User talk:Seraphimblade/archive 18

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:BEATRIZFRANCK

Hello.

This was the first time I attempted to create content in wikipedia.

This page is regarding a brand, and it's purpose is to share some information about the brand itself.

If there is some content that should be added, edited or removed, please let me know and I will make the changes needed.

The page has been in standby for some time as the launch of the online store for the brand has been postponed, even though it exists physically for some time now.

We are now in the process of finally getting the shop online, and that is why the page was never published.

I would ask you to please let me know what changes need to be done in order for the content to follow Wikipedia guidelines totally, insted of just deleting it.

Thank you for your time.

Best regards, Miguel Alfaiate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguel Alfaiate (talk • contribs) 07:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Miguel Alfaiate, we do not permit promotion of anyone or anything on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is also not the appropriate place for a company's (not "brand's", that is a junk term; something is a company, product, or product line), "About us" information; that would be social media or a company website. If that is your intent, you will not be permitted to do that. As some examples of the problems: angolan clothing brand (it is not a "brand", it is a company, product, or product line), that she started the first steps in the fashion business world (no reference, inappropriate "get to know ya" tone), At the end of 2003 Bibi Boutique[2] is born (inappropriate tone again, "was founded" will suffice, not "is born), In 2006 she was forced to increase this space to 50m2. (Forced? Who forced her? How and why? What reliable source confirms that?), ended up becoming the mall of the city. (inappropriate tone, and unreferenced claim.) Those, while not an exhaustive list, are an example of the problems. Articles are required to be strictly neutral in both tone and content, and to stick strictly to facts verified by reliable sources. Wikipedia is also not the place to "get the word out". Article subjects are only appropriate if substantial amounts of reliable and independent reference material already exist about a given subject. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not quite sure how replies are done here, so I am just typing below your answer. You can see here an example of an existing Wikipedia page with the same sort of content we want to produce: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabetta_Franchi

If this is a matter of tone, wording or other, we can adjust the content to fit wikipedia's policies, the purpose is not to write content that does not abide by the rules.

Relevant remarks such as the ones you left above can easily be fixed to correct the way the article is being written, and I am more than glad to perform those changes, if the article is once again made available as draft, and I can keep working on it. This is my first attempt at creating content in wikipedia, so it may take some time for me to understand the nuances of what is or not viable.

I appreciate your concern, but I believe that working towards making the content better is always preferrable to just deleting it without allowing the author to improve. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miguel Alfaiate (talk • contribs) 15:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Where you placed your reply is fine. I don't read Italian, so I can look at that by machine translation, but that often omits a great deal of context and nuance. However, also do be aware that any other language Wikipedia may have different policies, practices, and standards than the English Wikipedia, particularly around notability standards. There wasn't really anything salvageable from that article, but you can try again if you like, taking care to keep your writing neutral and only to verifiable facts. Writing an appropriate new article is pretty difficult; it's often better to gain some experience editing existing ones first. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Café Majestic

Hi Username:Seraphimblade, I don’t appreciate your aggression. I’ve noticed English Administrators appear to have developed this kind of reactive approach on Wikipedia which can be highly counterproductive. I translated, with loyalty to the original French, an article on this landmark café which had been created in several other languages way before my English version yesterday. For consistency, if my English article comes across as marketing, then ALL entries should be looked at and deleted. I have absolutely no affiliation with that or any other institution for that matter. I, like yourself and many others, volunteer my time to contribute towards Wikipedia. I would seriously recommend you guys give more attention, take a second look before opting for speedy deletion. I have absolutely no issue changing the content so as to make it more historical, which it is. See list below:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Café_Majestic https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Café_Majestic https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Café_Majestic https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Café_Majestic https://gl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Café_Majestic

Best regards Melroross (talk) 13:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Melroross, I know other language Wikipedias do sometimes have looser standards for notability than the English Wikipedia does. However, when translating an article here, it is necessary to ensure that it meets the standards applicable here. Just because an article is acceptable on another language project does not mean it's an acceptable subject here. That aside, however, neutrality is always required. Phrasing such as Café Majestic is a historic cafe (it's "historic"? According to what reliable source?), Its importance stems both from the cultural atmosphere that surrounded this café since it opened, particularly its long tradition as meeting point for many personalities from the city's cultural and artistic life over generations, as well as its Art Nouveau architecture. (It's "important"? According to what reliable source? The rest is puff.), immediately associated with a discerning sophistication (puff), suggesting a more Parisian "chic". (according to what reliable source?), remains as one of the most beautiful and representative examples of Art Nouveau in Porto. (puff), and on and on like that. Articles are absolutely required to be neutral in both tone and content, and to never promote anyone or anything, including by any form of "talking up". They should stick only to facts verified by a reliable source, and omit any statements of opinion not supported in that way. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Point taken Seraphimblade on the more stringent English Wikipedia guidelines. I think these should be same on Wikipedia, regardless of the language. Will create a new, sourced entry, with no puff. Hopefully acceptable. Thanks for the constructive feedback. Melroross (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

I receive a message of your intention to block me from editing and I really want to know why.

The pages I try to contribute to doesn't have any promotional write ups or materials on them. If it had, you probably should have drawn my attention to it and I'll make necessary corrections but you chose to threaten to block me from editing, really?

I'll need you to point out the promotional phrases on the pages I created to enable me understand my lapses.

Thank you Thisissegun (talk) 20:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thisissegun, as you have written several promotional articles, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,

No. I'm not been paid to write or edit on Wikipedia and it never cease to bother me why you think I received compensations for my work because I don't.

I've read the Wikipedia rules and I understand that receiving payment is one thing editors shouldn't do.

I really love the encyclopedia and I want to contribute but I'm frustrated right now.

How can I show my inoncency, how? Thisissegun (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thisissegun, in the case of Alex Ajipe, the article is written in a CV style, "sourced" only to an online "profile", or earlier to other non-independent sources like LinkedIn. In order to be an appropriate subject for an article, there must be substantial quantities of reliable and independent reference material about a subject, and it needs to be an encyclopedia article, not a CV. For Ondo State Music Awards: Our findings shows that The OSMAs is the only indigenous music award in Nigeria (who is "our"?), You can simply relate with “OSMA” (No second person/"you"; never address the reader), rewards excellence in our fast rising artiste across the country (pure puff), and section header titles should be written in mixed case, not all caps. (Also, the use of "we" and "our" makes me suspect the article may have been partially copied and pasted from another source, which is not permitted). The rest of the article carries on like that. Wikipedia articles must be strictly neutral in both tone and content, and never promote anyone or anything, including just by "talking up" or use of marketese words. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Okay, Now I understand better.

In the case of Alex Ajipe, I was still working on the page when suddenly, I got the "speedily deletion" notification. Like I was just starting to add more contents, references and citations but I couldn't continue since it was already tagged to be deleted.

Ondo State Music Awards on the other hand was sourced from few website including the awards official website, the mistake I made was copying & pasting (Which is against the rules). An administrator left a message for me to address few lapses which I instantly worked on but before I could do all that necessary, I saw a notification that the page has to be "deleted speedily" meanwhile I'm already working on getting things done the right way.

I was really frustrated but I agree I made few mistakes but I deserve a chance to do things the right way. Thisissegun (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

You have that chance; you haven't been blocked. However, articles created directly in mainspace will be expected to be ready for mainspace right away. You might instead consider creating articles in a userspace sandbox or a draft. You still can't have copyright violations or promotional material, but that will give you time to get things ready to go. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Alright, Thank you.

I'll go ahead and develop the article in sandbox.

I'll surely reach out to you to check the article if it's up to the Wikipedia standard before going live.

Thank you once again. Thisissegun (talk) 07:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

I now have the article on "Alex Ajipe" on my sandbox and I'll like you to check it out.

I have critically attended to the errors detected on the article earlier with better citations.

Can I drop the link to the draft? Thisissegun (talk) 22:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Thisissegun, it's better than it was. I don't have time to do things like check sources in depth, but you can submit via AfC. The bolded name at the top should just be part of the first paragraph, not on its own line, and he's not "Chief Ajipe", just "Ajipe". The CV bits should probably be toned down some too—instead of a laundry list of everything he's done, stick to the things reliable and independent sources note as particularly significant. It's not a resume, it's an encyclopedia article. Once you think it's ready, I've added a template to the top that will allow you to have the article reviewed by articles for creation. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Alright, Thanks. Thisissegun (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

I want to bring to your notice that I have submitted the article "Alex Ajipe" via Afc.

I'll continue to improve the article with more citations which is necessary for quick approval.

Thank you Thisissegun (talk) 08:16, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Why you deletes images on Government Yoga and Naturopathy medical college page

That image related to that Institute only... So kindly don't delete pic Sathiyanandham (talk) 04:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Sathivanadham, it does appear that your images were appropriate. I have restored them. However, please do not reinsert material on the specific numbers and types of seats available; that is brochure material and promotional. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you dude 🙏💕 Sathiyanandham (talk) 04:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Straight Talk Wireless Page Deletion

Hi Seraphimblade,

Thanks for taking the time to review Straight Talk Wireless. I'd like the chance to access the page to improve or use for future reference. If you wouldn't mind sharing any specifics on what within would have been considered too close to advertising, that would be appreciated. Happy to adjust as necessary.

Thanks again. FrankWS875 (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

FrankWS875, thank you for making the required disclosures. In regards to the deleted article, the following are some examples of problems, though not an exhaustive list. First, the logo and summary information were placed on the left side of the article. That needs to go on the right, and in a standard infobox, with the logo at standard rather than oversized size and the other infobox fields being the standard ones. From there: America’s largest prepaid, no-contract wireless service provider No, we don't slice things up to describe them as "largest". If it's America's 15th largest provider (I'm not saying it is, but whatever it may be), it should be described as that, supported by reliable sources. Don't slice it to put in a puff term like "largest" in some "segmentation". If it's the tenth largest, it gets listed in the article as the tenth largest. family of brands. Marketese. Is the "family of brands" companies, products, franchisees, licensees? Be specific. The junk marketese term "brands" is not acceptable. Straight Talk Wireless offers a variety of no-contract single-line plans and one multi-line plan ranging from $30 to $90. Articles should not include pricing. including budget-friendly devices According to what reliable source? and the latest Android and Apple devices. According to what reliable source? The rest continues on the same way. Wikipedia articles are to educate the reader, never incentivize them. I suspect, quite honestly, that the subject actually is notable, but we would never permit something like what you wrote. Wikipedia articles must never promote anyone or anything, even by any form of "talking up" or marketese. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

Got it, thanks for the insight. Is it possible to get access to the page to make improvements?

FrankWS875 (talk) 18:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

FrankWS875, sorry, I apparently missed this message when it came in. No, I do not restore advertisements, but you can try it again, ensuring to use neutral language and to stick to facts verified by reliable sources. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Query

Queries related to Government Yoga and Naturopathy Medical College and Hospital (GYNMCH) . Hi Bro..., can you explain how should I improve that page. Because it is a govt. owned medical college and hospital. It provides lots of health related benefits in and around chennai with most familiar system of Yoga and Naturopathy. Someone suggest that The page will be deleted.. I initiated the page to deliver the information for all the people through Wikipedia. Kindly help me to publish this page with neutral point of view.. Kindly help Bro.. Why should I promote this college? It is govt. owned.. It don't need any promotion or advertisement.. As like other medical college, I need this college page to be published. Sathiyanandham (talk) 10:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

The deletion nomination explains why the article was nominated for deletion. You may comment at the discussion if you wish to do so. If you do, it would be a wise idea to explain what sourcing you believe to demonstrate notability and why. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Platform Calgary Page (March2020)

Dear Seraphimblade,

"Calgary Platform" is a public/govt. incubator program. Please re-consider about the deletion of the page. Its from educational body "University of Calgary" to support the start-ups. https://www.platformcalgary.com/about-us/our-shareholders/

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsidhu.sait (talk • contribs) 04:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Bsidhu.sait, I have taken another look at the deleted article. It contains puffery and promotional material such as: focuses on supporting Calgary's innovation-driven companies (puff), championing the vision (puff), Empowering people and building the next economy (don't regurgitate mission statements, and certainly never place them in bold), will move the city's best minds and ideas forward, as just some examples, and the rest was full of the same. So, I have considered again, and I stand by my decision to delete the article as an advertisement. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:25, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Seraphimblade#top, This article is solely for the purpose of sharing information about the educational body's platform. Could you please move this article back into "Draft" namespace, instead of deleting it, so I can re-work on it to make it proper according to the Wikipedia rules.

Bsidhu.sait, it appears that this subject is your sole interest, and it was initially promotional. Before we proceed, please clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a requirement of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:54, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade I am not related to this Platform_Calgary (neither hired not related from any means). If you concerned about the content itself, First paragraph is copy-pasted (cite link provided at the end of para) and then "Mission" paragraph is directly copied from their own website, here: https://www.platformcalgary.com/about-us/our-story/ (On that note, I didn't wrote the text in promotional or any other style.) Many people asked me, if I know any organization which helps immigrants or startups etc, that's why I thought I should write about it. That's it. If content is the issue then I can re-write it completely. Please restore the page. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsidhu.sait (talk • contribs) 00:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Bsidhu.sait, I am afraid you will have to rewrite it. Copying and pasting material from other sources is not permitted, and I will certainly not restore an article I know to contain copyright violations. You need to write things in your own words, and that language must be neutral. Chances are, anything you find on the organization's own website will be promotional (as one would expect; of course they're going to toot their own horn, but that is not what we're here to do). Wikipedia is also not the place to "get the word out"; article subjects must be notable, meaning there is already a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material about that subject. If not, we should not have an article about the subject at all. See if you can find sufficient independent source material to write the article, and if so, stick to only facts verified by such sources. If not, you can always refer people who ask you about it directly to the organization's website. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:40, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Why did you delete KairosDB?

