ask the article's creator 3) Involve WikiProject... If these fail the suitable remedy was WP:AFD. The reference provided is the article is from a credible source The Hindu per WP:RSP which lists it as WP:GREL and I quote it "There is consensus that The Hindu is generally reliable and should be treated as a newspaper of record". I am sure you would concur as a senior editor. Blanking and redirecting was not the appropriate response before exhausting other suggested options. I have posted this here to seek consensus before I go ahead and add multiple references on a clearly notable article. Best regards Arunram (talk) 07:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
I have no idea what you are talking about. Onel5969 TT me 10:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Beautiful Jersey

I've declined the revdel request on Beautiful Jersey as it looks to be out of copyright material. As far as I can tell Lennox died in 1906 so in any jurisdiction where copyright in pma+100 or less, it's out of copyright. For the US it was registered for copyright in 1944 but I can't find it in the renewals database anywhere so it looks to be PD in the US as well. Nthep (talk) 14:40, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Where redirects should point.

You recently turned African Beauty (song) from an article to a redirect. You redirected to the artist, rather than the album. If you are going to be lazy when creating redirects then I shall be equally lazy in reverting you. Pls redirect to the album, where appropriate. Thanks. Richhoncho (talk) 16:35, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, if you're going to be lazy and not understand that either target is acceptable (since it is mentioned on both), not much can be done for you. From NSONG: "Songs that do not rise to notability for an independent article should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song." Onel5969 TT me 16:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Mentorship Request

Hi @user:Onel5969, I trust you are doing well. In the past few years, I have made some meaningful edits, made mistakes and try to effect correction when my attention is drawn. However, I would like to step up volunteering activities on the collaborative project. Hence, my humble request for mentorship for NPR/NPP in helping reduce the burden on the existing reviewers/patrollers.

Thanks for your time and consideration.

Best regards Fatimah (talk) 21:34, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Orphan

Talia Or, fascinated 3 October, article begun 4 October, waiting for a review until 5 October, hardly added: orphan tag. I like to first write something substantial and then link. For a person born here, studied there, it would really not be hard to place a link or two, instead of a tag. Just my view. I fixed it now, but imagine I had gone out for hours as planned ... -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Gerda, apologies for that, did not see that you had done the article (AWB) doesn't do that, and I missed it when I double-checked. I try not to template the regulars (and certainly not someone of your stature). FWIW, I actually tagged myself yesterday, see this.Onel5969 TT me 12:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
that's funny, thank, makes me feel much better --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The draftification of the page Barak Turkmens

Dear Onel5969,

Thank you for reviewing this article. If possible, I would like to learn the specific reason behind why this article was moved to the draft space, because compared to most articles that were turned to drafts, this article had much more content and better-quality sources (the bulk of the sources coming from academic papers or books). Moreover, none of the sources have a conflict of interest. After the draftification, I tried to back up unsourced bits or remove them for the moment, but the change wasn't substantial, since most of the content was supported by the sources provided. I have the feeling that because I didn't use repeated references, it may have been misunderstood that some full paragraphs (in the History section) were not backed up with sources. Though, in those cases, the sources listed at the end of the section would be supporting them. This would be a mistake on my behalf, which I tried to address in my further edits. Still, I am confused on the exact reason and would be delighted if you were to clarify it and/or give some feedback on the current state of the page. I will have to contest this decision.

Thank you. Ayıntaplı (talk) 14:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been off computer since you asked this question. I would have moved it back to mainspace, which you have already done. And Arthistorian1977 has already marked it reviewed. While not required, it's better to make sure that each assertion has a footnote, and the changes you've made are perfectly fine. Thank you for your efforts. Onel5969 TT me 21:12, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Save my article




— Preceding unsigned comment added by HugoAcosta9 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

@HugoAcosta9 to save the owner of this page from replying to your four requests, it is not up to them. It is up to you. Improve the articles with the references asked for, and ensure that each deletion discussion is made ware that you have done so.
Asking in four different sections shows lack of restraint. I have compressed these into one section. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 22:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
I apologize to you Mister Onel5969, I realized it was a misunderstanding, one of my subsections "Matches" was unsourced, now I include the link and reference. I thought The Banner was speaking about my whole article. I know Timtrent and I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. HugoAcosta9 (talk) 22:24, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Satkhol

Hi Onel5969. Hope you are keeping well. Thanks for reviewing this article and giving your suggestions. However the subject of the article is a tourist place and being a small village it doesnt have much reliable sources. I observe many villages,towns,cities having main space articles though not having sufficient references. Kindly share your inputs. Gardenkur (talk) 11:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Long time no speak. Hope you are well also. To establish notability of a place you need to have in-depth coverage. Obviously, this does not have that. Where did you get the information in the Background section? Was that from some type of government census site? If so, if you include that source, it passes WP:GEOLAND. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 11:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Sorry saw your note late. Thanks for your suggestion. However I noticed villages and towns with no substantial coverage but exists as they are geographical identity. Sure will try to get references for content in background section. Gardenkur (talk) 07:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Can you review once as I have added references and let me know if its good to move to main space. Thanks. Gardenkur (talk) 13:46, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Nice job! Have moved it back into mainspace. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 14:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969. Thanking you for helping me on this through your guidance. Would like to associate more with you in making Wikipedia a wonderful platform for informational puposes. Gardenkur (talk) 14:35, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

You can always ask for help, as I said, keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 23:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Changes Rolled Back

