Jump to content

User talk:Randykitty/Archive 34

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34

Abby V

Hi Randykitty. I saw the header at the top of your user talk page, but I thought I'd at least ask you as a courtesy. Abby V was just created in the mainspace yesterday. You previous deleted an article of the same name back in March 2020 per G11. Can you tell whether this latest version is basically the same as the one you deleted? -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

  • There are some new sources possibklly contributing to notability, but apart from that this version is largely identical to the one I deleted 4 years ago. I have tagged it as G11, so that another admin can have a look at it. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. --Randykitty (talk) 07:51, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
    Thanks for checking on this. FWIW, Deb draftified the article which seems reasonable since it allows the creator to continue working on it. If, however, the creator moves it back to the mainspace, particularly without addressing the concerns you raised on their user talk page, then perhaps further admin action would be warranted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:35, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

No consensus for redirects of Best American Short Stories individual volumes

I rolled back your redirects of all the individual volumes of The Best American Short Stories series because such a major change must first have consensus. BASS is one of the most acclaimed short story anthology series of all time, with the individual volumes frequently receiving acclaim and numerous reviews that prove their own notability. I started a discussion about this on the main article's talk page. If consensus is achieved for these redirects, I'll support you on it. But until we have consensus redirecting all those articles is premature. SouthernNights (talk) 17:23, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics and Draft:Alpine Entomology

Hi Randykitty, if you find the time, I'm still waiting for your reply on the above-linked talk page. I also drafted a page for another Journal, which I hoped you could take a look at if I made any obvious mistakes. Thanks Nobody (talk) 06:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Open edit request in an archived talk page.

Hello,

I am trying to work through the extended protected backlog and I ran into the request on this page.

Talk:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump/Archive 9#editextendedprotected

It is in an archived talk page, but is part of the request backlog. Would it be permissible to change the parameters to answered, just to help clear the backlog?

Regards, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Ah, didn't see the wikibreak template. Disregard, and sorry to bother you.
Kingsmasher678 (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Category:Academic journals by language

Hi Randykitty, seeing your edit at Gesnerus. I believe that on Swiss Journal of Psychology I probably also added too many. Could you correct me if so? Thanks Nobody (talk) 08:22, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

  • I have a strong preference for the latter. To me, a foo-language journal is a journal published exclusively in Foo language. Anything else is "multilingual". More generally speaking, what language a journal is in is not very interesting as far as I can see. I can't imagine someone explicitly searching for, say, a German-language journal regardless of subject. The other way around (i.e. searching for journals on a certain topic, regardless of language) is much more likely. Especially with free online translations available for ever more languages, language is not really a barrier any more. --Randykitty (talk) 10:16, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
    I agree, but since both Category:Multilingual journals and Category:Academic journals by language have the non-diffusing template, I've been putting them in the subcats of both. Nobody (talk) 11:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Sigrid Rausing Trust

Dear Randykitty, I would like to discuss with you the article about Sigrid Rausing Trust. I have provided several sources that prove notability of the Trust. For example, it is one of the largest charity organizations in the UK. That is why I don't understand why you just deleted information supported with sources. There are many sources regarding activities in the Eastern Europe, e.g. in Ukraine. Sincerely, Spudei Spudei (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

How many sources should I find to prove notability? I believe it is not fair just to delete information which has sources. It was not a stub... Thank you! Spudei (talk) 12:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Just more examples from the article you deleted:
In 2009, Sigrid Rausing Trust was ranked 6th on the list of UK foundations supporting international development and related activities (by international spending). The Trust provided $9.1 million in the respective year, covering projects in Africa, Asia, South America, and Eastern Europe.[1]
Between 2011 and 2018, the Sigrid Rausing Trust was among the top ten largest private grant-making organizations in Ukraine, according to the Foundation Center database.[2] Spudei (talk) 12:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
  • Hi, the problem with your sources (which was already signalled by Goldsztajn) is that almost all are not independent. The few that are independent are an interview with Rausing and some listings without any discussion. (Excluding reference 9, which my browser refuses to download declaring it a security risk). This is not sufficient to show notability. Please have a look at WP:GNG and linked articles. For the moment, the "Philanthropy" paragraph in her bio should suffice. --Randykitty (talk) 13:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Global Grant-making: A Review of UK Foundations" (PDF). Nuffield Foundation. January 18, 2012. Retrieved 23 August 2024.
  2. ^ "International Experience and Best Practices of Funds Functioning: Analytical Report" (PDF). Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting. 2018. Retrieved 23 August 2024.