It is a totally legitimate time series database. I have no idea why you deleted it. --Petercorless (talk) 07:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Petercorless, "legitimate" or not, advertising and promotion is not permitted on Wikipedia. The article was promoting the software. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Another query

I was just looking at Doug Weller's page as I found myself in a difficult situation and thought he might be a person to go to. I've seen many of his edits over the years and he's always (if memory serves) seemed reasonable. On his home page he lists recent blocks. SunCrow was among them. You did the blocking. I would have been glad to see him gone for years, but recently he got nasty, deceptive and contentious as usual with me. So I wrote back to him something like "You identify yourself as a 'Christian,' but what you're doing I think is very unchristian." Damned if he didn't write me back and apologize, sounding genuinely chastened. He has acted for years like a right wing paid editor, and a real asshole, but I doubt if he's ever seen a dime for editing here. I'm guessing he just thought it was his (perhaps literal) "mission" to boost the fortunes of those like himself. I'm not suggesting any action, just passing this along, FWIW. I can't remember for sure, but you and I may have either agreed or disagreed about something in the last couple of years so it was not likely a big deal. Activist (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Activist, it is entirely possible that you and I were part of the same discussion at some point, but to be quite honest, unless someone really leaves an impression (positive or negative), I'm unlikely to remember that years later. SunCrow's block was not for paid editing, but for persistent disruptive editing. If they want to appeal the block, well, it's right in the message how to do it. I was on the ArbCom at the same time as Doug Weller, and I've nothing but good to say about him. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 March 2020

• From the editors: The bad and the good

• News and notes: 2018 Wikipedian of the year blocked

• WikiProject report: WikiProject COVID-19: A WikiProject Report

• Special report: Wikipedia on COVID-19: what we publish and why it matters

• In the media: Blocked in Iran but still covering the big story

• Discussion report: Rethinking draft space

• Arbitration report: Unfinished business

• In focus: "I have been asked by Jeffrey Epstein …"

• Community view: Wikimedia community responds to COVID-19

• Recent research: Disease outbreak uncertainties, AfD forecasting, auto-updating Wikipedia

• From the archives: Text from Wikipedia good enough for Oxford University Press to claim as own

• Traffic report: The only thing that matters in the world

• Gallery: Visible Women on Wikipedia

• News from the WMF: Amid COVID-19, Wikimedia Foundation offers full pay for reduced hours, mobilizes all staff to work remote, and waives sick time

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom Notification

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Medical pricing and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Administrator changes

Cabayi • Lee Vilenski

Boing! said Zebedee

Jonny-mt • MarkGallagher • PeaceNT

Money emoji → Moneytrees

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork • WereSpielChequers

CheckUser changes

NativeForeigner

Oversight changes

Someguy1221

Daniel Case

Guideline and policy news

• There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

• There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

• The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

What was wrong with this

In the United States, it costs about US$10 to 20 per month since patent protection ended.

Indepth discussion in a textbook... Your edit is not inline with the RfC. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Doc James, this is the exact issue brought up with the RfC. The discussion of the monthly price is a sentence. The discussion of the effect of the drug being substantially cheaper than an alternative is what is the subject of extensive discussion. I would have no problem with the article discussing the latter, but it does not and only lists the former. We should contextualize things like that, not just drop a number. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:00, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

The requirement is that it extensively discusses price, which it does, not that it must extensively discuss the monthly price. It is not like it was talking about something else and than mentions this is passing. We have lots of sources discussing the price of this medication now. It was contextualized in that it was after patent protection expired. Could be useful to also find a source on the cost before it expired. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:04, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

By "contextualize", I mean rather than just dropping a number, something to the effect that "An estimate by $SOURCE indicates that if Foo was used in place of Bar when appropriate, $X would be saved annually in United States medical costs." The monthly price is a factoid; the prose contextualizes it and shows why it matters. In that context, I wouldn't even have a problem saying that a month of Foo costs $X as opposed to a month of Bar costing $Y, but again, that would be in context of why that number matters rather than just the factoid. If the sources contextualize it that way, we should too. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

The price before it went generic was $1200 a year in the USA. So we compare before 1200 to after 120 to 240. I personally think it is very interesting how much medications decrease in price when they go generic.

In 2006 sure one could compare with atorvastatin which did not go generic for years later.

Much more interesting than say "Simvastatin had been shown to interact with lipid-lowering transcription factor PPAR-alpha [31] and that interaction might control the neurotrophic action of the drug" whose inclusion in the article appears non controversial. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

These compares the various statins.[1][2] [3] But such comparisons are more complicated. But basically the bigger story is that statins were once expensive and now they are relatively inexpensive. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

This right here is an excellent illustration of why we don't include prices. The article stated that the price of a monthly treatment ranges from $9 to $20. However, one of the sources you just cited ([4]), states that the average cost for a month's treatment with generic simvastatin averages $71, but it can sometimes be had for as low as $3.33 per month ($10 per three months) via various membership-type deals. But the monthly treatment cost can't both be between $10 and $20 and average $71 (and that wasn't listed as a maximum, just an average). This is the very reason we should not be including prices. Which reference do we use? Is it from $3.33 to (somewhere above $71), or is it $10 to $20? How do we choose which one to put in the article? This, right here, is why I'm against the practice. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

No different than the question of does the USA have 164,253 cases of COVID19,[5] 164,603 cases of COVID19,[6] 164,669 cases of COVID19[7] or 140,904 cases of COVID19 now.[8]

One reason why relatively inexpensive is useful. But it also does not mean one should not have a number of COVID19 cases just because 4 sources do not agree perfectly.

For medications it also depends on do you want the branded version or the generic version. Many just present the of the generic version rather than the branded version as many places have auto subsitution. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Those are not similar situations. The coronavirus is known to be rapidly evolving, so it is entirely expected that numbers should differ somewhat. (Even then, it would probably be better to provide an approximation rather than an exact number down to six significant digits; there is no way we can keep such an exact figure updated frequently enough to actually be accurate, and as you say, sources aren't even going to agree to that much precision). However, even at that, the high figure of 164,669 differs from the low figure of 140,904 only by about 14%. Conversely, in the case of the pricing information, the minimum price ($10 vs. $3.33) diverges by 67%, and even if the $71 were a maximum rather than an average, that would diverge from the $20 maximum by over 350%! And the reference explicitly states the $71 average is for generic only; the average it states for branded (Zocor) is $229. It also introduces additional complicating factors, such as that a doctor may order pills at double the prescribed dose and instruct the patient to cut them in half. So, this is very much an illustration of why we shouldn't be picking numbers and putting them in the article as "the price". Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

It is more complicated than that. These are "confirmed" rather than actual numbers. Confirmed numbers are simple a proxy for actual numbers. Some people want actual numbers but those do not exist. Plus their is plenty of concerns regarding certain countries messaging the numbers and not having the same testing capacity to confirm the disease even if it is present (so they are not even directly comparable). So like everything in life numbers are fuzzy and some people want them to be exact even though that is impossible. So we provide approximates. Lots of similarities to prices, prices are approximates (the numbers we provide may not include the taxes in your jurisdiction for example or discountrs etc, etc). So instead we provide the numbers from reliable sources such as WHO.

But just because our numbers for the confirmed cases do not represent the actual number of cases and different sources come to different conclusions for the confirmed numbers of cases does not mean that the numbers are useless or that we should remove them all. Instead we add hatnotes listing some of the imperfections present. We could have the same blow up over these numbers if we wanted and use many of the same arguments. For example this source[9] does not provide extensive coverage of how they arrived at each countries number. Or provide extensive discussion of their meaning. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Misplaced comment

I would kindly like to know why you deleted my edits on John Merrill's page. The American Politician one. He was the first married SGA President at the University of Alabama and you have his wedding date off by two years. This significant. Why, on God's green earth, would you take out my edit that was linked to their wedding announcement, to revert to an incorrect date? Please, I am a research librarian at the university level, I find worthy and valuable information. If you wish for wikipedia to keep false information on their pages, that's your purview I suppose. But this is a living person and the information should be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belledoll (talk • contribs)

Firstly, Belledoll, please use some amount of care in your edits. You not only placed your comment in the wrong place, but removed the section at the top of my talk page which explains how to place it properly. That aside, I already explained to you why. Copy and pasting from other sources is not permitted, regardless of accuracy, and when I find that at least part of a series of edits has had that happen, I will generally revert the lot to be certain. Regarding the marriage date, you are correct that the secretary of state biography doesn't confirm the year of his marriage, but your source doesn't either, so I removed the year entirely. Your source only states when the wedding was announced and planned, not when it actually happened, and the biography page says he's been married "33 years" but doesn't say 33 years as of when. So until a reference is found confirming that the wedding did happen (not was planned to happen) on a certain date, it should be omitted entirely. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:12, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Read some of the other edits you so wrongly took down. They refer ro him being married as SGA President. Belledoll (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Also, what you stupidly reveryed to makes it sound like he is currently running for the Senate. He is not. If you had heeded my edits you would know that he has suspended his campaign. Belledoll (talk) 07:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

It would be in his honor that John Merrill and his wife of 29 years, the former Cindy Benford of Phil Campbell - and the current principal at That comes from this article from six years ago. https://www.al.com/living/2014/11/doing_what_he_has_always_wante.html To spell it out for you, 29 plus 6 equals 35. Making the date I listed correct. Belledoll (talk) 07:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

And that is fine. If you have some of those other edits which both accurately reflect the source and are not copy-pastes or very close paraphrases, it is not a problem if you individually put them back. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:33, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Seraphimblade: Here is the citation to the wedding announcement in The Anniston Star that refers to the wedding having taken place. As you can see, I have the correct date. https://www.newspapers.com/image/106664182/?terms=Benford%2B-%2BMerrill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belledoll (talk • contribs) 18:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Seraphimblade: I tried to add back the content like you said and it won't let me because of an edit conflict. Can you please change that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belledoll (talk • contribs) 19:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Since I have spent hours redoing research that I had done previously and it won't let me do the edits due to an edit conflict, I request that you personally add back the content for me that you previously deleted. I have listed the correct citation for their wedding on May 11th, 1985 at Calvary Baptist Church. Even you can't find argument with the new citation I have listed above. Sincerely, Belledoll. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Belledoll (talk • contribs) 19:05, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

If you had an edit conflict, just follow the instructions for merging them. Learning how to deal with an edit conflict is a part of editing Wikipedia. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Question from Hairmetalmusic

"Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia" - i just received this message from you. I'm so confused by this entire Wiki process. I tried to make a page for a book that sold thousands of copies, reached #2 on the Amazon Rock book chart (beating out books my members of Guns N Roses, ACDC, Motley Crue, Kiss, etc). All those bands have books that are featured on WIKI. But I got a notice saying the book I'm trying to make a page for isn't eligible. Then I get a notice saying I'm not citing where the quotes I published are from. I listed four quotes on the page, and several times said that the quotes all came from exclusive interviews for the book!!! Now you send me a message saying that my 10 mandatory edits are disruptive and advertising material. The couple of "edits" I made that featured a quote from the book....were literal quotes from a musician that is a leader of the field/genre that the page (that I edited) was about!!!! If Lebron James makes a comment about Michael Jordan, wouldn't that be relevant? The book I'm trying to make a page about went to #2 on the amazon charts, outsold and outcharted (for a time period) numerous books that DO have wiki pages, features interviews with 50 musicians of the genre.....but at every step, a Wiki editor is telling me that I'm wrong. It's so frustrating. I don't understand why other books have pages! And other books are used as references/cited on other pages. I feel like just giving up. Please help. Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hairmetalmusic (talk • contribs) 01:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hairmetalmusic, yes, when I see someone deliberately make ten minor edits to just pass the autoconfirmed requirement, and then make an inappropriate article directly in mainspace rather than using the draft and articles for creation process, that individual gets very little leeway. I suggest going forward that you use that process, but even as a draft, what you wrote would have been deleted as promotional. Wikipedia articles must be neutral in tone and content, and must never promote or talk up anyone or anything. As some examples (but by no means an exhaustive list) of the issues: All of Groghan's books can be purchased on Amazon. (articles should not contain instructions for purchasing a product), ...absolute top of the music world! Finally wrapping up with what bands were keeping the genre alive through the 2000s! (inappropriate tone in general, and article text should not contain exclamations), A popular section of the book... ("popular" according to what reliable source?), The final section of the book is one of the more impressive aspects, as it features interviews with 50 of the biggest and most interesting musicians and names of the hair metal genre. ("more impressive" and "biggest and most interesting" according to what reliable source?), If you’re looking for another hard rock tale of sex with groupies, copious amounts of drugs and debauchery, you can go read virtually every other genre related book. (no "you"; never address the reader). The entire article continued on in that vein, and ended with an inappropriate section full of pull quotes which were not particularly relevant to the article. Wikipedia articles are not book jacket covers and must stick to only neutrally presenting facts confirmed by reliable sources, not attempt to encourage a reader of the article to purchase the book. Additionally, it appears that you are associated with the book or publisher, as you uploaded the book cover stating it is your own work. If you are, or are otherwise being paid or compensated to edit including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures prior to making further edits. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:20, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine opened

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 21, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz 🎷 ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:32, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleted page

Hello, I was just wondering if you could tell me why the page for the American Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics was marked as "G11 unambiguous advertisement or promotion"? If it's not notable enough, I was going to add some independent, credible sources to the article. I think it is a notable organization as it accredits HLA laboratories internationally for HLA typing — which is essential part to advancing the research on autoimmune diseases and preventing host vs graft issues in transplantation. It also is the first HLA organization to be founded in the world. If it is written in a style too non-encyclopedic, I can rewrite it in a more concise manner. I really do want to know what's wrong with the page as I'm still new to writing on Wikipedia, so please do advice me. Thanks.--SaladH (talk) 04:25, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

SaladH, basically the article was an "About Us" page for the organization, which is not what Wikipedia is for. You stated yourself that ...it included the history from the society's website as no other credible sources could be found.... Normally, material on an organization's own site will be promotional (nothing wrong with that; of course they'll toot their own horn on their own site). But Wikipedia is not here just to parrot that. If reliable and independent sources haven't written a substantial amount of material about the organization, we as always follow their lead—in that case, by also refraining from writing about it. If you cannot find such source material, the organization is not an appropriate article subject, and nothing (except such sources writing about them in the future) will change that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Do these count as credible sources? This article mentions the organization. Other reports involving ASHI can also be found here, here, here, here, here, and here. Thanks! SaladH (talk) 05:18, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