  • Hi user:Onel5969, I recently made changes to the Openserve page and I see that all the changes and reinstatement of the dedicated entry for Openserve was completely rolled back. I need to understand why, as the issues with Openserve having a dedicated page (it was a division of Telkom not a separate entity) has changed. Openserve should no longer be redirected to the Telkom page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NicholasdebruyneFalcorp (talk • contribs) 07:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
    Being a "seperate entity" is irrelevant. There was an AfD discussion which decided that Telkom should be redirected to the other page. Are you associated with the corporation in some way? Onel5969 TT me 10:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Carol_Podedworny https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Laura_Millard

Could you review these 2 articles when you get a chance? Thank you, Joan Murray Joan arden murray (talk) 13:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I had already reviewed the Millard article last month, and it looks good. I removed a peacock reference in the lead from the Podedworny article. If sources say she was a pioneer, then that should be in the body of the article, with a reference. If they do refer to her that way, then it's fine to put back in the lead. The lead should also be expanded. There is enough stuff in this article that a four-five sentence summary should suffice. Actually, same with the Millard article. Other than that, very nice job. Onel5969 TT me 19:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. will do. JoanJoan arden murray (talk) 20:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Could you help me please? By accident, correcting Carol Podedworny, I blanked the page. Could you put it back? I don't know what I did. The instructions to unblank it are gibberish to me.Joan arden murray (talk) 21:20, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Somebody restored it. In the future, if that happens, simply go to the history of the page, and click "undo" on the edit which blanked the page. Onel5969 TT me 21:22, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. JoanJoan arden murray (talk) 21:37, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

You have removed content which was attributed

You removed a ton of World Ringette Championships event pages which had information collected from the World Ringette Championships article (and was improved) but was removed from the WRC to reduce the size of the WRC article. Can you please explain how this is reasonable considering this content had been approved for years but had only been moved then tweaked? CheckersBoard (talk) 01:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Because it was uncited. Please see WP policy, WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 TT me 01:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

2019 World Ringette Championships - thanks!

Wow were you ever right! It looks like it had only one source! I had to figure out how to view the old page. I panicked thinking everything was gone but one source? o_O I can only say thank-you, that article was a yikes lol. Sorry for the trouble :) CheckersBoard (talk) 02:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Mount Trumbull, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mount Trumbull, Arizona 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/Mount Trumbull, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 03:50, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Bhawi

This is a village in Rajasthan. I think it is to be added to Wikipedia. MahendraPrajapatKhejarla (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Then you need to add sources which show that it indeed exists, and is recognized by the government. Onel5969 TT me 13:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Amparo Serrano contested deletion

Amparo Serrano This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because they copied the text that I wrote and I can prove it. It is obvious that I wrote it first because of the hyperlinks to "abortion debate" and "girl group" that are internal articles of Wikipedia, so they stole my original text. Mruanova (talk) 14:23, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries, an admin who has more expertise than I do in these matters will take a closer look, if what you say is true (and I have no reason to believe it is not), they'll remove the tag. You've already voiced this on the talk page. Onel5969 TT me 14:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Bhawi

This page is a about a village and official government reference has been added. MahendraPrajapatKhejarla (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Undo redirect: McGill University School of Biomedical Sciences

Dear User @Onel5969,

I request that you undo the auto redirect of the page entitled "McGill University School of Biomedical Sciences," of which I spent hours creating and editing, to the page "McGill University Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences." I created this page for the purpose of public knowledge and information. The McGill University School of Biomedical Sciences is an entirely separate organization to that of its parent institution. The McGill University School of Biomedical Sciences has enough significant history, activity, and information to deem a unique Wikipedia page necessary. Furthermore, I have added original sentences with proper citations, according to APA citation stylings. Therefore, your redirect is not valid and your reasoning is unfounded. Please follow up immediately. The information I put on the page was common knowledge and the factual information was cited correctly. There is no reason why the page is being redirected. Justinhandgregory (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

None of which is relevant. What is relevant was the dearth of in-depth coverage of the entity from reliable independent sources, which is the WP policy which was cited. Onel5969 TT me 16:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
You have been reported to the Wikipedia administrator's noticeboard. McGill University has many other schools and departments listed on Wikipedia that have not been redirected to their parent institutions, some even with more blatant copyright violations. Your reasoning is unfounded and is a misuse of your admin power. Additionally, had you let me work on the page a bit, plenty of in-depth coverage from reliable independent sources would have been added. Justinhandgregory (talk) 16:14, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Just to clarify their above comment that you have been reported to the Wikipedia administrator's noticeboard, they opened at discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents in which you are mentioned. The topic is Unfounded reasoning and misuse of power for redirection of a page. I only mention this because it doesn't appear that you were actually notified of this. - Aoidh (talk) 16:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the head's up. Onel5969 TT me 17:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Nick Wolny

Hello, I appreciate your review of my article however it has been moved to draft-space by another reviewer. I just wanted to let you know that I have submitted it to the article creation queue for assessments and removed your maintenance tags because the article is no longer in the main-space. Kspoty (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)

Did you remove Robert Campbell (artist)? Why?