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
  • A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Advice

Hi Randykitty, I've just read that the Swiss Journal of Psychology was renamed in 2021 to European Journal of Psychology Open (Source: [1], [2](Paid)) and I'm not sure if the article should be moved to the new name or just be changed in the article. Thanks Nobody (talk) 11:26, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Ewick and Silbey moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Ewick and Silbey. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and does not follow structure of an encyclopedia article, for example: no lead section; non-standard citation style; needs a better context for the reader.. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. JoeNMLC (talk) 19:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

  • JoeNMLC: WP:DTTR. My only "contribution" to this article was denying a G11. I don't even put such deleted articles on my watchlist. Read your template, it's absolutely not applicable to me. It's not "my article" and I certainly don't intend working on it. --Randykitty (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Peter Bradley-Fulgoni

Dear Randykitty,

I recently tried to find the edit history of the page for Peter Bradley-Fulgoni and saw that it was deleted by yourself many years ago Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Bradley-Fulgoni

I am a novice to Wikipedia, so I’m sorry if this is the wrong place to ask, I was wondering if there was any way I can request special access to the edit history for this deleted page?

Many thanks for your time Strangelooper (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

  • Hi, the Italian version of this article overlaps largely with this article, except for the reference bombing. I don't see much use in undeleting this. --Randykitty (talk) 16:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
    Thanks for your reply. I do not want to undelete the article (absolutely not!!!). I merely want to view an edit made circa 2011 on the English article. Is this possible without undeleting it? A very strange and specific request I know but nevertheless important to me. Strangelooper (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
  • It would help if you could tell me what exactly you're looking for. This is a bit cumbersome. --Randykitty (talk) 06:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
    My apologies. The edit in question specifically concerns the sentence toward the end of the article “Peter is recognised as an inspirational teacher also giving piano and chamber music masterclasses”. The word “inspirational” was changed to something indicating the contrary, and it is possible that the name “Henry N******d” crops up somewhere (redacted to maintain privacy of a real person).
    The edit was made by an unregistered user with an IP starting with (my memory of this is foggy) 192.161… or something very similar.
    If it was not done in 2011 then it would be some time from the early part of 2012.
    I feel like it would be useful for me to explain the reasoning behind my request. It is purely of personal interest to myself and has very little to do with contributing to Wikipedia. I do not wish to revive or edit the article and would never do so to this or any related articles as per WP:COI. The edits in question resulted in the harassment of the editor. A recently renewed interest in these events has led to me searching for the article and its edit history to assess whether that harassment was justified.
    Sorry again for having roped you into this annoying task, I am aware there are much more pressing matters to be attended to on Wikipedia and I understand if you don’t want to bother with this. I am incredibly grateful for your help thus far.
    Best, Strangelooper (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Sinai (journal)

@Randykitty:, shalom. I do not question for one moment your expertise and skill in judging the notability of academic journals and periodicals, but I would only add to your knowledge that, among countries, the notability of some journals may vary, depending on the language in which the journal is published. For example, the English-language academic journal, The Jewish Quarterly Review, has a far-higher bar of notability in English speaking countries than, say, its Hebrew-language peer, Sinai, and which latter has mostly a Hebrew-speaking readership. Still, this is not to diminish from its overall reliability and verifiable-nature when it comes to academic journals in use by scholars. I only wish to humbly remind a woman of your important standing on Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, that the journal Sinai is held in the library holdings of the National Library of Israel.[1] Moreover, renowned Palestinian/Israeli scholars have throughout the years written articles for Sinai, among whom include Samuel Klein,[2] Saul Lieberman,[3] Ze'ev Safrai,[4] Yosef Qafih,[5] Zohar Amar,[6] among others. Does this not vouch for notability? Whatever your decision, I assure you that I still hold you in the utmost esteem. I see myself as always learning.Davidbena (talk) 13:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Sinai periodical, Catalogue listing, National Library of Israel
  2. ^ Samuel Klein (1939). "Comments on the Words of Israel's Sages" (הערות לדברי חז"ל), in: Sinai 3 (ed. Y.L. Hacohen Fishman), Jerusalem [Hebrew], pp. 405–417
  3. ^ Lieberman, Saul (1939). "Cantorship of Yannai (חזנות יניי)". Sinai (in Hebrew). 4. Mossad Harav Kook: 221–250.
  4. ^ Safrai, Z. (1976). "Beth-Anath". Sinai (in Hebrew). 78. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook: 18–34.
  5. ^ Qafih, Y. (1958). "Ha-Rambam we-golath teiman". Sinai (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook.
  6. ^ Amar, Zohar (1994). "אוג הבורסקאים בתקופה העתיקה". Sinai: A Journal for Torah and Jewish Studies (in Hebrew). 114: 131–143. ISSN 0334-4304.
@Davidbena (talk page watcher) For future use, please note that your "ping" to Randykitty will not have worked. The {{ping}} must be added in the same edit as you add your signature to a post. In this case she'll have seen the post anyway as it's on her own talk page, but if you had been trying to alert someone else to the discussion it would have had no effect as you weren't signing the post when you added it. PamD 07:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
OK. Next time I'll be more careful to sign my name.Davidbena (talk) 13:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Randykitty,

