User talk:Onel5969/Archive 96

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Onel5969. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 90

←

Archive 94

→

Archive 84:November 2021

I need your help can you review the article I created for Joaquin Domagoso.

Good day, I would have asked for help because someone proposed a deletion in the article I created, he said no because he is the mayor's son, this is not a basis to say that he is an actor and he doesn't have any significant roles on television. I also have a list of shows and series that he voted for me not to be deleted and someone also helped, I hope you can help me thank you. --7starunited (talk) 02:24, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi 7starunited - unfortunately now I can't !vote at the AfD, since what you did is known as canvassing. Which might be a good thing for your cause, since I am not sure I would !vote to keep the article. He appears to only have had a single significant role, in First Yaya. As such he doesn't meet WP:NACTOR. I don't know about GNG, and since I can't !vote, I'm not going to do a thorough WP:BEFORE. Nice job on writing, structuring and formatting the article, though. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:18, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Can you review again, I wrote everything today and there is also a reference link for his role on television, thank you.--7starunited (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Improved article

Hi there - last year you moved my article on Eileen Reynolds to draftspace as it was insufficiently referenced. I've since updated it and would appreciate it if you could have a look and give me your feedback? pgbrown (talk) 13:03, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi pgbrown. Yes, it definitely is much improved. I would say it passes GNG now, and is properly referenced now. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:22, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - much appreciated! pgbrown (talk) 07:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

3 topics that requires your assist of judgment

Dear User:Onel5969,

This is francabicon here and i would like to seek your assistance of judgement regarding the matter of my edit on three topics:

Malaysian United Indigenous Party(Current Version)

Here is my edit:https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_United_Indigenous_Party&oldid=1053371794

United Malays National Organisation (Current Version)

Here is my edit:https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=United_Malays_National_Organisation&oldid=105337095

Malaysian Islamic Party(Current Version)

Here is my edit:
https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_Islamic_Party&oldid=1053371583

Here is the problem I've edited 3 topics of Ideology, Controversy whit assisted contribution by many members but has been taken down by this User:Amir Noor Muhammad. I repeatedly told the user that if he has any arguments of this topic the user can talk to me about it but the user didn't just not talk to me about it and removed large chunks of our contribution of it which i don't think is fair for the people who had place an effort contribution to the new section of the page. Also adding to the fact that he had many Controversy on this talk page where the many user had criticize him for similar behaviour like that which you may check right over here: User talk:Amir Noor Muhammad.
Also the user had written to ban me from editing with his recent revert. The reason that the user always revert my edit is that "it's not related" "personal not on party lines" which i then replied to him stating that " so long as they are part of the party their political action is related to the party" but the user still insist on reverting.
Hope you understand that i don't mind to be wrong but i would like your best judgment on what you can do to resolve this matter because those topics are with valid links and valid facts. Thank you.
hope to hear frm you soon do talk to me if you do want to know more. User talk:Francabicon

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, Bobherry Talk Edits 17:10, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Harry Forbes (cinematographer)

The article Harry Forbes (cinematographer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability not established with substantive sources, obituary is just a passing notice about funeral services, not significant coverage

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. Reywas92^Talk 00:19, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

CSD G5s

Hello, Onel5969,

When evaluating page creations by editors who are evading their ban through the use of sockpuppets, please be sure that, for each article, the policy stated in Wikipedia:G5 applies: This applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and that have no substantial edits by others.

Edits that are considered insubstantial would be adding a tag to the page, like a notability tag, fixing a typo, correcting a date or adding a category and such. Substantial edits would include adding content to the article or adding significant references. With some of the recent pages you tagged, editors made substantial edits AFTER you tagged the page, so you would have no way of knowing what occurred after you had placed a legitimate CSD G5 tag on the page. But recently, there have been some mass page deletions by pages created by editors evading their blocks and I want to make sure that in the eagerness to delete the work of sockpuppets, we don't delete articles that have contributions by editors in good standing on the project. I should also add that you are not the only editor to tag these sockpuppet page creations but I'm posting a message to you because you maintain a CSD log and when reviewing it, you might wonder why some links are still blue and not red.

Thank you for all of the considerable work you do (almost a half a million edits!) for the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Yes, I understand that, take this for instance, when I nominated, would you consider the diff a significant difference? Even after another editor made another edit, I still would not consider the addition of two more sentences, from an unreliable source, a significant contribution. Same with this diff, and this diff, or this, this, this, or this. Even an earlier one you decline, this, I'm not sure I would agree the other edits are significant. In fact, one might get the impression that another editor was stalking me, and I would posit that their edits, after a good faith G5 should not be considered. But that's just me thinking that socks should NEVER be encouraged. I'm not sure I would agree that this is truly a significant difference either (you didn't decline that G5, but as an example). Regardless, thanks for the heads up, and thank you for all the hard work you do on the project, always a pleasure interacting with you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

BTW, I don't mind when an admin removes one of my CSD tags, different folks can have different levels of what "significant" means. I tend to take a more strident position, since I think socks are one of the greatest time sucks this project has (that and UPE's). And neither should be encouraged. Also, before I tag an article with a G5, I ALWAYS look at the edit history. Most times it is clear that there have either not been major contributions by other editors, or there have been. Sometimes I'll need to look at the diffs (as I showed above) to see whether or not the intervening edits were, imho, significant. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:36, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Hartsville, Pennsylvania for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hartsville, Pennsylvania 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/Hartsville, Pennsylvania 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.

snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 18:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hilltop, Pennsylvania

The article Hilltop, Pennsylvania has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GEOLAND as it is just a GNIS entry. I cannot find any references to this place existing outside of GNIS or Wikipedia.

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. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 18:48, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Adobe, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adobe, 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/Adobe, 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.

MB 02:00, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Highland Park, Bucks County, Pennsylvania for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Highland Park, Bucks County, Pennsylvania 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/Highland Park, Bucks County, Pennsylvania 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.

wizzito | say hello! 07:04, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

sockpuppets and ban evaders

Hi Onel5969, I noticed you were previously involved in a deletion discussion at Wheels (2014 film). I uncovered 3 accounts that were socking/ban evading/whatever. After seeing that the previous discussion was voted on by at least 1 and probably 2 or 3 of the accounts run by the same person(s), I looked through all the references and re-nominated the article for deletion. I felt that the previous discussion was tainted by those votes. Fred Zepelin (talk) 18:34, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Many thanks for your work on my previous edit. Would you mind checking my new article: The Global Campaign for Equal Nationality Rights ? many thanks Abs11a (talk) 12:30, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Agua Linda, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Agua Linda, 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/Agua Linda, 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.

MB 04:05, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

New Tempe Arena

Thanks for the help... Roberto221 (talk) 21:44, 19 November 2021 (UTC)