Hi @Onel5969. Eight days ago, you reviewed a page I created, Robert Campbell (artist). Now it's gone. What happened? Can you please help me get it back? Pcaabplroa (talk) 03:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

It did not have enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass notability criteria (WP:GNG). It was redirected to Brass Tacks Press. If you would like to work on it, I could move it into draft for you. Onel5969 TT me 11:26, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

orphan page

@Onel5969, page link has been created. so Mara Rudman is not an orphan page now.- AbuSayeed (talk) 09:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I've removed the tag. Onel5969 TT me 11:27, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Help move Nederlandse Stoomboot Maatschappij

Hi @Onel5969 as you noted on my talk page, please help move Nederlandse Stoomboot Maatschappij to Nederlandsche Stoomboot Maatschappij (with 'ch'). This move is blocked by Nederlandsche Stoomboot Maatschappij currently being a redirect page to Fijenoord.Grieg2 (talk) 13:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Done. Nice job on the article, keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 13:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick action! I added a new infobox image to Nederlandsche Stoomboot Maatschappij, which explains the relation to its shipyard Fijenoord.Grieg2 (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Six Super Universities

Hi colleague, the proposed page does have factual bases which have been included in the draft. See e.g. "World Reputation Rankings 2016 methodology". Times Higher Education (THE). 2016-05-04. Retrieved 2022-10-08. Btnls (talk) 03:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Whether or not it's a real concept is fine. But not relevant to WP:GNG. You need several in-depth sources from independent, reliable references which talk about it, in order to show it's notable. Hope that helps. Onel5969 TT me 10:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Why was the page 'Su Shihao' redirected?

Hello fellow editor, the page 'Su Shihao' was created by me and focuses on a player for Qingdao Youth Island football club, I don't know why yesterday it was reviewed and redirected to the page of the football club by you. I hope this could be reverted.

Hi. Two things first. Whenever you leave a message for someone, please remember to sign it with four tildes (~~~~). Second, please leave a link to whatever it is you are talking about. Now about the player, as was said in the edit summary: not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG.Onel5969 TT me 10:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Tom McKendrick (DA RSW RGI)

Makes no sense in putting a CSD tag on a redirect - the CSD tag goes on the actual article, which when deleted means the redirect is no longer valid and can be deleted. Dan arndt (talk) 11:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

I was running copyvio while you were redirecting. When I added it, it was a page. Also, the source you reference in your CSD, doesn't really state its copyright procedure, the second source, which was the one I referenced, should probably be used. Most likely not a big deal. Thanks for your help. Onel5969 TT me 12:02, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Not a problem both the article and the redirect have been deleted now. Dan arndt (talk) 12:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I didn't figure it would be... Onel5969 TT me 12:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Review

Hi, today Draft:Habib_Alejalil rejected with the reason "they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject" but there is enough reliable sources to verify for example [1] [2] [3] can you please look into draft and tell me your opinion about it? ZEP55 (talk) 12:21, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Waiting for reply. ZEP55 (talk) 19:16, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Regarding my articles

Hello, I noticed you have been and still are deleting the content of my articles without at least moving them to draft or putting tags on them for me know whats wrong. Can I ask for you to move them to put them in draft or add tags without deleting please? Larasabri401 (talk) 13:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

You'll have to let me know which articles, and I'll be happy to move them to draft for you. Onel5969 TT me 13:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
The Tale of the Travelling Seagull, In the Harbour of Days, The Puppet (Novel), Two Rooms and a Hall Larasabri401 (talk) 13:30, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi. The first one is at Draft:The Tales of the Traveling Seagull 2, Draft:The Puppet (novel), Draft:In the Harbour of Days, and Draft:Two Rooms and a Hall. And they were never deleted, they were redirected to the author's article. And as was said in the edit summary, there are not enough in-depth references from independent, reliable sources to show they meet notability criteria. Onel5969 TT me 13:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

warina hussain

what is the issue with the biography of the actress Warina Hussain? have provided adequate references. And why is it being redirected to create ambiguity, either delete it or allow editors to expand it, why is it being redirected to one film only. Kindly participate in article talk page, notability changed overtime June to Oct 2022Fostera12 (talk) 15:03, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Because that was the consensus of a very recent AfD. Onel5969 TT me 16:14, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Why did you tag my article for notability?

Why did you tag Gaotang Long for notability? There are two sources and a search of Google Books finds quite a few more. Mucube (talk) 15:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

It only has two sources, one of which is unreliable. Another issue, although it does not go to notability, is that is has zero footnotes. Onel5969 TT me 15:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
First of all, I didn't use footnotes because I didn't find the need for it. I use both of the sources throughout the entire page.
Second, what is the unreliable source you are mentioning? Mucube (talk) 18:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
And what happens when another editor adds something to the page? Anyway, chinaknowledge is not a reliable source. Onel5969 TT me 19:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Ok, I will be adding footnotes. But why is Chinaknowledge unreliable? Mucube (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Quadrant House

Hi! I've seen that you moved the page Quadrant House to the draft space. Nonetheless, I believe the article should be moved back to the mainspace since it is about a national heritage listed building. As such, it is convention that the very same source from the national register are enough to demonstrate the article's notability. Moreover, in addition to that I have also included an additional source, thus more than satisfying the sources requirements. I'd be glad if you could revert the move. Thank you! Plumbago Capensis (talk) 16:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. I've moved it back, but right now it has zero independent reliable sources, which is why it was moved to draft to begin with. Onel5969 TT me 17:40, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi again, thank you for the intervention. Why do you say it has no independent sources? The article has a link with the proper SAHRA listing details, plus a reference to another catalog, independent from SAHRA (the 'Artefacts' reference). What I want to say is that in my opinion the article satisfies notability and the the independent reliable sources requirement, too.--Plumbago Capensis (talk) 19:40, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Regarding lack of good sources for "Women's Indian Premier League"

Here are five sources that could be used for that article: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/bcci-set-to-launch-five-team-womens-ipl-in-march-2023-1339813, https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/124105/bcci-considers-5-teams-2-venues-20-league-matches-for-inaugural-wipl, https://theprint.in/sport/womens-ipl-set-to-take-place-in-march-with-5-teams-max-5-overseas-players-in-xi/1166291/, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/sports/cricket/ipl/top-stories/womens-ipl-set-to-take-place-in-march-2023-with-5-teams/articleshow/94835731.cms, https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/five-teams-in-womens-ipl-with-22-matches-to-be-played-bcci-8207222/. With these sources, would you be willing to reinstate the article? GreekApple123 (talk) 18:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Okay Look Sorry.....