I'm not sure why you keep removing our logo from our page. You said it's nowhere in use but we use it in the office, on paraphernalia, and on all of our socials. That is our logo. I'm also struggling to understand why you removed it a second time after you were reversed. The last time you said the logo was not being used and another user told you it was. Nyulrlogo (talk) 22:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

https://www.instagram.com/nyulawreview/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/nyulr/
https://twitter.com/nyulawreview Nyulrlogo (talk) 22:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Radhika Muthukumar

117.230.159.51 has asked for a deletion review of Radhika Muthukumar. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. —Cryptic 19:09, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Heliyon and Scopus

Hi, Randykitty: it is always fun to bump into you. I usually agree with and thank you for some your reversals, but not with the two about Heliyon. 1) Who owns Scopus is important here, because both Scopus and Heliyon are owned by Elsevier, and the latter has been accused of unfair promotion of its journals: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Elsevier&action=edit&section=17 . I feel, that instead of deleting the infor about Elsevier ownership, it should be expanded to mention the unfair promotion, such as Manipulation of bibliometrics. 2) mentioning the OA publishing cost is important here, because it is fairly high compared to other OA mega-journals, and because such high OA price motivates the Publishers to accept every manuscript, including those that resulted in Heliyon "delisting" by the Web of Science. Again, I feel that this topic should be expanded rather than deleted. If I do not hear back from you within the next few days, I will proceed with the proposed expansion.

PS: I feel that this communication belongs on the Heliyon's article discussion page (where I am posting its copy) rather than in your mailbox, but I do not know how to draw your attention to the article discussion. I became a wiki-dragon only recently, and I avoided the wiki-drama in my larval stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Tau (talk • contribs)

Barangay 79

Inspired by a comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barangay 79, article creator disambiguated and moved, in good faith I'm sure, Barangay 79 → Barangay 79,Caloocan → Barangay 79, Caloocan. XFDcloser acted on the original title, a bit of manual labour is required at Barangay 79, Caloocan.

The script User:Anomie/linkclassifier.js is perhaps useful; it turns redirects green and at Afd would have made the level-3 heading stand out looking like this:

Barangay 79

Best, Sam Sailor 17:53, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

"Barangay 79" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Barangay 79 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 27 § Barangay 79 until a consensus is reached. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Journal redirects

Hi Randykitty, I've come to ask a question due to this edit. Does it make more sense for journal redirects to point to a list entry, instead of the publisher? Also, if you find the time, could you take a look at this? Thanks Nobody (talk) 11:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

List of journals associated with learned and professional societies of Switzerland