The government source is primary, so probably not. For the rest I can't immediately view them, but if some meet this criterion, I could take a look and let you know what I think: The source must be substantially or entirely about the organization, not just mention it. No number of brief mentions add up to notability. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Most scientific scienties/accreditation/medical organizations are mentioned in sources not independent of themselves. As the majority of them go unreported by mainstream media, do they still qualify to be Wikipedia pages? I'm not sure what sources are secondary or substantial enough for these types of organizations, you could point me in the right direction if you please. However, if you would kindly give me another shot, I still wish to create a page for ASHI, an organization that accredits laboratories to enable transplantation. Do I have your permission to redraft the article to fit in with the rest of the scientific societies? SaladH (talk) 08:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

You don't need my permission. You need references. If those aren't available about most scientific societies, then we shouldn't have articles about most of them. There are many organizations we do not and should not have articles about. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

SaladH, I did miss one common misconception in your reply that I should clear up. "Mainstream media" is not the only source of reliable information. Scholarly articles published in reputable journals, books written by qualified authors and published by reputable publishers, etc., are also entirely acceptable as references. But if none of that has been published about the organization, or it's just briefly mentioned in passing, then it wouldn't be notable. Plenty of scientific organizations such as IEEE and the National Academy of Sciences have sufficient sources published about them for an article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:45, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your guidance! I think I'd follow my adopter's advice to create a section under Human Immunology instead of rewriting an article. Thanks for being patient with me. SaladH (talk) 04:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

On another note, could I retain a pdf/html/??? version of my original page? I'd just like to keep it personally. Thanks again. SaladH (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately on checking, I have found substantial portions of the article which are either copied more or less verbatim or extremely close paraphrases. As this raises it as a copyright violation, I would not be permitted to restore the article or email copies of it. Going forward, please ensure to write article content in your own words. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Tyler Glaiel article deletion

Hello, I was wondering why the article I wrote about Tyler Glaiel got deleted? I decided to make that article since he has worked with other famous game developers like Edmund McMillen and has also worked on some really successful Indie games, I interviewed him in order to get some of the information and spent hours finding practically lost documents. Also all the images that were used are not with copyright holders, I made some investigation and found the official marketing material which is Free to use. I would like the page to be restored because I was planning on adding some more information just now when I found it was deleted. Also, this is no promotional or disruptive material, I literally got an interview with Tyler because I realized he had no wiki. Mcoloniab (talk) 01:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Mcoloniab, I am afraid you may have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia, which is not as a newspaper or magazine. An editor's personal interview with a subject is neither a reliable nor independent source; sources must be published (and interviews are by definition not independent of the subject). If this individual does not already have a substantial amount of reliable source material published about them, we will not and should not have an encyclopedia article about them. That aside, articles must be written neutrally, and not serve as a game catalog from a particular developer. That would be inappropriate even if there were clearly sufficient sourcing. As some examples of specific problems here: Tyler had an interest in Game Development his whole life. (We use a formal tone, so "Glaiel", not "Tyler". A person is referred to by their full name on first reference and last name only thereafter. And according to what reliable source? Also, "game development" should not be capitalized.) A Twitch link (Twitch is by no stretch of the imagination a reliable source), Edmund McMillen being one of them who at first said no. A few years later Ed needed a programmer for what would become Aether and Tyler was the only one online on his friend list. They later would collaborate together on The End is Nigh, (Again, "McMillan", not "Ed", and according to what reliable source?) The entire article carries on in that entirely inappropriate "get to know ya" tone. Encyclopedia articles must be strictly neutral in tone and content, and stick to what published, secondary, reliable sources (not sources such as interviews) verify. If the only references available are things like interviews, we would need to be sure to refrain from writing an article about the individual altogether. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Still I find no good reason in that that helps, instead of deleting the post all together wouldn't it be better to improve it? I made some mistakes, being it the first page I ever created on the site, but when I tried to correct them and add some better references I couldn't do that anymore, because the page is deleted and I know no way on how to even see the source code of the now deleted site. I can't even adjust to the talk type of wikipedia discussions, I realized you mentioned email somewhere in your profile, if there is a way to continue this conversation via email that would make things easier for me, and maybe also if you can give me some tips on not making the same mistakes again. Thanks. Mcoloniab (talk) 11:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I gave you some tips, above. If you know of something that would not be suitable to be discussed publicly I will discuss it by email, but if that is not the case, the expectation is for such discussions to be public. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Just one last question, how can I see the source code of the now deleted page? So I will be able to modify it.Mcoloniab (talk) 12:26, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

As it is not the worst I've seen, I'm willing to place it in your userspace for you and stub it down to be rewritten (you'll still be able to see the old versions in the page history), provided you are willing to agree to ensure to use reliable published sources to support any statements in the article and to request review by articles for creation rather than returning it to mainspace yourself. (Subject to the caveat that I'd still have to check it for any copyright violations prior to undeletion, and cannot do so if I find them.) Would you be willing to do so? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is perfect and will do, about the images, they are public domain, how do I deal with that?Mcoloniab (talk) 20:10, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Mcoloniab, I'm afraid you may be confused about what public domain means. ("Available to the public" is not at all the same thing.) Public domain means the copyright holder has explicitly agreed that anyone in the world can use the images for any purpose desired, including commercial purposes, with no permission needed, no royalties or other fees due, and no right of refusal. If that were the case, the copyright holder should have confirmed that they have done that somewhere. Unless the copyright holder has explicitly agreed to that, images are presumed to be "all rights reserved". Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll only complete the article then, I thought that was the same, sorry.Mcoloniab (talk) 01:15, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I found one additional copyvio image, but no text. (For reference: "Own work" for a photograph means you were the photographer, and for a piece of art means you drew or created it. Grabbing something off the Web does not make it your "own work".) I've placed the article in your userspace at User:Mcoloniab/Tyler Glaiel and have stubbed it and added the AfC template; you can use that to submit the article for review if and when you are able to write a neutral article with sufficient references. You can view the previous revisions in the history tab. However, I would ask you not waste AfC's time. If you can't find better references than the ones you've got, you will need to find something else to write about, and regardless nothing promotional will be accepted. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:13, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Oakland Buddha

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Oakland Buddha you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vami IV -- Vami IV (talk) 16:01, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

PeioR

Hi. I'm a ptwiki editor (and enwiki editor too). We are investigating the illicit use of multiple accounts by the user PeioR. I saw that you applied the block him. Could you tell me if there was any account verification request in enwiki involving PeioR? Best regards. ✍ A.WagnerC (talk) 21:44, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

A.WagnerC, that block is under authority of the Arbitration Committee. Please contact them with any questions regarding it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:37, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring abuse at George Pell

I'm not going near ANI. It's a cesspool for the piling on of hatred. I firmly resist POV pushing on Wikipedia, and have a number of enemies, including some POV pushing Admins, so no visit to ANI ever leads to rational discussion. If you don't like what was written in that mini-discussion, why don't you do something about that hurler of abuse who attacked me? This editor follows me around Wikipedia insulting me and ALWAYS disagreeing with me, and all you do is hide a discussion. He'll just keep doing it now. HiLo48 (talk) 00:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

You are welcome to make any points you like regarding article content in a civil fashion. Other editors are too, and they may disagree with you. If you cannot come to agreement with them, dispute resolution is thataway. However, the talk page is for discussing the article and its content, not its editors. If you have conduct concerns, you might seek some form of dispute resolution, but the talk page is not the appropriate venue. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I was completely civil. I don't understand that response. Please have another look at the conversation. HiLo48 (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I did not say you were not. It is a general reminder, as it looks like the conversation in general was growing rather heated. I am not particularly interested in analyzing whether you in specific were. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Why not? Are you happy to let a serial troublemaker and abuser continue on their merry way? Your action treated us as both as equally guilty. That is encouraging even more bad behaviour by someone who began a thread by insulting me. When WILL you try actually making this a batter place? HiLo48 (talk) 01:22, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

If you believe there are behavioral issues which need to be addressed, ANI is thataway. If you are unwilling to bring up the problem at the place intended for it, this is not a substitute location. I saw an inappropriate thread and closed it, without apportioning blame. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Useless response. See my well established thoughts on Administration on Wikipedia on my User page. You have further confirmed that view. Many have agreed with me over the years. I repeat, by treating both parties as equally guilty on this occasion, you are, in fact, excusing the genuinely guilty party. HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2020

• News and notes: Unbiased information from Ukraine's government?

• In the media: Coronavirus, again and again

• Discussion report: Redesigning Wikipedia, bit by bit

• Featured content: Featured content returns

• Arbitration report: Two difficult cases

• Traffic report: Disease the Rhythm of the Night

• Gallery: Roy is doing fine and sending more photos

• Recent research: Trending topics across languages; auto-detecting bias

• Essay: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing

• By the numbers: Open data and COVID-19: Wikipedia as an informational resource during the pandemic

• Opinion: Trusting Everybody to Work Together

• On the bright side: What's making you happy this month?

• Interview: Health and RfA's: An interview with Guy Macon

• In focus: Multilingual Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: The Guild of Copy Editors

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Issue 38, January – April 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 38, January – April 2020

• New partnership
• Global roundup

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --15:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Onkar Kishan Khullar

You deleted this page under G11 a week ago. I think you probably salted it too as it was deleted previously at 22:17, 20 March 2020. It has now been recreated as a draft, but when I see the edit report of the user from Xtools it says here that all of his edits are live and none have been deleted. Can you allow me access to page logs of the two pages that were deleted. I want to launch a sockpuppet case, but without those logs I don't know who the master is. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

MistyGraceWhite, it would appear that the sockpuppet investigation was already completed. I'm not sure what "logs" you're asking for access to, but I can confirm that both deleted versions were created by 7620ruthik if that's what you need. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade. Yes I wanted to know who had created those pages so I could report the current user with the correct master account. Thanks MistyGraceWhite (talk) 05:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

• Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
• Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
• A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
• A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

• The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
• Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

National Union of Public Employees (New Zealand) - deletion

What *exactly* was your issue with this page? I addressed the initial issues raised. Yet I check back a couple of days later and the whole thing is gone? Tartanperil (talk) 11:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Tartanperil, I think where you went wrong here was relying on material published by the organization, which of course will be promotional in nature. Wikipedia articles must be based upon reliable and independent sources, and for a mainspace article those must be there from the first edit onward. This particular article was promotional in cases like: NUPE cites a commitment to social justice, collectivism and fair representation, and believes workers can only improve and protect their conditions and rights by acting in solidarity and unity. (we don't regurgitate "mission" type junk like that), NUPE often works side by side with other unions in pay negotiations and campaigns, in order to maximise leverage on behalf of workers. (what other unions? What reliable sources confirm that the strategy is effective?), NUPE is a democratic organisation; its policies and employees are directed by a National Executive made up of delegates who are elected directly by NUPE's members. (according to what reliable source?). The "article" read more like an "About Us" page, which is unacceptable. If there is not a substantial amount of reliable and secondary source material available about this organization, we should not have an article about it at all. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Oakland Buddha

The article Oakland Buddha you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Oakland Buddha for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vami IV -- Vami IV (talk) 06:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

E-flux deletion

Hi, you recently deleted the page for E-flux, a vital arts organization based in New York City. E-flux has existed since 1998 and serves as a crucial entity within the global art world. Based on the page log, it seems as though the Wikipedia page had existed without issue since 2014. I am not affiliated with E-flux -- I am a grad student in art history. I'm here to contest the deletion of the page because I had been referencing it during my research. It was not a page strictly for marketing at all. It was a valuable and informative page about a platform that it's nearly inconceivable to imagine the art world without. Please reinstate the page as soon as possible, and I'd be happy to edit it myself to remove any language that seems like personal branding on their part. The E-flux page truly is a necessary resource for artists, writers, students, and researchers and should go back online as soon as possible. Hallieedit (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC) May 5, 2020

Hallieedit, I do not restore advertisements to mainspace. The article was full of reference bombing using references which barely mention the organization in passing if at all, and some were even sales links to publications put out by them. However, since it's not the worst I've seen, I would be willing to move it to draft and stub it if you believe you have sufficient reliable and independent reference material to actually write a neutral article that does not promote or talk up the organization, and are willing to ensure to seek articles for creation review. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, I can definitely go through and edit to meet the review standards once you return it to draft. Would you be able to point out an example of the reference bombing or instances in which the links directed to sales pages? I don't recall that part of the page but want to avoid including that while I'm editing. Thank you! Hallieedit (talk) 14:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)May 6, 2020

I've placed it at Draft:E-flux, and will also add the AfC review template for you to use if you believe you've corrected the issues. For some indication of the problems, it starts at first: e-flux is a publishing platform and archive, artist project, curatorial platform, and enterprise founded in 1998. (What do they actually do? An art sales or promotion company, an art criticism publisher, what? That's marketese and doesn't give me any actual facts.) There are many, many more issues like that in the article. Stick to facts, no flowery or metaphorical language. Be very literal and direct. The reference bombing starts from the first source too, currently to The New York Times: [10]. It only briefly name-drops e-flux, it is not in any sense about it. The second is an interview, which is not an independent source. The third just mentions e-flux as the location where something was held; it is, again, not substantially about e-flux. If you look in the article's history, the article is replete with "sources" like this—they are not reliable, not independent, or are just a quick mention or name drop and don't cover the organization in-depth. For references, we would need multiple reliable and independent sources which are entirely or primarily about e-flux. Not about subjects or people related to e-flux, but directly and exactly about the organization itself. If such reference material does not exist, we should not have an article about the subject at all. I suggest starting by finding the three best sources you can, and see if those meet the criteria (linked earlier in this comment) for reliability and independence, and if they actually are entirely or primarily about the e-flux organization. If you find the truly best ones, and they still don't measure up, it would not be appropriate for us to have an article about this subject at all. A bunch of name drops, mentions, and interviews do not add up to notability; that requires actual high-quality, in-depth reliable source material. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Connectedart - deletion

Dear Seraphimblade,

Yesterday evening I finally sat down with a glass of red wine and wrote my first page about a new media art company working with technology and arts. I have been looking forward to start writing articles about these type of companies, organizations and individual artists focusing on digital and virtual arts - as I have been following them for a couple of years. I expect a very interesting boom of visual and interactive arts in the years to come based on the potentials in AR and VR.