I'm just fustrated that you Turned my Oggy Next Gen page into a redirect. I don't know how to do the opposite of "not enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to pass GNG, nor VERIFY". PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 23:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

@PickleAndPeanutFan: You'd have to find in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources that show it's notable. If secondary reliable sources don't exist then the article shouldn't be here because it's not able to be verified as notable, even if you watched a lot of it. The reasons provided in the edit summary for redirecting (WP:RS, WP:GNG, WP:VERIFY) are very basic/core tenets of policy/guidelines so I'd advise brushing up on those to be sure you have some basic Wikipedia competence under your belt with which to edit. (Also, I'd recommend reading WP:CIVIL (also a basic/core tenet, though in the user behavior sphere rather than the content one) since I happened to be glancing at your contribs and saw your original reverted edit to this page which was very uncivil.) - Purplewowies (talk) 04:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
@Purplewowies what are the examples of in-depth coverages PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 09:25, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
@Purplewowies what are the examples of in-depth coverages PickleAndPeanutFan (talk) 09:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Please don't draft legitimate stubs

The ofgem reference is perfectly sufficient. Leave it in main space. I notice you disruptively draft a disproportionate amount of articles. Please consider becoming an inclusionist and expand articles instead of letting them languish in draft space where they will be deleted after six months. DonkeyW (talk) 12:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Please consider becoming a competent contributor. I have no idea what you are talking about, since you did not leave a link. And uncivil comments are not really the way to approach someone. Onel5969 TT me 12:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Sock; blocked. Girth Summit (blether) 12:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thanks. Onel5969 TT me 12:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Princess Lechang

I made some updates and added some book/journal articles as references as you suggest. Could you please review the updated draft ? Thank you. Inuyasha2021 (talk) 15:54, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

@Inuyasha2021 I'll take a look in 24 hours or so (ping me if I forget), came across this page through random AFC, ref 5 seems promising but there is likely no significant coverage on the character herself but more on the general story. (although zh wiki redirects zh:破镜重圆 to zh:乐昌公主). Will leave a note on your talk page after review. Justiyaya 18:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


Kondaveeti Venkatakavi

I noticed you removed Kondaveeti Venkatakavi page. He is well known poet and has books and movies to his credit. You can verify from other Telugu language wikipedians. He has even an article in telugu wikipedia. I put more information on talk page of article. I reverted changes. Please let me know if you disagree and what else I can do to improve your confidence.

mlpkr (talk) 03:42, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Accident

I may have accidentally unreviewed a page that you reviewed. Lily Goh Bruxton (talk) 15:52, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

It happens. No worries. Thanks for your efforts at NPP. Onel5969 TT me 00:29, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Question on your review of the article on heterostrain

Hi,

Thanks for checking my article on heterostrain. You flagged it with the "needs more citations for verification" which I don't understand. Could you be more precise on what part needs verification? The citations in the article are all from main Physics journals and most of them have been cite several times, up to more than a hundred times for some of them according to google scholar. It seems to me that this satisfies the wikipedia verifiability page. Thanks for your help. Note that I've added a talk page on the article. Maybe a batter place to discuss this?Spaguettovince (talk) 20:13, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Every assertion needs a reference. So for example, the Etymology section has no reference. And when I reviewed it, the section following that was woefully undersourced. Hope that helps. Onel5969 TT me 00:31, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for sharing the good practice. I've added sources to the Etymology section. I think it is now in order. Do you think I can remove the flag?Spaguettovince (talk) 20:27, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Nice job. I've removed the tag. Onel5969 TT me 20:29, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for your help!!!Spaguettovince (talk) 05:53, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

CEDAW Alliance Germany

Hi Onel5969! Do you think CEDAW Alliance Germany is notable? I was on the fence about it during an NPP review and posted a message at the talk page hoping the page creator might have seen more sources. I found a few not cited in the article, but nothing with significant coverage. I came back to it today thinking to maybe take it to AfD. Would appreciate your thoughts! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:04, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

I can't find anything in-depth either. AfD is one route. You could draftify, the creator ignored your note on the talk page, so it might prompt them to put some more work into it. I thought about redirecting it to CEDAW, but the German branch isn't mentioned there. Personally, I'd draftify, but as I said, AfD is also an option. Onel5969 TT me 13:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Both are great alternatives to AfD. I'm going to go ahead and draftify. Thanks! Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:23, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

New page query

Hi, I see you reviewed Stuart Sorbie but I am struggling to see see how this article meets our notability guidelines in its current state. Can you let me know which refs you think assert this sufficiently? This is especially an issue as the article creator has recently created many articles which have dubious or no notability. Thanks. Bungle (talk • contribs) 17:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

