User talk:YesI'mOnFire

Speedy deletion declined: User:Africa4me/sandbox2

Hello YesI'mOnFire. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:Africa4me/sandbox2, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Drafting an article is a valid use of user space. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

YesI'mOnFire, please do not add U5 tags to userspace pages that are formatted as drafts, as you did both in the example Whpq has given and at User:Tarafder57/sandbox. Such "plausible drafts" are explicitly exempt from WP:CSD U5, and trying to get them speedy-deleted actively removes potentially useful content from the encyclopedia. Note that a draft merely being flawed or unlikely to pass AfC does not make it implausible for the purposes of U5. You can take this message as a warning to stop misusing the U5 tag. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 17:37, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Moving userspace drafts

As an addition to the above, except for AfC submissions, there is no policy-based reason for moving recently created userspace drafts into the Draft namespace, especially without consulting the page author. There are very valid reasons a user may want to avoid using the draft namespace. There is also no policy prohibiting drafting in a user page instead of a subpage; if you come upon such cases, the optimal course of action would be to explain to the user on their talk page that it would be preferable to move the draft to their sandbox or another user subpage, and provide assistance if needed. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Paul 012: I'm going to stick up for YIOF somewhat here. No policy requires moving userpage-level drafts to draftspace, but there's also no policy that forbids it, and it is very unlikely that a new user drafting on their userpage actually intends to draft there. It's often easier to ask forgiveness than permission on these things and draftify a userpage, so long as the user has the chance to object and reverse the move if they want; that's the approach I take, and one I adopted following other admins. The semantics of draftspace versus userspace drafts are unlikely to be of interest to a brand-new user, but if they do develop strong feelings, they are always able to move the page back to a user subpage. To YIOF, all I'll say is, if you move someone's userpage to draftspace, you should notify them with {{uw-draftmoved}}. I also recently made a custom soft-redirect template for userpages after such a move, {{draftified userpage}}, which clearly explains to a user what their options are, including reversing the move. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:03, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough, though I disagree; we should not be making implications to new users that one way of doing things is more correct, when neither is actually preferred. If anything, moving to a user subpage would be far better. This is of course coloured by my personal preference as, as explained in the above-linked essay, I have very little faith in the use of Draftspace.

For context, I should probably explain the cases which prompted me to question the judgment involved. User:Loei2536 (since U5 deleted; history was last at User:Loei2536/sandbox) was a mix of content forked unattributed from the existing Loei province article and unrelated stuff about the police. Without a clear focus on what the topic was, the page should not have been moved to to Draft:Loei and given a title that did not represent its contents. A more recent case was User:Elle.Campbell, which was moved to mistitled Draft:Prachin Buri incident (instead of radiation incident). This was also unneeded since the user had already updated the Prachin Buri radiation accident article.

On a different note, as the page history shows, it does appear that patrollers misunderstanding drafts placed on user pages is a bigger issue than I realised, so maybe immediately moving them is warranted. But I still insist that the user's sandbox is a better target. If anything, it avoids the risk of them ending up at mistitled Draftspace pages, as the mentioned cases show. (There's also another recent case where all of the user's subpages were accidentally moved into Draftspace, though that one involved an AfC draft, so it's a separate issue.) --Paul_012 (talk) 09:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Paul 012 There are some reasons why, IMO, draftspace is usually a more preferred place to move to.

First, in draftspace, you can tag several issues easily to help the creator/editor of the article identify why their draft might not be accepted, while user sandbox is connected to users themselves, which include only warnings, ARV report, CSD, and so on, not the tag themselves (I saw this as I was working with the tool Twinkle, though I have no idea if there is a way to bypass this nor a tool that did it)

Second, as Tamzin mentioned, there is a uw-draftspace for moving to draftspace, and I can't find any mention of notifying user when moving to their sandbox (though I would appreciate it if you create one for it one day)

Third, most users when adding new drafts usually already came up with a name for it, only problem is that it was in the wrong place for draft. By moving to draft with the name, it helps users to identify their draft easier, even with users that are not proficient in English. 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 14:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Maintenance tags can be placed on any page in any namespace by normal editing; there's no need to rely on Twinkle, and one certainly should not base their editing on what features Twinkle has available or lacks. But all that can and should wait until after the user submits their draft through AfC. I find it patronising and demeaning to assume that a user working in their personal user space doesn't know what they're doing and needs unsolicited help by having their work taken away from them.

Your third point clearly doesn't apply to the two cases I pointed out above, so at the very least, please be more careful with such cases and consider leaving them alone. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

About your false edits on List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network

Why do you revert edits on List of television and radio stations owned by TV5 Network and make it false one? Can't you understand that True FM is now on 105.9 since November 4, 2024 and not anymore on 92.3? CryingSulfur (talk) 23:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

@CryingSulfur I am simply reverting back to what I believed was the last stable version before User:Jimlantabanao socks disrupt the page. If you disagree with some changes you can restored the content that you think is correct anytime. 🔥YesI'mOnFire🔥^{(ContainThisEmber?)} 04:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ok. But next time, never ever edit any hoax or false information. CryingSulfur (talk) 06:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Removal of peacock from Senco Gold Limited

Removal of peacock tag from page of Senco Gold Limited and way ahead. OdrimluarEd (talk) 13:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

The page has been edited and things which didnt seem upto the mark has been removed. OdrimluarEd (talk) 13:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

SPI case

FYI, because you may have an interest in this: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DieudoneBila --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Declined speedy deletion: NRD Cyber Security

Hi there! I wanted to drop by to let you know that I declined your A7 speedy deletion nomination of NRD Cyber Security because there is some indication the company may be important or significant, which is a lower standard than notabilty. If you do not believe this event is notable, please conduct a before search, then nominate the page for deletion through AfD, where the article can be discussed. Let me know if you have any questions. Take care, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)