My thinking was that I could do a real and valuable contribution to Wikipedia writing about the actors within this field in an early phase, as I do have some real insights. Therefor I was surprised when you deleted the page under the G11 article claiming it was pure marketing. I wrote the page in an objective and informative way, and I have an intention of writing about more companies, organizations and artists in the time to come. The G11 also states that "Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion".

I'm definitely a novices and I do respect your many years of effort to keep Wikipedia as good as possible, so please clarify what I can do to be more neutral and objective in the future. With this I also ask you to undelete the Connectedart page so I can adjust it in accordance to your advice.

Thank you for time!

- Wikisupp — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisupp (talk • contribs) 08:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikisupp, first off, you deliberately ducked autoconfirmed by making exactly ten edits so as to create the article directly in mainspace, instead of creating a draft and requesting articles for creation as newer editors should do. If you're going to pull one like that, you had better be able to pull off creating an appropriate article on the first edit, and you did not. That aside, the article started with an inappropriate external link (one external link to an official website is permitted at the bottom of the article in an "External Links" section; never in the article text and certainly not first thing), and then went on from there to an entirely unreferenced "profile" spam. References to reliable and independent sources are not a nice thing to have, but a requirement. If substantial quantities of such material has not been written about this organization, we should not have any article about it at all. From there: Connected.ART is a company running an Eco-system for artists, art consumers, art institutions and art investors. (a bit promotional, and "ecosystem", not "Eco-system". While odd, I've noticed promotional material often contains inappropriate capitalization or otherwise oddly used words. Maybe some way to draw attention? That aside, even "ecosystem" would be inappropriate fluff, what they do should be described more matter of factly.), The concept was initiated by an international group of art and tech enthusiasts in 2019, and they established a company in Norway due to the country's open society and freedom of speech. (according to what reliable source?), Connected.ART focuses on how to use modern technology within art and culture, bridging arts, technology and people. (we don't regurgitate "mission" junk like that; that's pure marketese), Their main focus seems to be... ("seems" to whom? Wikipedia articles aren't written from the impressions of what editors think things "seem" to be, only from facts in reliable sources), They have created a movement called... (they "created" this movement according to what reliable source?), They publish the destruction on their YouTube channel: (no external links in article text and no pushing someone's YouTube channel). Overall, the article was entirely inappropriate profile spam. Wikipedia articles must stick entirely to verifiable facts already published in reliable and independent sources and must never reflect an editor's own thoughts or impressions. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

- Seraphimblade:

Please let us have a discussion thinking we both have the best intentions (not the worst):

I did not "deliberately ducked autoconfirmed by making exactly ten edits so as to create the article directly in mainspace". But I read that I needed to have 10 edits and some time before I could create a page, so I did it. And eventually I found the time to look at Wikipedia again. Further I did try to write an appropriate article, but obliviously I missed. Regarding the capitulation and "Eco-system" you criticize me for I have no idea. My auto correction suggested this as the right way to spell it. English is not my mother thong, but I do find it important for Wikipedia to have room for other then Americans and Englishmen. Using the term ecosystem as such I do not understand is wrong; Its a good description. Regarding the statement about Norway I agree fully that I should have been linking to a source. This is a important lesson for me, that I should never state anything without providing a source. "Connected.ART focuses on how to use modern technology within art and culture, bridging arts, technology and people" This is not junk, but yes, it is close to their mission, which is their business. Of course I can phrase this differently, but is this really important to criticize? Using the term "Seems" is a term used by most true experts when talking about facts, as most "facts" are not a golden standard. I assume you know the history of science, and personally I prefer people that approach things with humility, so I try to do that myself. My experience is that it's the dumbest of people that are most bombastic. BUT OK, I will never use such terms in the future and I will be more objective and accountable.

Two questions:

1. Is it not acceptable to link to an external site in the text (like webiste or youtube)?

2. Do you in general have issues with YouTube links or other links to social medias?

(I'm asking as I cannot see this stated in the regulations)

Please undelete the connectedart page so I can adjust the article in accordance to you advice. Give me 24 hours to fix it. When you have accepted this one I will continue to write about players within this field, and use this one as a "standard". And please keep and eye on my actions in the future and correct me if I do not comply. And if possible, provide me with the chance of doing corrections before deleting the page. Thank you!

Wikisupp (talk) 09:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

I do not, and will not, undelete advertisements. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

- Seraphimblade,

I have supported Wikipedia economically for almost 10 years because I "love" Iustus the rightful and balanced, and "hate" the Peccator - the narcissistic sinner. I do appreciate the fact oriented approach and the hard work of keeping the big money out of the history. I guess 80% of your work is rightful and balanced, but what you are doing with this attitude is also to eliminated the history of older local history without scientific sources and new history without scientific sources. With such a strict regulation you create a vacuum. This vacuum has at the most polar side of things resulted in your president Mr. Trump and the far right movement. Actually, if I may or may not be polite, you're acting like a Trump, a dictator, being the prosecutor, judge and executor. Why can't we enter a normal dialog and talk about this in a normal way. You miss use your power man. Even if you're probably doing most of your work at Wikipedia right. Again: I do respect that, but playing God is not a good thing. Let's play by the rules, and if I brake rules, please help me obey! Not ignore me and put me in jail - sorry for the emotional speech, but please, there are more good people out there than you ;-)

Wikisupp (talk) 17:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

You are making progressively less sense, pulling out the "I donated!" bit, and then being insulting. I do believe we're done here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

- Seraphimblade

I'm sharing a combination of facts - that I have donated for a decade, Iustus et Peccator, and that I love Wikipedia - and emotions - talking about the vacuum and other shit that I feel coming from the culture I come from. I hope and agree that we are done here, so feel free to delete this conversation. I have posted a new article and believe it have understood your point. I hope I show some learning at the end of the day. Thank you!

Wikisupp (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

- Seraphimblade

I see that you again deleted the page. Please let me know on which basis. Other than bias.

81.191.10.115 (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

If you are Wikisupp and mean Connectedart, no I didn't. It was moved by another editor to draft space as it was not appropriately supported by reliable and independent reference material. References are a requirement, not a nicety. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

- Seraphimblade

Yes, I apologize! You're right, I have now some technicalities to correct. Even though the dialog may not reflect it (as my intellectual ego have issues accepting it) I do appreciate your lessons, and I did learn from it. Thx ;-)

Wikisupp (talk) 19:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

e-flux

why didn't u talk in the talk page? so im on ur page. It looks like ur upset and u think I'm trolling. im not. I feel like we are similar. im from nyc too. Imc00ln0treally.

Imc00ln0treally First, if you would like to have a conversation, please use English. "im", "u", and "ur" are not English words, and I will not have a conversation with someone using that kind of silliness. If you'd like to have a conversation with me, please repost in correct English. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Seraphimblade (my tone = optimism/embarrassed) I would like to continue our conversation. I will take your comment as friendly advice and not as an insult. Tone can be tricky to project in text. I am truly sorry. I feel embarrassed. I didn't realize you would get offended by my informal tone and nature. I will be mindful of that. thank you for showing me that other conversation about e-flux on your talk page. I see the deletion got the attention of other users. I have no love for the previous version of e-flux's wiki. I was not apart of the downfall of the e-flux page. I want to be apart of its resurrection. I was planning on editing e-flux over the next few days, to give it a more encyclopedic tone. I think, I will wait for that other user to submit you a draft before I submit one. I like how active you are, it makes me trust your POV on wikipedia. I sense your commitment to wikipedias integrity. What was your second point? (forgive me if there is a mistake) imc00ln0treally —Preceding undated comment added 23:51, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

You could help at Draft:E-flux. It might be that the organization is notable, though it would require more than name drops and mentions. Perhaps you can assist there in helping to find reliable and independent sources that directly cover the organization rather than briefly mentioning it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced question regarding Karan Choudhary

Hi Seraphimblade, You have deleted my account on May 7th(Karan Choudhary), for I don't know what reason. I'm not an expert on how to make or publish a Wikipedia page. I'm an artist who makes films and acts to survive. This Wikipedia page is really important for me so my employers can recognize my authenticity. Would you please undelete the page? I would really appreciate it. Karan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithnkieth (talk • contribs) 16:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Keithnkeith, using Wikipedia for promotion of yourself is directly contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, as Wikipedia may never be used to promote anyone or anything. That is why the article was deleted, and you absolutely will not be permitted to do so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I understand and as you can see I'm not an expert on Wikipedia and how to post question etc. So apologies for that. My page wasn't just to promote anyone, we provided valid references. Is there any way you can help me understand how can I improve the mistakes so that my page can be up again? I would really appreciate your help. - Karan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithnkieth (talk • contribs) 18:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Who is "we"? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I mean to say the person who was helping me create the page. He was an expert on Wikipedia. He checked all my references thoroughly and made me sure that they are legit. I'm not good at this language and setting up a page etc. But if you could help me navigate the problem, I can find someone to help me correct the mistakes. I'd appreciate your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keithnkieth (talk • contribs) 20:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

That sounds a lot to me like undisclosed paid editing. If someone was paid or compensated to create the article, disclosure of that is mandatory, regardless of whether the paid individual actually posted it to Wikipedia. Anyone who is an "expert" on Wikipedia should have known that and told you. They should also know that all statements of fact require references, and that puff terms like "award-winning" are not acceptable. It sounds like your "expert"...well, wasn't one. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Seems like you get so much fun out of deleting people's pages and spend most of your life doing this. I may not understand "your full of crap life" but it's ok. You'll see another page with my name and with the same term "award-winning" because that's who I am. An award-winning filmmaker. Not like you, "a whining piece of shit" who acts like police on Wikipedia. Go get a life dude. Don't bother replying to this message or you'll prove that I'm right about your miserable life.

I've just blocked this single-purpose account. They requested undeletion at WP:RFUD twice today. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced question regarding Lonestar Industries

Dear Seraphimblade,

I was looking to write an article on Lonestar Industries - an expansion joints manufacturer from India. I find that you have deleted a page similar to this and was wondering if you could either send me a draft of the previous article ? or maybe tell me why it was deleted ?

I also, have a couple of questions considering I am new to wiki. 1. I do have some data on this company and I know for a fact that they are the largest manufacturer of expansion joints in terms of value in the country (India) and that they are also, the only expansion joint supplier in India to have been certified by the U2 single certification mark of ASME. Again these are details known to those in the industrial market/ a wide range of customers but we donot have an article or any written award to prove this. I was wondering if mentioning these above details may have been the reasons for deletion ? If so, how do you propose that we can present these facts?

- Agraja12 (please leave me a notice when you do respond to this) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agraja12 (talk • contribs) 08:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Agraja12, neither I nor anyone have deleted anything at Lonestar Industries. If you mean a different location where something was deleted, please provide a link. If there is not a substantial quantity of reliable and independent reference material about the organization, it is not appropriate to write an article about it, and your comment seems to be acknowledging that there is not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Inspirasia Foundation page

Hi. I have created a new page for Inspirasia Foundation as a draft. If you find the time I would really appreciate if you could give it a quick look just to advise if I am infringing in any way or not doing things correctly. Thank you for your time. Angie Balzan (talk) 09:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Angie Balzan, you've done quite well at making the language used more neutral (except for the "non-profit leaders" that seems to have slipped in). Next up is to do some work on your references. The goal isn't just to have a bunch of citations, but to have reliable, independent, high-quality references which directly back assertions of fact in the article. You have one academically-published book (though it only covers the organization briefly) and one article from the Times of Malta, and that's the type of reference we're looking for; scholarly work, reputable news organizations, things like that. The rest, however, are not up to that quality level. For example, take the assertion Opened in January 2013, the centre brings together Indonesian non-profit leaders from organisations such as YPK Bali.... The reference used to support that claim is [11]. That page does not confirm any partnership between the two organizations. One reference does ([12]) under "Major Partners", but if third-party sources have not seen fit to comment about the partnership, it probably is not significant enough to be mentioned in an encyclopedia article either. Similarly, be careful of overstating things: This source ([13]) confirms one joint project between the two organizations, but does not state that there is a longer-term partnership between them. If you can find more quality reference material and stick to what those references verify, I think you'll have done very well here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the pointers. I will continue refining the article as suggested. Angie Balzan (talk) 00:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Hope you are well. I have found the time to do some adjustments to the page as per your recommendations. I have added citations that show the connection between Inspirasia as a doner and the actual charity receiving the donation. I have found various journals and Annual publications created by the NGO thanking Inspirasia for their support but I am unable to create a citation for them and I am unsure if they are reliable sources to use. Do you think what I have cited is enough to substantiate my sentences? Once again thank you for finding the time to go through the article and pointing out the issues. Angie Balzan (talk) 15:51, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

That wasn't the primary issue. The main issue is the lack of references which are (all of): reliable, independent, and covering the organization in depth rather than mentioning or name-dropping it. There still only appears to be one such reference (the Times of Malta piece), and that covers only one particular aspect. Individual references covering specific factoids is not sufficient to demonstrate notability; that really does require a substantial quantity of reliable, independent, in-depth material. That's still not there. If better (not just more) references than that are not available, an article on this organization will not be possible. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy delation of Fermiparadox_foundation

Moreover there is no button "contest speedy delation"

I think speedy delation should be removed as page was writing patterning on https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Kulczyk_Foundation [Kulczyk_foundation] as I edit, observe in my work foundation, start ups which started from poor and spread activity at many fields.

It is not fair that is so easier for richest only to have their own mentions in article as young start ups without well-educated parents, patterns from top same should have same rights and place like richest.

It is not fair that people with luck parents have everything and people from fermiparadox_foundation whom works incognito do not even use surname at article. I observed, worked and admire people from fermiparadox_foundation and in my opinion their work is much less as self promotion as Kulczyk_foundation as all messageboards, blogs are non-profit and done in constructive way to improve world and people's knowledge of mathematic.

I think their work is worth much more than Kulczyk_foundation and thei are worth to have separate article at wikipedia.