That looks like a misclick on my part. I remember looking at it either yesterday or this morning, and I looked through the 10 sources, none of which go in-depth about the person (although there is one decent article which is about them). I thought I had tagged it for notability, but with the new curate tool defaulting to "not reviewed", not sure how that happened. Yes, this editor is creating numerous articles which last year would easily have passed AfD, but with the recent changes, no longer do. Very nice catch. Onel5969 TT me 18:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
No worries. The source you suggest may be "decent" is possibly the one with almost entirely interview quotation. I saw this article flag up in new pages list and was somewhat bemused it had been reviewed without highlighting the referencing issue (this editor seems to be making many similar type articles recently). As you say, not long ago it may have been received more kindly when WP:NFOOTY was a thing, but not now. If it's a mistake then no worries! Bungle (talk • contribs) 19:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I already went back and prodded it. Fram is having quite an issue with this editor. Onel5969 TT me 20:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Jan Mikulka

In the case of Jan Mikulka, your suspicion of a conflict of interest is absolute nonsense and an affront to my professional honour. I founded the Art Library project in the Czech Wikipedia, where there are almost 1200 entries and I select artists only with regard to their importance. One of the entries is the Studio of Classical Painting Techniques of Prof. Zdeněk Beran and I am gradually adding entries of his students who have made a mark abroad with their work. I have no family ties with the artist, I do not own any of his works and I have only communicated with him in the process of arranging the copyrights needed to publish the paintings. The article is, in my opinion, adequately referenced to sources.--NoJin (talk) 21:55, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

So you do admit you have a relationship with them. Please follow WP:COI. Onel5969 TT me 21:58, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
What do you mean by "a relationship"? I have only relationship with Czech art in general as author of the Art Library project, but none of listed in WP:COI.--NoJin (talk) 22:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
You have been in communication with them. That's COI. Onel5969 TT me 00:39, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
I insist that I have no family, client, financial, employer or other ties to the artists for whom I have written Wikipedia articles. I am originally a molecular biologist and write articles in my spare time. I have never written anything for hire and I am very scrupulous about protecting my right to choose my own topics. Of course, I had to get their permission to publish the work, but I often take the photographs myself so that I don't have to ask the author or photographer. Jan Mikulka is one of dozens of Czech artists whose articles I have contributed. The fact that I provide illustrations of artists' work makes my project special and has been recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation with an article on its blog.--NoJin (talk) 13:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

RE: Faculty of Agronomy, University of Buenos Aires

Hi! I saw you've redirected the page Faculty of Agronomy, University of Buenos Aires to the main article on the university on grounds of lacking general notability and lack of reliable sources. I'm a little confused on this, seeing as the article contained detailed references coming from notable publications such as independent newspapers (La Nación and Página 12) as well as a book on the faculty's history. If the issue is the lack of sources, I would be happy to add more to the article. To discard it entirely (especially given the fact an article on the faculty already exists at Spanish Wikipedia), does come across as extreme. dainshku • talk page 22:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

The La Nación article is about the school, and only includes a brief paragraph. The Página 12 is an interview, which is a primary source, and therefore doesn't go to notability. The book about the faculty's history is a primary source, having been published by the university. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 00:43, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Okezue Bell

And finally... I give you the AfD. Got any silver bullets and garlic? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:48, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

My removed pages

I can understand why you’ve removed my pages about the Dutch footballers and the st Vincent and the grenadines goalkeeper, but what independent sources am I supposed to find about fourth tier Dutch footballers and a 20-year-old goalkeeper from a small Caribbean archipelago? Sorry if this come across as sarcastic but I’m just looking for advice on sources Jackoooo45 (talk) 21:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. And thanks for reaching out. That's kind of the point about GNG. Just because they played football, doesn't necessarily make them notable. The guidelines have changed in the past year. There used to be an SNG (Specific Notability Guideline) for footballers, but so many stub articles were being created about players where there wasn't a lot of coverage, that the SNG was deprecated, so now WP:GNG is what is needed. I don't do a lot of research on European and Caribbean subjects, so I don't know where to point you regarding sourcing. You might ask at WP:TEAHOUSE or on the project pages for those subjects... in this case I would guess Wikipedia:WikiProject Caribbean, Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Netherlands. Hope that helps.Onel5969 TT me 01:27, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Whitlock Cienega, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Whitlock Cienega, Arizona 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/Whitlock Cienega, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Hog Farm Talk 15:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Stub status in Plasmodiophore

Hello, could I ask you to please reassess the quality status of Plasmodiophore? I think it no longer is a stub. Snoteleks (talk) 17:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Definitely not! Have changed the status (but you can do that yourself, you know). Thanks for pointing it out! Onel5969 TT me 01:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! I didn't want to do it myself since I don't really know how to assess the quality of articles, it would've been my first time and I'd rather let an experienced user do it. Snoteleks (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Yampai, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yampai, Arizona 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/Yampai, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 18:04, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wood Springs, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wood Springs, Arizona 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/Wood Springs, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 18:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wingfield, Yavapai County, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wingfield, Yavapai County, Arizona 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/Wingfield, Yavapai County, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 18:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wingfield, Coconino County, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wingfield, Coconino County, Arizona 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/Wingfield, Coconino County, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 18:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Note on Let us break Bread together on our Knees

Is still in my draftspace, Draft:Let Us Break Bread Together. To find good sources is not easy, as most are relgious sources, which I view of questionable veracity. Wisdom?