Hi Randykitty, I've created above mentioned list and before boldly moving it into mainspace, I wanted your take on it. Thanks Nobody (talk) 09:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Hi, I'm afraid that I'm not a big fan of these "associated" things (lists or categories). What does "associated" even mean? I know of journals that are owned and published by a society, owned by a society and published on their behalf by a commercial publisher (or sometimes another publishing society), or owned by a commercial publisher while a society is still somehow involved (I think that's all possibilities :-) The involvement of the society can vary from full editorial control (naming of EIC,any subordinate editors, and editorial board) to just a line on the front page "official journal of..." I realize that we have a whole tree of categories for this "associated" stuff (and there's a parallel tree "Academic journals published by learned and professional societies"), but I don't find it very helpful. I won't go around removing such categories, but I won't add them to articles either. I guess this is not exactly what you wanted to hear... ;-)
Going from the general case to this particular example, I would limit the list to notable journals and do away with those external links. Journal lists in generals rapidly degenerate into promotional linkfarms if non-notable list items are accepted (but I admit that such is less likely in the present case.
Finally, although above I'm quite critical of these lists and their contents, that is my personal opinion and (alas) not consensus, so if you still would like to create that list, just go ahead. --Randykitty (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi again, from what I know, all the journals on the list fall into the first two categories (owned by the society, published by them, or on their behalf). There are several others where there's still some involvement, and it's called an official journal, but I left those out. I get that this would open up journal lists to another type (like discipline and publisher already are). My thoughts for making this list were: Not all journals are notable, not all societies are notable, not all publishers are notable, but putting all three together might satisfy CSC#3. I agree that the external links are too much and shouldn't be included, if the list makes it to mainspace. They would probably make the list fall into a WP:NOT category if left in. Also, there is no need to worry about not exactly what you wanted to hear; I'm more interested in learning all the relevant policies and guidelines to edit WP:AJ articles than I am in pushing my own maybe borderline acceptable articles and lists. Nobody (talk) 18:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:21, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lajos Balogh (scientist)

Hello Randykitty. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lajos Balogh (scientist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Not unambigously promotional - subject appears to meet WP:NACADEMIC, in which case rewriting is preferable. The article is already COI tagged. Thank you. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 12:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

If you disagree please let me know! New admin here so I'm still learning the ropes and it seems like you spend a bit more time working on articles about academics than I do :). ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 12:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Ancient TL

Hey Randykitty. Posting this on your talk page to avoid cluttering the deletion discussion even more. This is intended to be friendly and definitely not confrontational. I'm curious what your vision for how Wikipedia covers journals is. If we applied your standard – that it needs to have third-party articles that are exclusively about the journal – hundreds (probably thousands) of articles would have to be deleted. In my field (materials science / electrochemistry), almost none of the major journals have this type of coverage. To name just a few: Journal of the Electrochemical Society (that journal was actually cited several times in the 2019 Nobel Prize announcement), Journal of Power Sources, the Journal of Materials Chemistry series (A, B and C). And I would guess this is the case for most fields outside of the major general-interest journals. I imagine it's not deliberate, but you're setting forth an extremely restrictive vision of Wikipedia. Is this really how you see the project? Tserton (talk) 22:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  • Hi, I already explained some of this at the AfD. It is WP policy that articles have to be about notable subjects, which has to be documented by reliable sources independent of the subject. This has led to the adoption of the WP:GNG guideline. As you say above, precious few journals are the subject of in-depth articles. That's where NJournals comes in, which basically argues that indexing in a selective database constitue a source and makes a journal meet GNG. NJournals was devised to make it easier for journals to be included. Note that this is controversial (see the talk page of NJournals and its archives). If there is no indexing, a journal fails NJournals and has to meet GNG, which is actually harder. There is a significant number of editors who think NJournals should be shelved and that only journals meeting GNG should have an article. Without sources, we cannot write an article (your or my opinions are not acceptable sources). Hope this explains. --Randykitty (talk) 08:46, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

IIT Delhi

Hi @Randykitty: This article was moved to this title per consensus on a Move Request in October 2020. I have reverted your move. Regards, Aafi (talk) 07:54, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Thanks for letting me know. I looked for previous moves but didn't see any, probably didn't look enough. That discussion is a bit weird for such a move, with only 1 participant besides the nom. If you look at MIT, for example, you'll see that it redirects to Massachusetts Institute of Technology, even though nearly everybody the world over just refers to it as MIT. Similarly,, we use California Institute of Technology, not Caltech. We normally use the full name as article title, not an initialism or abbreviation that may be well-known in one country, but not in the rest of the world (see also WP:UCRN). Anyway, I don't feel strong about this either way so I'll let it be. Happy editing. --Randykitty (talk) 08:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
    Although I agree that this RM wasn't nicely closed and it could've been given more time, but I might disagree on other parts. Anyways, let's keep it as it is, as it doesn't apply on Indian Institute of Technology. Regards, Aafi (talk) 09:09, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Randykitty/Archive_34&oldid=1258370441"