Please remove speedy delation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathematicsnewspaper (talk • contribs) 17:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Mathematicsnewspaper (I note you were blocked for a username change; you can either respond here once you change username and are unblocked or respond on your own talk page and ping me), the article you cited is not one to follow in the footsteps of. It cites no reliable or independent sources, as is necessary to demonstrate notability, so I'll be evaluating the suitability of that one as well and see if it needs to be nominated for deletion. That aside, however, your draft was not deleted for lack of notability (drafts are not required to demonstrate notability like mainspace articles are), but for promotion, since no content on Wikipedia may promote anyone or anything. Language such as in Great Britain and all around the world (so it operates in Antarctica? Uzbekistan? North Korea? Be specific and cite sources verifying those specifics), helps solve the problems of people, thus lastingly changing the world (marketing fluff, what do they actually do?), and the rest of it continued on in that fluffy tone that says very little about what the organization actually does, let alone citing sources confirming it. Regardless, if there is not a substantial amount of reliable and independent reference material available about the organization, it is not appropriate for us to have an article about the organization at all. I am sorry if you consider that unfair, but that's still the case. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

for deleting Frinza. I do not like spam. PS I created a script that allows for tagging articles for speedy deletion with one-click. Because you are an admin, you can immediately delete pages for reasons mentioned in the dropdown. Feel free to give me feedback on the script :) Aasim 08:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Awesome Aasim, I certainly appreciate your enthusiasm, but Twinkle already supports that. I'm afraid you may be duplicating work that's already been done. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Fermi paradox_foundation

I overlooked with previous nickname very rigorious in my opinion rules of wikipedia. There is no much choice than be obedient for this rules as revenue which i read is bigger than my income [but at uknown reason smaller than linkedin or instagram]. Reasons cited by editors were foundation is done for self-promotion and now as it was not enough reliable, independent , secondary sources. I overlooked previous nickname setting as i did not think that someone will nominate foundation used for self-promoting as it is non-profit and mathematics is as constructive as more than welcome to research.

I think [ Barking Dagenham College], Imperial College], BBC Chelmsford, Library], can be considered as secondary, reliable sources as long as I read guidelines. i know I will be whistleblowing now but it is a bit angring and not fair that people from example mentioned Kulczyk_foundation https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Kulczyk_Foundation whom had great start, and great life from very beginning had education and patterns from top.[parents] as their education, confidence. AS longs as I research kulczyk_foundation article their owns secondary/ reliable sources are: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Foundation_(nonprofit) https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Human_Development_Index https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Poverty In my opinion sources which i wrote in article fermiparadox are not weaker than above mentioned [in my opinion even stronger] but biggest minus of fermiparadox activity is that they started from scratch poor where other foundations had great start, education ensured from top and that's not fair. Place like Wikipedia or other internet websites are rather concentrated on quality than great start or power of rich parents. Please remove speedy delation or if not I would have to make another read on guidelines and secondary, reliable sources as It is hard to fight or be wiser than Wikipedia as it is great reliable source of information even though revenue is smaller than linkedin or instagram. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legalensuchtmitteln (talk • contribs) 06:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not understand what you are saying. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

I will pay much press on kindness and love form of my essay, utterrance here as because of unknown reason i recognized fear from login to wikipedia [it is probably because i received 40 rejection at many languages of my articles usually of various reasons but lastly reason became same so i came back to guidelines and other wikipedia articles] which i plan to diminish transforming even into willigness and happines to log in as generally wikipedia is great place.

Arguments that my article were not enough of secondary sources are clear and after another reading of its guidelines i understand what do in next stage.

"Seraphimblade" wrote I do not understand. I will now try to be kindest i can,trying to send as much love, constructivness and greatness i can [transforming] this accussation,whistleblowing and dragging down corporation tone.I will explain this nicely and clearly.

I think article about foundation which i wrote is not worst than for example kulczyk_foundation article.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Kulczyk_Foundation

I patterned myself on it and gave more secondary sources than patterned article. I think it is not fair that oligarchs, richest families have that amount of power as even my whistleblowing, [or like it say dragging down or coloquially says "to cotton on "]even this not strongest organization will not harm their position and power [and existance of its article] and with my article about above mentioned organization/foundation should same appear in wikipedia but i think probability will be bigger if secondary sources wil be stronger which naturally will cause real quality and power of its foundation [in this case mathematics can be easy to measure and be performed of its quality, efficiency and application.

I think i explained issue really clear and again claim removal of speedy delation and publish article of above mentioned organizaton[foundation] and to diminish this lawful and accusative tone i write at end my favourite ending "

Much love:> Keep things together. [another way to diminish my fear of wikipedia is to really improve article with secondary sources which i know how to after another deep read of guidelines] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legalensuchtmitteln (talk • contribs) 00:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

That is still incomprehensible. Please try to express whatever it is you're asking in a sentence or two; the long jumble of word salad is not helping. If you are still requesting undeletion of the article we still discussed, the answer is "no" and will remain no regardless of how many times you repeat the question. You also don't need to repeatedly start new sections if you're discussing the same thing. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:22, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Will Kirby

I just saw this tweet then checked out the article and saw that you're editing it. Be prepared for fans hoping to help out their hero. Schazjmd (talk) 00:36, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Wouldn't be the first time I've annoyed a spammer, and probably won't be the last. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

/* Request to Restore Deleted Page for Alex Okoroji */

Hello Seraphimblade. You recently deleted a page I edited Alex Okoroji, it was tagged for speedy deletion citing CSD G11. And I declined the speedy deletion because she is a notable Nigerian with Notable accomplishments. This BLP article has been created since 2016 and had relevant sources and citations.

If a subject is notable and the content could plausibly be replaced with text written from a neutral point of view, this is preferable to deletion. Note: Any article that describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. So, I'm confused as to why the sudden decision to delete, instead of fixing the issues with it. 

She clearly passes WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:NACTOR, WP:AUTHOR, WP:CREATIVE

• She has had significant roles in multiple films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
• Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to the field of entertainment in Nigeria.
• She has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series).
• She also has significant coverage. "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

Can you please undelete and restore the page, so whatever issues you have with it can be resolved and the article can be improved to avoid this in the future. Thank you very much. Joykodiri (talk) 08:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Joykodiri, no, I will not, as the article was promotional and was since its creation. The following are some examples, but by no means an exhaustive list, of the inappropriately promotional content: also known as the "Queen of Expression" ("sourced" to an unreliable reference, and puff), ranked one of the top 250 most influential women leaders in the world by Richtopia (what is "Richtopia" and why's anyone care what their rankings are?), and was nominated for Her Network 2018 'Woman of the Year' in Entertainment category. (by whom?) She was honored with (puff, "received", not "was honored with"), She is mentioned as one of the beauties and beautiful things about Nigeria, in total facts about Nigeria (you've got to be kidding me there), and it just goes on and on and on from there. No, I'm not restoring that absolutely blatant puff piece. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade Hmm...Got it. I see what you mean. In this case, do you think it could/should be completely rewritten from a more neutral point with better references? I didn't create the article but I have contributed to it and was wondering if I could recreate it, as, I'm trying to understand all the guidelines. Joykodiri (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

If there are sufficient reliable and independent sources to create an article on the individual, then yes, it is fine to do so. Just make sure the language is neutral and doesn't "talk up", and stick only to facts verified by those reliable published references. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Commented-out warnings

The sort of people for whom this message was intended, don't read talk pages. They just come in and edit the article to reflect their Moral Truth. DS (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

Hi Seraphimblade, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, Sam-2727 (talk)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Do you read logs, articles or any submitted contest before you delete anything?

Asking out of real curiosity, or is it just a reflex "shoot from the hip"-motion at this point? Hmwh (talk) 09:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, of course I do. I read your comment. It is not a "catch-22". If you read, for example, the article about Microsoft, it clearly explains why the company is significant while still maintaining a neutral tone. It is entirely possible to do both, and articles are expected to do both. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:11, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of my 2 new pages

I published two new articles named Neelkanth Patang - The Revolving Restaurant and Gopal Namkeen. I just want the data of both articles, so I can improve that and may recreate those pages after suggested improvements. Please help me to do so, I created those pages after spending hours on internet.बृहस्पति (talk) 05:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

बृहस्पति, if you intend to do a recreation, I will not assist you in doing so. The articles were promotional and would need a fundamental rewrite, not a bit of tweaking. However, you also need to remember that not all subjects meet Wikipedia's definition of notability. If you spent hours looking for sources and those are the best you could find, chances are very good that these subjects do not have the necessary source material for notability, meaning we should not have articles about them at all. Determining if a subject is appropriate for an article and, if so, creating that article, is a very difficult thing to do, and I suggest that new editors spend a fair bit of time editing existing articles first to gain experience with Wikipedia. After that, once you initially try new articles, do so as a draft and request articles for creation review rather than going for it directly in mainspace. It seems you may have gotten a bit ahead of yourself. That's okay, but give it a bit of time before you jump directly into the deep end. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:48, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I only need the data which I gathered after hard working, Searching through books, websites and cited on the pages. I don't asked for your assistance. These articles were deleted too fast, so I can't get enough time to backup source codes. I read Wikipedia's definition of notability. I want to recreate both the articles(If it not violate wikipedia's guideline) and I promise you I am not going to publish it on mainspace directly. I will first request experienced wikipedia editors of my City/State/Country (I think they can understand the topics better than others.) to review it. If they will find the articles in the limiting boundaries of wikipedia guideline then only I go ahead.बृहस्पति (talk) 20:10, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

If you intend to recreate them like that rather than going through AfC, the answer remains "no". "Understanding" of the material is irrelevant; the whole point of using published reliable sources is so that even someone who doesn't understand the material can verify that it is accurate. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:02, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Why you are stretching the conversation?, I already mentioned that I will go through review process, more precisely called AfC. I need the Source Codes of both Articles.बृहस्पति (talk) 06:33, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

No, you said previously you would request experienced wikipedia editors of my City/State/Country (I think they can understand the topics better than others.) to review it. That's not how this works. You hit the submit for review button and you get whatever reviewer you get. You do not pick which one. Are we clear there? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:42, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you for your guidance, Am I get my lost data or not????बृहस्पति (talk) 13:37, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Please undelete and draftify Neelkanth Patang - The Revolving Restaurant. The topic is notable as an architecturally important building and considered as landmark building of Ahmedabad. The editor is new so he might have made mistakes in writing. The previous writing might be promotional and poor. I will be keeping any eye on it and will remove if anything promotional is found.

See following references to solve notability issue for Patang Hotel:

• [14]
• HCP
• This ref says: Noted architect Hasmukh Patel, who designed Ahmedabad's landmark revolving restaurant — Patang — passed away on Saturday morning after prolonged illness.
• images
• This also has article on Patang

Regards,-Nizil (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Another reference which I already mentioned in Neelkanth Patang - The Revolving Restaurant.

• Limca Book of Records - Limca Book of Records: India at Her Best, 2018. The reference says Neelkanth Patang at Ahmedabad, Gujarat, was the first revolving restaurant at 221 feet above ground level, Opened in 1984...

Requesting to undelete and draftify article.बृहस्पति (talk) 12:21, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

And you've already received the answer to that request. It will not change if you keep repeating it. You are welcome to try again if you have found sufficient reference material, though the couple of blurbs you've stated here won't be that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

But what is your problem to undelete and draftify Neelkanth Patang - The Revolving Restaurant??? I am promising to go through AfC. You deleted the article citing notability and promotional. I think the article is as per guideline. If you don't think so, please cite any promotional sentence from that deleted Neelkanth Patang - The Revolving Restaurant here.बृहस्पति (talk) 07:39, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

It is profile spam. It's there to push something about it onto Wikipedia, not to actually determine if available sources actually support doing so. Additionally, language like "...Diners can enjoy the views..." is promotional and unacceptable. For the last time, the answer is an absolutely firm no. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:00, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2020

• From the editor: Meltdown May?

• News and notes: 2019 Picture of the Year, 200 French paid editing accounts blocked, 10 years of Guild Copyediting

• In the media: CBS on COVID-19, Sanger on bias, false noses, and five prolific editors

• Discussion report: WMF's Universal Code of Conduct

• Special report: The sum of human knowledge? Not in one Wikipedia language edition

• Featured content: Weathering the storm

• Arbitration report: Board member likely to receive editing restriction

• Traffic report: Come on and slam, and welcome to the jam

• Op-Ed: Where Is Political Bias Taking Us?

• Gallery: Wildlife photos by the book

• News from the WMF: WMF Board announces Community Culture Statement

• Recent research: Automatic detection of covert paid editing; Wiki Workshop 2020

• Community view: Transit routes and mapping during stay-at-home order downtime

• On video: COVID-19 spurs innovations in Wikimedia video and virtual programming

• WikiProject report: Revitalizing good articles

• On the bright side: 500,000 articles in the Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia

• Obituaries: Dmitrismirnov, Kattenkruid, Muidlatif, Ronhjones, Tsirel

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
• The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

• A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine closed

An arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

• Standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles. Any uninvolved administrator may apply sanctions as an arbitration enforcement action to users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.
• CFCF is reminded to avoid casting aspersions and similar conduct in the future.
• Doc James is prohibited from making any edits relating to pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing in the article namespace.
• QuackGuru is indefinitely topic-banned from articles relating to medicine, broadly construed.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 15:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Medicine closed

Speedy deletion Luciano Micallef

Hi.This is Angie Balzan. We had a long discussion a few weeks ago about the Inspirasia foundation page which I found most helpful. I have rewritten an article Luciano Micallef which has just beeg tagged for speedy deletion. I would really like to be told where I went wrong on this article as I really tried to substantiate every claim with verifiable sources. I have also not used any inflated language and have really kept to precise detail ( to my knowledge). It would be really helpful if you could find the time. Thank you. Angie Balzan (talk) 14:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Angie Balzan, it looks like the request for speedy deletion was declined. I would have declined it as well had I reviewed it; it may go a bit into excessive detail on specific projects they've done but I certainly don't see it crossing the line into blatant promotion. So, sometimes people make an error; that's why there are multiple steps to the review process. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I didn't see, though, that it was edited in between the placement of the speedy tag and the decline. At the time of tagging, I see it contained stuff like: Micallef is known for his vibrant portrayals of leading... (leave out stuff like "vibrant" and "leading"), and ...in honour of Malta's leading philantropists... ("leading" again, "Maltese philanthropists" will suffice.) Generally, an article should not have "leading" in it; that's a puff term. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Unblock request

I am an inexperienced administrator who has never done any blocking or unblocking. I have been looking at the unblock request of Olickal Peter Thomas. Could you please explain your thinking on this user and your reasons for blocking him? He seems to have created a single article Uwe Gustafsson in 2016 and done very little since. Or am I missing something? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Hey Cwmhiraeth, no troubles, we've all been there once after all. I did put an expanded rationale below the block reason which I think addresses your question: To be specific, you have repeatedly uploaded images which are copyright violations, created inappropriately promotional articles, and otherwise been editing inappropriately. It appears that you are either unable or unwilling to learn how to follow the policies which apply to editing Wikipedia. Basically, this editor is repeatedly and routinely creating inappropriate pages that other editors then have to clean up and acting as a time sink, and seems unwilling or unable to learn how to create policy-compliant ones. I hope that helps to clear it up? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

If I had been dealing with him I would have asked him about his CoI in connection with the organisation "Coastal Voluntary Network" where a Peter Thomas was listed in the infobox as the general secretary. The uploaded image of the logo was the only upload of a file since 2016, so the indefinite block seems a bit harsh to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

The fact that someone has had years to learn better and has not indicates to me more, not less, of an issue. If you're convinced they'll edit productively, you're welcome to unblock them, but I sure don't see anything that tells me so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

L'OR

Please maintain a neutral stance. In a market where one brand nearly achieved a monopolistic position, it appears legitimate to list and present (in a non corporate way) an alternative brand to the general public. By deleting my page you just discourage any competition for customers in Europe, that are unable to find clear information about this brand, apart that from its official company's website. Other users shall improve the page if not deleted. Goodwillgames (talk) 20:55, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Goodwillgames, Wikipedia is not a directory of products. If you would like to do that, please consider a corporate website or social media. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:53, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Saskatoon

And, less than two weeks after you removed the commented-out note that explains why we're not calling the Saskatoon freezing deaths 'murder', people have resumed editing the article to say that they were murder.