dino (talk) 18:16, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

If you click on the editor's resources, and then the links for news and books, I think you can find enough references. This is a well known hymn (I happen to know all the lyrics myself). There's this, this, and this, and that was just on the first page of the search of news. This was on Books. So the sources are out there. Give it a whack and ping me and I'll have another look. I'm looking forward to seeing what you can do with it. Onel5969 TT me 01:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Willow Spring, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Willow Spring, Arizona 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/Willow Spring, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 19:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Willow, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Willow, Arizona 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/Willow, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 20:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Wickchoupai, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wickchoupai, Arizona 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/Wickchoupai, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 20:03, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Tonto Estate, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tonto Estate, Arizona 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/Tonto Estate, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 22:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Rose Creek Lodge, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rose Creek Lodge, Arizona 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/Rose Creek Lodge, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 00:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Aztec Lodge, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Aztec Lodge, Arizona 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/Aztec Lodge, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 01:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Dehorn, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dehorn, Arizona 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/Dehorn, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

in appreciation

The Reviewer Barnstar
For the reviewer whose name I am always grateful to see. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 12:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Ichabod Chauncey

What convinced you to add the "notability" tag to this article? I think the sources in the article (and other references in the ODNB entry, here) indicate references in secondary sources going back 300 years. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. And first of all, thank you for your contributions to the project. I've reviewed quite a few articles you've created, and have always enjoyed them. Second, in response to your question, mostly since there are only two refs used in the article, and one of them is primary. I'm pretty sure they are notable, it's just right now, the footnotes are a tad thin. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Fair enough. I've added this source (p. 67) to the "Further reading" section. Combined with this source (p. 178) and the ODNB entry, do you think that is enough to remove the tag? I realise the inline citations are slight, but they are reliable. And notability is established by the "Further reading", in my view. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Absolutely. Nice job. Keep it up. Onel5969 TT me 12:22, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of La Cienega, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article La Cienega, Arizona 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/La Cienega, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 00:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Noah, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Noah, Arizona 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/Noah, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 04:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Molly_Bobak

When you get a chance, could you please change this artist's name to Molly Lamb Bobak. She was a friend of mine and always preferred this form of her name. I have tried several times to change it but couldn't. Thanks, as always, Joan arden murray (talk) 13:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Will do, but you should not edit the article, as you have a WP:COI issue. In the future, please request changes to be made to any artist you have a connection with. Or ping me and I'll take a look. Wouldn't want to see a valuable contributor like you get in trouble. Onel5969 TT me 13:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Will have to wait a bit, clearly, as per WP:COMMONNAME, it should be Molly Lamb Bobak, but there is a redirect which is blocking the move. Normally I could do a three-way move, however, back in 2012, the info from Molly Lamb Bobak was cut and paste to the new article, Molly Bobak, and a history merge needs to be completed first. If you could keep your eye on the article, after the histmerge is completed, I'll be happy to move it for you. Onel5969 TT me 13:42, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!! and for the good advice too!Joan arden murray (talk) 23:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries. And done! Onel5969 TT me 00:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Glad about that, puts icing on the cake! Thanks, Joan.Joan arden murray (talk) 12:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Splitting of Aurora (singer)

Hi Onel5969. I was going to split Aurora (singer) and I saw that in the past you objected to that split. Would you still object, or do you agree it is time to do it with the article now over 140k? --Muhandes (talk) 17:24, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for reaching out... no, it looks long enough to qualify... go right ahead. Just remember to leave the correct attribution in your edit summary. Onel5969 TT me 17:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
Sure thing, happy editing! --Muhandes (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Kool Corner, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kool Corner, Arizona 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/Kool Corner, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 19:02, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Draftication of Qdot and its recreation

I created the article Qdot (https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:Qdot) with references in line with Wikipedia guidelines but maybe it wasn't enough because the article was drafted but the article was recreated with only blog References (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qdot) and it is still on the Wikipedia space. I am confused. Can you help me to check the two pls?

Nomination of Engesser Junction, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Engesser Junction, Arizona 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/Engesser Junction, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 14:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

AFD

Hi, letting you know about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T. R. Kesavan given you previously PRODed the article. MaxnaCarta (talk) 23:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

"Non-load bearing wall" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Non-load bearing wall and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 25#Non-load bearing wall until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 65.92.244.114 (talk) 03:42, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Achi, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Achi, Arizona 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/Achi, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 03:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Angell, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Angell, Arizona 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/Angell, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 04:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Peters Corner, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peters Corner, Arizona 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/Peters Corner, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 04:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Oit Ihuk, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Oit Ihuk, Arizona 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/Oit Ihuk, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 04:52, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nasty Vlădoiu

You moved to draft but it has been returned to main without much improvement. In view of COI or UPE issues may be AfD 'ready'! Eagleash (talk) 12:46, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Maniklal Sinha Wikipedia new page

Sir I tried to resolve few issues and revised the article Maniklal Sinha. Kindly see once. Srikrishna1960 (talk) 15:16, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Blaisdell, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blaisdell, Arizona 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/Blaisdell, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Growler, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Growler, Arizona, 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/Growler, Arizona (3rd nomination) 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) 01:02, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Redirecting of Regional College of Pharmacy to RUHS Site

Have been working on Educational Universities and Colleges in India. Kindly Understand Regional college of Pharmacy is affiliated college of Rajasthan University of Health Sciences. It cannot be redirected to parent University.