I warned you that this would happen.

I am restoring the commented-out warning. Please do not remove it again. DS (talk) 01:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

If there is a substantial amount of disagreement over what the article should say, the discussion for that goes on the talk page, not in a "do not make this edit" warning. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 02:15, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

The people who want to change this article to something that is emotionally satisfying but factually incorrect DO NOT READ TALK PAGES. Versions of this statement have been inserted into the article on a daily basis over the past week. DS (talk) 03:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Request

Hello. I request text of page Group-IB. Can add in draft namespace? Erdmiln (talk) 14:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Erdmiln, as this article was promotional, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If this is so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Done [15]. waiting for the following instructions. Erdmiln (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. You will need to review the policy on conflict of interest. Specifically, if you are being paid to edit an article, you should not create or edit it directly in mainspace. For creation, it will need to be created as a draft and submitted to articles for creation for review. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay thank you for help. Can I ask you about wiki-text of old page? After I can change it for make more neutral. Draft name should be Draft:Group-IB? Erdmiln (talk) 17:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I already answered that. I do not restore advertisements. You may try again. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Material Retrieval

Hi,

You deleted an article "Ondo State Music Awards" few months ago and I'll like you to help provide the deleted material for improvement.

Thank you Thisissegun (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thisissegun, since the article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I have never been paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia neither is it a duty of employment or internship.

I admit to have made lots of errors on the article as it was first and I haven't really read much about how things work on Wikipedia when the article was done.

However, I'm so ready to make necessary corrections as I've read and understood a lot.

Once again, I want to clearly state that I don't edit on Wikipedia to get benefits of any kind Thisissegun (talk) 20:26, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I can't say as I believe that. If you're not being paid to edit, you're sure trying awfully hard to make it look like you are. You've already had to have one article title protected since you kept creating advertisements at it. I do not undelete advertisements, so I will not undelete that one. You can try again, but I very strongly advise you read through the policy on neutrality. In the particular case of Ondo State Music Awards: features performances by prominent artists ("features" and "prominent" are puff terms), Our findings shows that The OSMAs is the only indigenous music award in Nigeria. (who is "our"?), You can simply relate... (articles should never use the second person ("you" or "we") or otherwise address the reader), rewards excellence in our fast rising artiste across the country ("artist" or "musician", not "artiste", who is "our" again?, "rewards excellence" is puff.) Those are just the issues I found in reading the very first paragraph, and they persist throughout. Wikipedia articles must be written strictly in a neutral tone without any talking up, puffery, or marketese, sticking only to facts verified by reliable sources. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced request regarding Nishi Bhardwaj

user:seraphimblade I created a page Nishi Bhardwaj. However, it was deleted due to certain mentioned reasons. I would request you to retrieve my article and I would like to improve the article and make it more informative and be eligible to the Wikipedia guidelines. I will be thankful. Richardmat (talk) 09:58, 5 June 2020 (UTC)user:richardmat

Richardmat, as the article was promotional, please first clarify whether you are being paid to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If that is so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade I am not paid for creating and contributing to Wikipedia. I am beauty pageant enthusiast and I created this article of Nishi Bhardwaj because she has been the candidate of major pageants. We have Wikipedia articles of almost all the beauty queens who have represented India at Miss Earth and been the major national pageant winner. Unfortunately, the article I created seemed to be promotional while the intention was only to add more and more information with the credible sources.Richardmat (talk) 10:14, 5 June 2020 (UTC)user:richardmat

Thank you for clarifying that. In terms of this article, it was full of promotional, puffy material, for example (but by no means an exhaustive list): was sent to represent India, walked the ramp ("competed in" would serve fine), She walked as a Show Stopper (pure puff), She was in Top 8 (not confirmed by cited source and it doesn't appear to be reliable; if there is a reliable reference as to where she finished, "finished sixth" rather than "finished in the Top 8" would be fine), and so on from there. Articles must be written in a strictly neutral tone without any "talking up" or puff terminology, and must stick strictly to facts verified by reliable sources. I do not undelete advertisements, but you can try again, sticking to neutral language and referenced facts, as it does appear she may indeed be notable. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:24, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade Thank you for your suggestions. I will abide by it and it also helped me understand things better. Is it possible to get the draft format back that I can edit as I directly created them on the Wikipedia page.Richardmat (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

(You don't need to ping someone when you're posting on their talk page; one is notified automatically about those posts.) That being said, it isn't the worst I've seen, and I don't find any indications of copyright problems. So if you're willing to agree to have it reviewed by articles for creation rather than returning it to mainspace yourself, I'd be willing to restore it to draft. Would that work? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Matthew Talbot-Kelly

Hi Seraphimblade, Can you tell me was there something specific that you found overly 'promotional' about the entry? I had only used verifiable details with good source references (The Irish Times, New York Times, New Yorker, Screen Ireland, National Film Board of Canada) and thought it was biographical. Any pointers here would be most helpful. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoJimboJames (talk • contribs) 10:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

YoJimboJames, since the article was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If this is so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade

I haven't been paid or am under any obligation to edit Matthew Talbot-Kelly's page. However I did work with him over a decade ago and I believe I may have created the original entry. But in the intervening years Matthew Talbot-Kelly has been producing artwork recognized and supported by the Canadian Council for the Arts and has produced many artworks that are certainly of note. I have re-written my recent entry and have made it more biographical and encyclopedic and only with reliable and trustworthy citations. He is part of a family lineage of artists from his father, grandfather and great grandfather (his grandfather and great grandfather have wikipedia entries). This along with the work he has produced, I believe warrants his inclusion. One of his films was in competition at the Venice Film Festival. Thanks!

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:YoJimboJames/Matthew_Talbot-Kelly

— Preceding unsigned comment added by YoJimboJames (talk • contribs) 01:21, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm still seeing a bunch of puff there. It is an assemblage of moods, objects, and music, portraying an old man’s memories. ("teaser" stuff, what's it actually about?), Surreal imagery with juxtapositions of real everyday objects unfold as we see (articles must not use second-person such as "we", and what reliable source describes the movie that way?), It also featured in the 35th ("featured in" is puff, "was shown at" will suffice.}}. The rest carries on in that same inappropriate, informal, "get to know ya" tone. Encyclopedia articles should be written in a formal tone; rather dry and sticking just to facts from reliable sources. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

Thanks for your advice and I saw what you meant by 'puff'. I've removed all that language just sticking to the facts with reliable sources. Can you please read over again? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YoJimboJames (talk • contribs) 07:14, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

It is at first glance better, but I don't have time to review it in depth right now. There is a button in the template at the top to submit the article for articles for creation review. Use that and an experienced reviewer will check to see if it is mainspace ready. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of Blue Label Labs

Hi Seraphimblade,

You removed a page I recently published for Blue Label Labs so I’m hoping we can work something out between us without having to involve anyone else. My grounds for the dispute are as follows:

• You accused me of "disruptive editing" which isn't true and could be seen from the edit history of the document - I made a couple of additional changes to the language and fixed a few things I failed to notice in the original draft. Changing text to more concise language that coincides with Wikipedia's guidelines as well as fixing small grammar and punctuation areas is, based on my understanding, in no way a violation of Wikipedia's guidelines. My understanding is that Wikipedia pages should be as well-written as possible which explains my edits.
• The article was previously deleted for lacking notability then reworked according to the feedback received from the first admin who deleted the page. After addressing this feedback, there were no glaring errors with respect to Wikipedia's guidelines with the exception of the first-party sources cited. These were present in the first draft that was briefly published on the site – from my perspective, it was heavily implied that a revision simply required more content that reflected notability. The section I added pertaining to the Webby Award was meant to address this feedback.
• You accused me of "vandalizing" Wikipedia. Per Wikipedia's definition of vandalism, it appears that I've done nothing of the sort. I simply created then re-created a page for a noteworthy company, citing verifiable information from reliable sources found on the web. Because of the "EAT principle" (i.e Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness) used by SEO professionals to rate web pages (a former profession of mine), I chose to use information issued by the company itself, despite having gathered the same information from third-party sources. I will admit that upon further review, I now understand this not preferred, per the Wikipedia guidelines. I feel you could have easily asked if I had other third-party sources to backup content.
• Verbatim, you wrote, "You may be a copywriter, but "copy" is not permitted on Wikipedia. Articles are to be encyclopedia articles, written in a neutral tone and based upon factual details from reliable and independent references." This, I feel is a personal attack and highly upsetting coming from someone who appears to be well-respected in the Wikipedia community. The output from anyone who is considered a copywriter is (or can be) considered "copy." Really, it’s simply a generalization for any written content, including content on Wikipedia, no matter how the creator identifies themself. So when I post something to my personal Facebook, it's considered copy. When I text my mom, this is considered copy. When I leave a hand-written note for a colleague, this is also considered copy. Just because I am a copywriter doesn't mean that I should be treated unequally. Calling my content "copy" in a derogatory manner when it really boils down to a matter of semantics then whimsically dismissing it as some form of lesser content is nonsensical.

There are a lot of small businesses in the world – it would benefit web users the world over if, no matter how seemingly insignificant, these entities were allowed pages that met Wikipedia guidelines. Isn't the whole point of Wikipedia to strive to host accurate, publicly-available information for any given subject under the sun?

I respectfully ask that the article is put back on the site at which point, I will change the citations to independent sources, per the Wikipedia guidelines. If necessary, I’ll rework or omit the section on the Webby Award.

Thanks in advance for your attention to this matter. Legendofthebend (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Legendofthebend, first off, my apologies for messing up the warning. That was meant to be for advertising, not vandalism. So that bit's my fault, and no, it's not specifically considered vandalism. However, using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion is not allowed. To answer your main question, no, Wikipedia is not for having an article on "any given subject under the sun"; nor to "get the word out" about someone's company. Articles must demonstrate notability; that is, the article's subject must be the subject of substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources. If that type and quantity of material does not exist, an article on that subject shouldn't exist either. Additionally, sourcing wasn't the main issue (though heavy use of self-published sources often indicates profile spam). Rather, Wikipedia articles are required to be written in a strictly neutral tone, and in practice, this is enforced especially strictly with regards to promotional language about people and organizations. Some examples: As a full-service agency... (marketese, what's that actually mean?), Blue Label Labs has been recognized by many notable publications and received a variety of accolades... (I find the word "accolades" to be an excellent indication I'm reading a spamvertisement, and the "many notable publications" bit is superfluous fluff), a Webby Award, the leading international award honoring excellence on the Internet (the talking up of the award is more puff, and we certainly cannot source things like that to people who give the awards, of course they'll talk up their own stuff!), reference 4 is an Amazon sales link which is not at all appropriate and the book doesn't need mention in the article unless third-party sources confirm it's particularly significant, and then a section of largely non-notable awards and mentions. I don't restore advertisements, but you can try again at Draft:Blue Label Labs. If articles for creation approves the article, I'll then be happy to unprotect the title to move to mainspace, but since now two inappropriate articles have been directly created there, it will need to go via AfC. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade, right on. Thanks for getting back with me promptly and providing clarification!

Based on your feedback, it looks like I'll need to rethink some of this and certainly remove or the content and citations that are in violation before attempting to publish another draft. There are several pages I'd like to create (in time) so the amount of detail you've provided pertaining to your thought process is very helpful.

Just one more question - is there anything specific I should do before hitting publish once I feel it's ready? Legendofthebend (talk) 18:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Once you believe the draft is ready for mainspace, you can add {{AfC submission}} to the draft, and that will put it into the queue for AfC review. You can work on the draft as long as you like before doing that, so only do that once you feel it's ready. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:23, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 39, May – June 2020

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 39, May – June 2020

• Library Card Platform
• New partnerships
  • ProQuest
  • Springer Nature
  • BioOne
  • CEEOL
  • IWA Publishing
  • ICE Publishing
• Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:13, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Cookie Dough Bites (candy) page

Hi,

I'd request that this page not be deleted because I am endeavoring to build it out to be a fully encyclopedic entry because it is one of the most significant new-product/brand launches in the category for the decade of the 1990's - and I think it should be listed (similar to how Nerds were arguably the biggest candy launch of the 1980's). My apologies as I'm just still finding my way around the various ins-and-outs of Wikipedia guidelines. I read your personal FAQ, regarding page deletions, but could not find how to comment to you via the page itself (maybe because it was deleted) so I'm leaving this on your talk page.