I was Expecting others to add up in the page. For the same have i have recovered it back for further additions. Ansh.cardiff (talk) 11:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

That's irrelevant. It does not meet standards for WP:GNG. You need in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources. Onel5969 TT me 11:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Have Put Citations from
1) Pharmacy Council of India which is the Government Approved Pharmacy Council that provides approval to pharmacy Colleges // Most Reliable Pharmacy Body in India
2) Rajasthan University of Health Sciences which is the Government University which Affiliates the Colleges // Most Reliable Pharmacy Body in Rajasthan
3) AICTE which is the Government Body which checks the regularity of Education in India.
4) Rajasthan Pharmacy Council - A Council which approves the Certificates of Students after passing.
Kindly Guide further Ansh.cardiff (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
Have added Few Journal Citation and other references also - Can You please guide Ansh.cardiff (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Nik Omar Nik Abdul Aziz

Hello Onel5969. I have declined the speedy deletion of Nik Omar Nik Abdul Aziz, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because the recreated article is not substantially identical to the originally article deleted at AfD, and thus is not eligible for deletion under the G4 criteria. The originally deleted article consisted of only a sinle line of text, 1 infobox, 2 refs and 1 external link. This does not precluede a re-nominaton for deletion via AfD. Best wishes. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Zimin Foundation

Hello. Why do you find this article is an advertisement? - because of too long description of projects? I doubted about that but thought it was important information gathered together, although of course some links for specific projects are not independent. But there are other independent links to AI. If such a long list of projects looks too advertising - ok, I can shorten it, leaving only the most important projects of the foundation. The foundation is one of the most important organization supporting science, at least in Western Europe, so just deleting the article does not seem a good solution. Mlarisa (talk) 13:11, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Because it is simply a promotional brochure. It needs a complete re-write as is. And yes, I would drastically shorten the projects listings. Anything which is sourced by a primary source I would get rid of. Also, keep the article about the foundation, not about Zimin himself (e.g. the Carnegie Award was to him, not the foundation). If you would like I could move it into draft so that you can work on it if you would like.Onel5969 TT me 13:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Araby, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Araby, Arizona 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/Araby, Arizona (2nd nomination) 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 until the discussion has finished.

Mangoe (talk) 15:00, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Life with Luca for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Life with Luca, 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/Life with Luca 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) 01:02, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Los Burros, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Los Burros, Arizona 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/Los Burros, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 03:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Natches, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Natches, Arizona 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/Natches, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 03:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Nariska, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nariska, Arizona 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/Nariska, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 03:37, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Copyvio confusion?

I published a working draft of a biology list yesterday, List of Odonata species of Senegal. Thanks for taking interest in the article and improving it. I'm a little confused on some of the material that was removed because of apparent copyvio, though. The linked website (https://pixels.com/featured/california-dragonfly-mariola-bitner.html) contains none of the text from this article. Most of the text portions of this article are in fact copied or adapted from another wikipedia list, List of Odonata species of Sri Lanka. I intended to note this somewhere when completing the rest of the references as I polish up the list. I suppose I should have added an 'Under Construction' template to the top of the page. How should I proceed? -NoahElhardt (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries, when copying like that is unattributed, it is usually assumed to be a copyvio. But with what you say above, that is most likely a mirror, feel free to remove the revdel template, and rev my deletion of the material. But please provide the appropriate attribution when you do. Onel5969 TT me 14:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for picking up some AfC reviews! S0091 (talk) 19:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
No worries... now that NPP is under control, will do some work over there... Onel5969 TT me 19:54, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Dar Al Sharq Group for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dar Al Sharq Group, 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/Dar Al Sharq Group 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) 01:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Notability and promotion tags on Andre Soares (Brazilian-American writer, actor)

Good morning One! Hope you're doing well.

I just received a notification a tag was placed on a draft I just moved to the article space. This draft was reviewed by many contributors (for weeks) who brought forth great feedback. I applied all of it, ranging from citations to legal details removal and the use of last names in BLPs.

Every information in this article is backed by independent press coverage from international (Le Parisien, France, Shepherd.com), nationwide (Yahoo!) and local sources (municipalities in GA, Shoutout Atlanta and Voyage Atlanta, which I just came across and was just published 10/27/2022).

Reviews and critical reception on publications have been added word for word and can be verified through retailers' sources (which I did not include to avoid promotion and advertisement per BLPs guidelines).

The subject has a Google knowledge panel, which is an index of notability and visibility that can only be attained to Google's discretion.

External links and overall template are modeled over this one.

I see many articles in the disambiguation page for Andre Soares (similar names) with less coverage, less sources and less indexes of notability.

What would you like for me to correct on this page?

--

Thank you again and I hope you have a great weekend. A1ProtocolX (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, first, I'd love for it not to read like a promotional brochure for the individual. Second, I'd like for it to have more in-depth coverage from independent, reliable secondary sources. Please remember that interviews do not count towards notability. And third, every assertion in the article needs to referenced from a reliable source. This style of editing makes me think you might have some personal connection with the subject. If so, WP:COI or WP:UPE might apply. Do you have such a connection? Onel5969 TT me 13:37, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt response! I have no connection to the subject nor am I compensated for this. I came across his works during book club sessions (in college) and discussions. I was asked that and clarified it a few weeks ago while performing my first edits. What would you suggest to reach a more neutral tone? My intent was never to promote, which is why I kept the critical reception section as minimal as possible and removed the influences section I added a few weeks ago to avoid notability-by-inheritance.
I'll be happy to remove any information that seems like paid, contracted work or promotion. A1ProtocolX (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Mumurva, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mumurva, Arizona 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/Mumurva, Arizona 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 until the discussion has finished.