I'm a confectionery historian, and for the post-war 20th century, I might be a preeminent authority of candy brand history. I have published over 600 articles (and over 6,000 images from my archives on CollectingCandy.com) I have consulted with the Smithsonian, the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, have been featured in the New York Times discussing brand history and even hosted my own food history television show on Cooking Channel. I've been featured on Food Network a few times, when the history of candy or cereal comes up. So, I hope that lends me some credibility and some leeway when I state that my interest is in making sure the history of these brands is documented and documented well and accurately. My creation of this page is not meant to be a promotion, but rather an accurate and robust recording of its importance as a late 20th century confectionery brand.

I've been reading and re-reading the guidelines and have a lot of additional information to add to this entry and rewrites to do on the existing information I've posted thus far. I want to work within the Wiki guidelines to create a solid Wiki entry for this brand. Hopefully I can do so as I am working to do it the right way. I am on the learning curve, but hopefully on my way up to getting it right.

If I need to start over, is there a way for me to get what I wrote for the Wiki that was deleted? I didn't realize that a deletion would wipe it out, so from here on I'll work to draft things locally before uploading.

Jason Liebig New York City — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarvelJason (talk • contribs) 18:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

MarvelJason, unfortunately, one's own personal expertise is not a reference on Wikipedia. References must be to reliable and independent published sources, and there must be a substantial quantity of reference material available about an article subject. If that is not available, Wikipedia (by the way, not "Wiki") should not have an article about that subject. In this instance, the first bit of text contained promotional language ("enrobed in", "Egg-free and shelf-stable"), and after that was just a product listing, which is not appropriate for an article. The only references cited were what appear to be blogs, which are not generally considered reliable. Is there better source material available about this product than that? So far as beginning an article, it is generally better to either do so in your userspace sandbox (you'll see a link to it near the top), or as a draft, where it is not necessary to immediately demonstrate notability (although even in draft form, promotion won't be allowed). There's really not much usable in the text that was entered; like I said, just a brief, rather promotional blurb and then a list of products, and the references used were poor ones, so I don't think the deleted text would be too helpful to a new article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

Thank you for the response (hopefully I'm doing this correctly - I really am trying to navigate the communication tools of Wiki as best I can).

First question, can you recover what I already published and was deleted? Just so I can put it back on my workpage or draft page (or userspace sandbox, whatever that is - maybe these are all names for the same thing?) I'd love to get that back.

Before I started on this, I studied many of the existing candy Wikipedia pages and endeavored to craft the format of this new page, using those as a guideline. Being the authority and arbiter of the category that I am, I am keenly aware that one of the big things people are always looking for on Wiki are a list of historical flavors/variety a brand has had, and it's great to see those included in the various established Wiki entries I'd studied. So, for that I was looking at established precedent for brand-related Wikis.

As far as source material, yes, there are some news articles and such that I plan to add, but much of this is, like much of my foundational work, based on primary research. Some of which I've published on CollectingCandy.com but much of which remains unpublished. And I assumed that, with well-established median and journalistic credibility, primary research could be included in an encyclopedic entry. I've been interviewed many times and I always tell people, for much of what I write about it, before I wrote it, it was un-Google-able.

And frankly, in the category of candy history, Wikipedia is littered with seemingly endless amounts of speculative data that I've never been able to corroborate in any way. I often refer to Wiki's candy history as the least-reliable historical references you can find. But I aim to create an entry that is just the opposite.

So, I wouldn't be publishing anything I could not provide physical, documentable corroboration for, and I do intend to site more things, but this category is, well, the history of it is so largely undocumented, but my primary research in it stands a bit alone. I'm not getting my information from Google, I'm getting it from phone interviews with inventors, from decades-old trade papers I have in my physical archives here, and from other similar pieces of incredibly scarce ephemera.

Of course, I'll be happy to also include these materials in the WIki as I write it, but they were all published before the internet existed, and have not been uploaded anywhere.

I'm just trying to provide an accurate historical exploration of this important-to-the-category brand. I'll endeavor to do whatever is asked of me, but I do hope that corrobaratable primary research is not dis-included.

Jason

MarvelJason (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2020 (UTC)MarvelJasonMarvelJason (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

One more note, ironcially "enrobed in", "Egg-free and shelf-stable" were my attempt to get as technical as I could and to avoid flowerly language, to provide raw data about what Cookie Dough Bites TECHNICALLY are. Those are technical terms, which I guess could be considered promotional, but typically are not. "Chocolate covered" is how a product is marketed, "enrobed" is the technical term for that. WHich is why I chose that language.

So, I can see why you might understandably interpret that as promotional, but I was trying to approach this as "someone has no idea what this is, how do I technically describe it to them, what's the important data points". Not, "lets tell the world how great these are". And I think it's important to establish, technically, what a product actually is. Unless the desire is to be less-specific. Because I can certainly do that.

MarvelJason (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)MarvelJasonMarvelJason (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm afraid not. Like I said, there was nothing really salvageable there. The references weren't reliable and the tone and language were inappropriate. If you can find a substantial amount of reliable and independent published reference material (stuff in private collections won't work, nor does that go toward demonstrating notability) about the subject, you can certainly use that for an article. If that does not exist, we should not have an article on this subject. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Request to Restore Deleted Page for Golden Race

Hello Seraphimblade. Hope you are fine and safe. You recently deleted a page I edited [Race], tagged for speedy deletion citing CSD G11.

This article has been created since 2019 and had relevant sources and citations but, in several editions from other users, some of those sources and citations were deleted.

Also, recent changes I was making just pretended to help the content of the page to be even more neutral. I read that it was better to do the changes one by one and not everything at the same time.

Anyway, I would like to explain you why I think this article about Golden Race is important for Wikipedia’s users and why I decided to write it:

Regarding the betting software companies worldwide, I saw Golden Race was quite important among the industry, with several awards and important partnerships.

This made me think about writing an article at Wikipedia about them, as other companies already have it (Playtech, Microgaming, BetConstruct, EveryMatrix, OpenBet, Sportradar, Sirplay, Bede Gaming, Betfair...). These pages are still active and I don’t see any differences in the language on them and the one I used.

Due to a “possible promotion of the company” in the text, as detailed in CSD G11, first of all let me say that was not my intention and I don’t think I did that; talking about the history of a company, I find it relevant to mention the awards given by important organizations and media, such as SBC News, with the aim of focusing the core of the business. Those awards are real and, in fact, I included links to the pages where anyone could have the proof of it.

Moreover, I never used any qualifying adjectives to describe the company, trying to be accurate in every moment. I just detailed the beginning and development of Golden Race to help the reader have a more complete landscape of the betting industry.

My main aim is to complete information about betting software and all topics relating to that, as I think there is a lack of info from this particular sector in Wikipedia.

Could you please undelete and restore the page? As I mentioned before, I was improving the article to have as neutral and referenced content as possible.

I could add information about revenue, number of workers and so on if you think this info will be helpful.

Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowfan (talk • contribs)

Knowfan, while you were not the first to insert promotional material into the article (had there been a non-promotional earlier version to revert to, I'd have done that instead; it was an advertisement throughout), yours was as well. Some examples (note: examples, not exhaustive list) of the inappropriate material: Golden Race was born... (skip the fluffy language; companies are founded, not born), ...made a qualitative leap with the introduction of its flagship product... ("flagship" is marketese, and "made a leap" according to what reliable source?), it then goes on to list a bunch of awards with no indication that such awards are notable outside the industry, which is awardspam, and then The three companies offer together their full suite of virtual sports and games through an all-in-one solution (outside of literal chemical companies, companies don't sell "solutions". They might sell TVs or lumber or software or massages, but then say that, not "solution(s)". Also, "all-in-one" is marketese). I do not restore advertisements, but if you believe there is sufficient reference material to write an article, you can try it again. Ensure to stick to only facts verified by reliable and independent references, and to keep your tone strictly neutral and avoid any kind of talking up, marketese terms, or puffy phrasing. If you would like to work on the article over a period of time, do so as a draft rather than in mainspace. Mainspace articles are expected to be mainspace-ready from the first edit, but drafts permit you to work on the article over as much time as you like, though things like promotion or copyright violation will result in deletion even for a draft. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:53, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Gautam Kumawat

Hello, will you please restore this to my userspace, User:Tulsi Bhagat/Gautam Kumawat? Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat ^{[ contribs | talk ]} 07:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Tulsi Bhagat, since the article was promotional, please first specify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia in regards to this subject, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If that is so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed further. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:22, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

That was my bad! I didn't know about black hat SEO websites which i had included in the article as references. It's just i was going through the hacking tutorial sites and found this guy. I clearly understand about paid-contribution disclosure. I assure you that I am not being paid in any way, and don't expect for any kind of payment to be received in future. I am writing this article without any prompt from anyone except myself. Editing Wikipedia is my hobby, and I am not here for pay. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat ^{[ contribs | talk ]} 08:48, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

It had nothing to do with "black-hat SEO websites". A G11 deletion is for promotional tone. In this example: He is best known for... (cited source does not confirm the "best known" claim, so best known by whom, according to whom?), a company which provides business automation solutions ("solutions" is marketese. A company might sell software or tax preparation or computers or corn, but aside from literal chemical companies, companies don't sell "solutions". Say specifically what's sold, and the company sells, not "provides" it), He has received over 300 awards (that's a more wordy way of saying the spammy "award-winning" bit. Are any of those awards notable according to independent and reliable references? If so, they're the only ones that matter), a link to a book without any third-party sources stating that the book had any significance, and on and on from there. Articles are expected to remain strictly neutral in tone and content, and to stick to facts verified by reliable and independent sources without talking up their subject with puffy or promotional language. Since this one did so, that falls under my normal rule that I do not restore advertisements. You can try again, but please ensure to stay strictly to neutral language and referenced facts. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

That was my extremely bad! I am really sorry. Thank you for the clearance and information. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat ^{[ contribs | talk ]} 12:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Nikhil Anand

Seraphimblade Will you please help me in creating the article Nikhil Anand. It is important to be created as an information source because he has been all over news for his upcoming movie that he is directing. There is a block placed on the article and only wikipedia administrators can create as it says. Can you please remove the restrictions. You can check the article once I create it. I will abide by the wikipedia guidelines.Richardmat (talk) 08:13, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Richardmat, no, I won't do that, as the article was repeatedly found to be inappropriate. If you believe you can do better now, you may create the article at Draft:Nikhil Anand and, once ready, seek review via articles for creation. If and when AfC approves the draft, then we can look at what needs to be done. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:10, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade I would like you to take a review of my created article if you suggest any changes or find it appropriate before I request the article to be reviewed. It will be kind of you if you can look at it and suggest in any changes required.Richardmat (talk) 21:31, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I do not have time for an in-depth review, but at a glance:

• In the first sentence, "filmmaker", "producer", and "beauty pageant entrepreneur" should not be capitalized.
• "...came into limelight" is rather puffy and not encyclopedic language.
• Claims such as "youngest national director of the major beauty pageants" require a reliable and independent source which support that claim.
• The "Early life and education" section is entirely without references.
• After the first mention, he should be referred to as "Anand", not "Nikhil" or "Nikhil Anand". Full name on first mention, last only thereafter. His name should also only be bolded in that first mention, not every time.
• "He started Miss Teen India pageant..." Again, that needs a reliable and independent source confirming that he started it.
• "The movie is expected to hit Cinema Theaters in the year 2022." "Expected to be released in 2022", not "expected to hit Cinema Theatres..." (also inappropriately capitalized again), and that needs a source.
• "More details are yet to be announced by him." Omit that until they, you know, are.

So, the article is not yet ready. It needs substantial work on neutrality in tone, and to stick only to presenting facts confirmed by reliable sources. I have not, as I said, actually reviewed the sources which were thus far used and don't have the time to do so. Remember the purpose of an encyclopedia article is to inform, not excite, the reader. Neutral language should be rather dry, and never "talk up" its subject or anything else. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:47, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Request to Restore Deleted Page for Arun Pandit

Dear Seraphimblade. Hope you are doing well. You recently deleted a page, [| Arun Pandit], tagged for speedy deletion citing CSD G11.

We understand and respect your decision for deleting our article due to some advertising & promotional contents. So, I have removed all those advertising & promotional content contents as per wiki guidelines.

Arun Pandit is a popular face in India, a motivational speaker, and writer, who did a lot of notable works. He is also a former Guinness world record holder in Light Photography.

So I think this article about Arun Pandit is important for Wikipedia’s users, to know more about him.

So we would like to request you please review this article once again and let us know what changes and all you required to live this article.

I am waiting for your response to proceed further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbsanamkumar (talk • contribs) 07:28, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Pbsanamkumar, as you are referring to "we" and writing promotional material, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. (And who is "we"?) Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:25, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear Seraphimblade , I want to clarify that I am not an intern and neither I work for any digital agency or as a freelancer. I have not been paid in any way to write this article. I wrote “we” because the process was a little difficult and I asked few of my friends who were also new to help me with some points in it .

I have been impacted by Mr Arun Pandit and dontgiveupworld community like thousands of others and that prompted me to write this piece. He has tirelessly helped thousands of people across India as he was himself a suicide survivor and then took a mission to spread the word of hope and optimism. The whole community is not for profit and the community has grown from few hundred to 1 lakh + members only via word of mouth and organically. No monetary promotion anywhere. This is not a business and all members are volunteers and the members manage everything from site to server without asking a penny in return. This is a very important mission that needs to be heard more . Mental health is the most neglected part of the society and he is playing a vital role in spreading the word .

I believe that he is notable for subtly impacting thousands personally without asking anything in return since more than a decade.

I sincerely apologise for the errors . This is the first time I am on wikipedia and I was not completely sensitised about the expectations of the platform. I picked whatever material available on extensive google searching without understanding what needs to be put and what now and how exactly to write it . I have learned from my experience and have tried to made changes accordingly. I just wanted to contribute and help spread the word. The intent was right but unfortunately I was not able to do it right. I hope you will understand and give it another chance. I would be more than happy to accommodate any other changes required. I hope you will understand and support . Looking forward to a positive response.