–dlthewave ☎ 19:56, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

I made a new film article Poovan (film)

Hi,

I am Ameer, I have created the articlePoovan (film) recently and during the editing another editor interrupted and added some tags early before I complete the article. due to the edit conflict, lost some more data which I had been working on. Now I've completed and could you please check.? Ameer al safar (talk) 07:31, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I couldn't get to this yesterday. Another editor has already marked it reviewed, so all's good. In the future, if you are working on developing an article, you might consider working on it in draftspace, first, that way, no one will interrupt your development. Even if an article is only a few minutes old, reviewers don't know whether you are done or not. I know that can be frustrating, so consider the draftspace option. Onel5969 TT me 10:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

By the Way Tour

Good evening! I noticed that you reverted my revision to the By the Way Tour article. Should I make my revision more complete? Chris25689 (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Take a look at WP:NTOUR, you need in-depth coverage from independent, secondary, reliable sources to show that it's notable. Interviews are primary, so don't count. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:19, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Definitely helpful! Thanks!
Chris25689 (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Good morning! I have two questions about secondary sources:
1. Could the secondary sources just be about individual concerts of the tour, or they have to be about the whole tour.
2. I reference that used in my revision was from the Red Hot Chili Peppers Live Archive, which is used as a reference in articles of other RHCP tours, such as the Stadium Arcadium World Tour, The Getaway World Tour, and 2022 Global Stadium Tour. The footnote states that it "is an unofficial website and is in no way affiliated with Red Hot Chili Peppers, their management and/or record label. The contents on this website are exclusively for informational purposes." Therefore, should it be considered as a secondary source?
Thank you!
Chris25689 (talk) 03:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Restore my New Idea page

Please refer to the title. But in addition, just make it a draft again instead of deleting my work. ADHD Ginger Boi.#ALM2M [[User:ChiserYT|ChiserYT]] ([[User talk:ChiserYT|talk]]) (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Done. Onel5969 TT me 10:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Errors fixed

Hi Onel, I’ve effected all changes you suggested to article Becoming Abi. Kindly check it out.

Thank you B.Korlah (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Nice job. Keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 10:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Matt White (paraclimber)

Hi Onel, a couple of days ago you declined my submission due to a suspected conflict of interest. I just messaged the Articles help team for next steps and they said to just explain my relationship (or lack of) to Matt White.

A friend of my climbs and competes at the national competitions in the UK. I first saw Matt White in the 2021 Nationals. Then again later this year in a few events including some of the Nationals. Whilst I’ve seen him climb (and heard lots of people talk about him and his story) I’ve never actually met him and he doesn’t know who I am (I promise I’m not stalking him).

Do you need anything else from me to help resolve this?

Thanks. Trevor Stocall (talk) 09:51, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the COI, yes, your above explanation is good enough. However, while the climber is accomplished, none of the sourcing is in-depth about him. Currently he does not meet either WP:GNG or WP:NSPORT. Onel5969 TT me 10:46, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. First hurdle over lol.
Now for the ‘notability’… This is my first article and I would have thought that each of the results pages meets the criteria for verifiable sources. I was unable to find lots of articles about Matt White, but the British Mountaineering Council (BMC) pages came up (with a secondary set of info about the result). Would that be sufficient?
Sorry to be a pain and thanks in advance Trevorstocall (talk) 14:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi. I'd have to take a look. What you want is at least three independent sources which go in-depth about the climber. If the BMC is independent, and reliable, than that would work for one of them. I did a brief WP:BEFORE, and I can't come up with any in-depth coverage, but there might be local sources I don't have access to. I'm more than willing to take a look at the article as you work on it and offer suggestions. Onel5969 TT me 15:53, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks. I’ll keep working on it and get back to you in a couple of weeks. Thanks for your help Trevorstocall (talk) 17:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Madan Lal Puri

Thank you very much for noticing the copyvios in the AfC contribution I recently accepted. I was obviously focused too much on notability, so I didn't run a copyvio check against the given sources. Good catch! Felix QW (talk) 11:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

No worries, that's why we have safety nets. In reviewing, I usually do the copyvio ck first, since if that's positive, everything else is irrelevant. Thanks for your contributions. Onel5969 TT me 11:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
But I do agree with your notability assessment. Onel5969 TT me 11:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Gonzalo Lira

I edited the Gonzalo Lira page at the same moment as it was draftified. I've deleted my edit but I presume something needs to be done to the page now? BobFromBrockley (talk) 14:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

No. It's being taken care of. Feel free to work on the existing draft, Draft:Gonzalo Lira Onel5969 TT me 14:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Quaternion Eagle

Not enough references? There were at least 8 references, while you redirected the page to a section with even less references, that is zero. That's the text I started with, and I was manually adding the references; I added three books just seconds before you reverted, and I was going to add others. Well, I am going to. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 14:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Est. 2021. I think we overlapped when I restored the redirect - when I checked, which was about five minutes before that, it hadn't been worked on in over an hour. You can always put an inuse tag on it. My only issue is the WP:VERIFY one.Onel5969 TT me 15:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

Abou your takedown on the article

What do you mean by that, other pages I saw are also like that. Maybe you could take them down. Why you are just noticing this specific page is the same could be said for other similar pages? Omega2330 (talk) 21:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I have no idea of what you're talking about. Onel5969 TT me 02:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969/Archive_107&oldid=1158515983"