Thanks for the clarification. I don't undelete promotional material, but you can take another go at it. I would strongly suggest for new editors to start the article as a draft (in this case at Draft:Arun Pandit) and request review by articles for creation. Also, rather than asking other inexperienced editors for help, it would probably work better to ask at the Teahouse where more experienced editors will be available for advice. That aside, articles must remain strictly neutral in tone and content, and not include puff phrasing like: As a passionate speaker, Arun has... ("passionate" according to what reliable and independent source? Also, "Pandit", not "Arun"; individuals should be referred to by full name on first mention and last name only thereafter), consistently spreading the message of hope and optimism (again, according to what reliable and independent source?), create a one stop solution ("one stop" is marketese, and aside from literal chemical companies, companies and websites do not provide "solutions", be specific about what they sell or do), The website got popular (once again, according to what reliable source?), and the rest of the article goes on in the same inappropriate and promotional manner. Ensure to stick to a strictly neutral tone, and to only facts verified by reliable sources. Wikipedia isn't here to "spread the word"; it should be based on facts already published in high-quality sources. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:00, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

I am grateful for your detailed suggestions. The feedback is highly appreciated. I will work on your feedback and also research further to hone my skills as a wiki editor . Thank you once again for sharing specific examples and teach by example. Appreciated.

artical for Alfa Co for Operation Services.

I have created one artical for Alfa Co for Operation Services. As I'm leaving in Saudi Arabia this company is very well know and all the source are very reliable.

Please can you explain to me how to get back. Ikms ibrahim (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Ikms ibrahim, the sources may or may not be reliable, but a couple were directory entries, and the others did not even mention Alfa Co, let alone cover it to reasonable depth. You will need to first find a substantial amount of reliable and independent reference material which directly and in depth covers Alfa Co. Not its subsidiaries; directly covers Alfa Co itself. If a substantial quantity of such material does not exist, the company is not notable and we should not have an article about it at all. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 June 2020

• News and notes: Progress at Wikipedia Library and Wikijournal of Medicine

• Community view: Community open letter on renaming

• Gallery: After the killing of George Floyd

• In the media: Part collaboration and part combat

• Discussion report: Community reacts to WMF rebranding proposals

• Featured content: Sports are returning, with a rainbow

• Arbitration report: Anti-harassment RfC and a checkuser revocation

• Traffic report: The pandemic, alleged murder, a massacre, and other deaths

• News from the WMF: We stand for racial justice

• Recent research: Wikipedia and COVID-19; automated Wikipedia-based fact-checking

• Interview: What is wrong with rebranding to "Wikipedia Foundation"?

• Humour: Cherchez une femme

• Opinion: Trying to find COI or paid editors? Just read the news

• On the bright side: For what are you grateful this month?

• In focus: Edit Loud, Edit Proud: LGBTIQ+ Wikimedians and Global Information Activism

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Black Lives Matter

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

re: Courtesy notice of editor block

Thank you for the explanation, and I am sorry for the trouble. Usually the results are better. Unfortunately, when a student misses all the deadlines and decides to speed-learn how to submit the Wikipedia assignment for extra credit on the last week before the grades are due, well... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Confirming

Just need to confirme the appeal for an Administration Review for the sanction has been deleted. And no review will occur without another appeal. Asking since I will not submit the appeal - too many other important things to do. Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 14:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Pasdecomplot, yes, that is correct. Like I said, you're still welcome to submit a properly formatted appeal, but whether to do so is your decision. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:42, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Administrator changes

Malcolmxl5

John • TheCoffee • Tim!

Creffett → GeneralNotability

DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes

Bbb23

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.

Technical news

• Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
• The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

UNDELETING Base58

Hi. I just discovered today that the article on Base58 has been deleted after discussion. I'm an employee of Ripple, a relatively-large blockchain company, and some technical documentation I've written I've written about the XRP Ledger links the Base58 article as background reading. Actually, that's how I found out the page had been deleted; a link checker running on xrpl.org reported the link from as broken.

Personally I found the Base58 article on Wikipedia to be very useful because it provided a neutral perspective and it highlighted several different users of the algorithm (Flickr, Bitcoin, XRP Ledger/Ripple) and the different "dictionaries" they used. In the context of this documentation, that's handy because it correctly implies that people writing compatible software could use any of several off-the-shelf solutions (such as the npm packages mentioned in the deletion discussion) to encode/decode data.

I didn't know that the deletion discussion (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Base58) existed until after the fact; had I known, I would have chimed in in favor of keeping it. I don't know if that would have been enough to tip the discussion, but I think it would at least make it a bit of a closer call. The fact that List_of_numeral_systems#Standard_positional_numeral_systems links pages for comparable algorithms (and now has a "create page" link for Base58) suggests to me that it's a relevant page. And, while it's not strictly untrue that Base58 is "an implementation detail of Bitcoin", it's one that is very user-facing since it's how the addresses people use to send and receive Bitcoin are represented; and it's not limited to Bitcoin, but to other cryptocurrencies including XRP, although there are some variations like the different dictionary the XRP Ledger uses.

I only rarely contribute to Wikipedia, so I don't really know what the threshold is for getting an article un-deleted. if I'm just tilting at windmills to get back the article that I found useful because of my niche work, then please forgive me. I don't really remember exactly what contents the article had, but I could probably touch it up a little with some more sources (Google seems to have plenty of books on it) if that's helpful to getting it reinstated. Thank you for your consideration. mDuo13 (talk) 07:52, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

MDuo13, being useful is not a criteria criteria for retaining a page. Rather, there needs to exist substantial amounts of third-party reference material from which the article may be written. It looks like the amount of source material was thoroughly discussed, and found to be lacking. An AfD discussion is not a vote, so any argument that did not conclusively show sufficient sourcing would have made no difference to the outcome. That being said, if you find the material useful yourself, I'd be happy to send you a copy of the article by email. If you want one, let me know if you'd like the plain text or the wiki markup. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please do send the article in wiki markup to (removed). mDuo13 (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I've sent it over to you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I've noticed that you have deleted Lightstep, Inc. Article

Hi, I've noticed that you have deleted Lightstep, Inc. Article from Wikipedia. The article was purely written using references from various reputed news agencies. Not even a single line was written without reference. I don't know how it was Unambiguous advertising or promotion?Theproeditor7 (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I've applied for deletion review. Thanks == Deletion review for Lightstep, Inc. ==

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lightstep, Inc.. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Theproeditor7 (talk) 07:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

No response, I assume that the article was deleted without any reason.Theproeditor7 (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

• Don't be ridiculous. This user is in the US; when you left the note for him, it was the middle of the night. The reason is clearly stated in the page logs: G11, unambiguous advertising or promotion. Wikipedians are very accustomed to people who want to misuse our encyclopaedia for marketing purposes and we have well-established procedures for de-spammifying our project with the minimum possible effort. You're not entitled to have an article in that space. I suggest that you consider taking a less strident and angry tone, and starting to behave moderately and reasonably and more like someone we can work with.—S Marshall T/C 14:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Theproeditor7, S Marshall is quite correct. You do realize that people sleep, and eat, and have other things to do? I could understand you reacting that way if I'd not responded after several days, but just a few hours? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

So, insofar as the issues: First off, you are essentially reference bombing. The first two "sources" are reprinted press releases, which are not independent and should generally be avoided. The third is a bare mention in passing, and it goes on similarly from there. However, of course, lack of good reference material is not a speedy criterion. When combined with marketese language, however (leverages several of its components as part of its data pipeline (standard marketese, using many impressive-sounding words to not actually say anything), backend uses both open and closed source software to collect and analyze data from a variety of sources and to aggregate and correlate these data to provide dashboards and other application performance management (APM) reports. (same again—what is it they are actually doing?), planet-scale distributed tracing and metrics solutions ("planet-scale" is unnecessary fluff), and on and on from there. Articles must be articles, not sales brochures. (Now that I look again, there could also be copyright issues with the article; at least some of the text I see is paraphrased extremely closely if not exactly from the source material. Especially if you're using press releases and fluff pieces as sources, that could indicate why the language is fluffy and promotional and reads like a sales brochure rather than an encyclopedia article.) So no, it was not deleted "for fun". It was deleted because Wikipedia does not permit marketing or "profiles". Actual encyclopedia articles about notable companies are acceptable, but that stuff is not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:21, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

UNDELETING Haruna Sentongo

Hello Seraphimblade i here by kindly request that you to undelete the page Haruna Sentongo on grounds that: I had not yet disclosed COI as a paid editor, WP:BEFORE was abandoned when nominating the subject for speedy deletion, as This Subject apparently has significant press coverage,and by the time of contesting deletion, i found the page already deleted. Thank you very Much in advance.Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 08:39, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Mark Mulwanyi, thank you for (if belatedly) making the disclosures as required. I do not undelete promotional material, and regardless, since you are being compensated, it was not appropriate for you to create the article in mainspace to begin with. I see that there is already a draft article for the subject, and as you are being compensated for editing, that is the correct place for you to work on it. Once you believe the article is ready to go to mainspace, seek review of the draft via articles for creation. I see that you have, in some cases, moved draft articles you created to or back to mainspace from draft yourself. If you once again do that, you will be blocked from editing altogether; paid editors must seek review of their edits through editors without a COI. For a new article, that means creating a draft and going through AfC. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:05, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Alright, @ Seraphimbladethank you very much for the guidance, however, i am not directly paid or compensated for editing, i was advised by other folks that i should disclose as a paid editor.

I worked on that company's website through an Agency and the Agency did not tell me to talk about the company here, nor do they even know about it, however, given the fact that the company is very credible and worked on the site, then it did not have an article here, i decided to create articles about it. In future may be i may be compensated though not sure, Now i had to disclose COI, given the fact that i worked on the website.

Regarding moving from draft to main Space, i did not know and i have clearly understood this well. Now i have finished working on the draft, i am kindly requesting that you please review it. Thank you very much. Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 09:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Seraphimblade i am writing to you in regards to my drafts (1) Haruna Sentongo and (2)Ham Group These were initially deleted and restored as drafts, i very well remember you telling me never to move drafts that i have personally made to the main article space. You advised me to instead get get someone to review, however, there is no option for submitting for review hence i am kindly requesting that you please review and move to the main Space. Thank you very much in Advance. Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 10:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

You have already submitted it for review, and that will take place in due course. I do not have time to do that myself, but AfC will review it for you. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I was initially warned from moving own drafts to the main article space, lest i face being blocked, but i have now been advised that i have any right to move it, since once there, it can be nominated or any other action can be done in regards to meeting Wikipedia's Standard. Hence i assume that by moving to the main Space, i am not in violation of any wiki Policies. Mark Mulwanyi (talk) 08:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

National Institute of Fashion Technology

Hi, I'm not fussed to see that National Institute of Fashion Technology has been G11 speedy deleted - the article has been a timesink since its inception, as have related articles such as Govind Kumar Singh. I'm just curious regarding what takes it over the line into unambiguous advertising compared to most other school/higher learning institutions, aside from being relatively new and therefore not having the sort of history to draw on that, say, London College of Fashion, Yale or Oxford universities have. I can't see the de:leted article but am pretty sure it had some independent sources, although it definitely also had dependent ones + recycled press releases. - Sitush (talk) 04:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Sitush, I certainly would respect your opinion, and if you think it's salvageable I would be happy to restore it to draft for you. That being said, since its inception it was rather a puff piece. I do try to find good revisions to revert to in the case of a G11 nomination, but while I was certainly hopeful on this one, I just couldn't find one I could in good faith revert to and say "This is not an advertisement." If there are no such revisions and all of them are ads, G11 is required. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh, no. I'm happy it is going to fall off my watchlist! I just think that if I had the mop and had done that then there would have been howls of protest from the schools project etc - it exists, therefore it is notable. Which made me think that perhaps standards have changed a bit since roughly last September, when I more or less stopped editing for quite a while. - Sitush (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Certainly glad to see you back! But no, standards haven't changed. G11 does not have really anything to do with notability; even an article about an absolutely and unambiguously notable subject can be deleted under G11 if it is blatantly promotional. Of course, that does not preclude someone from coming along and writing a neutral article about the same subject later if it genuinely is notable. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:09, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Ah, got it. You'd think I would know that by now. I'm in the middle of an interview process for The Caravan (magazine), who want to run a story about Wikipedia's treatment of caste. I'm in two minds about what sort of reaction it will get when it hits the news stands, so don't be surprised if I duck under cover again! - Sitush (talk) 09:13, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, it didn't take long before a schools "specialist" did what I thought would happen, ie: recreate the article using the same press released puff piece news stories etc. The Times of India, in particular, is now quite notorious for publishing pretty much anything that is put on their desks. - Sitush (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd be very interested to read that article once it's out. I've got the school article on my watchlist, so hopefully the junk can be kept out of it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:24, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, we're back a square one now, except it cannot go through CSD again. - Sitush (talk) 09:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Testing the waters

Something to think about: {{User:Chowbok/Userboxes/Fork}} —Chowbok ☠ 04:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverted Edits

Hi, would like to know the reason why I had the edits on Carlos_Duarte_(composer) and Eduardo Iturrizaga removed. I think it can be because of the lack of sources? Because why I did write is true! On Carlos Duarte is based on the spanish wikipedia page of him. Also I got the Neysa Blay page deleted for promotion or advertising and I understand it because there were links to her music selling channels, but again, the code used was based on the spanish version. Could I get the original deleted source so I can modify it to Wikipedia's policies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exbio (talk • contribs) 19:05, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Exbio, as that material was promotional, please first clarify if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures outlined here before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:24, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't make wikipedia creation or edition on demand, I'm a musician who happens to know a bit of coding and wants to create content for musicians that doesn't have wikipedia pages but, I think, deserve to have. Again, would love to know the reason of the previous two revertions to fix those as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exbio (talk • contribs)

Thanks for clarifying that. So far as the two article edits, they were both unreferenced and likely awardspam. An article will not and should not contain a laundry list of awards as puffery. Unless reliable sources note that the winning of an award was particularly significant, or if the award in itself is highly notable (as a good rule of thumb, check if there is a Wikipedia article about it), it shouldn't appear. There is no way to "fix" those; please ensure not to do them again. So far as the other article, please note that each language Wikipedia sets its own policies, so the fact that an article is acceptable on the Spanish Wikipedia does not mean it will be on English, nor vice versa. No one "deserves" to have an article about them. Rather, any article subject must pass the standard of notability. If it does not, we shouldn't have an article about it. Articles must also be written neutrally, without any form of "talking up" such as Neysa shows interest in the world of art from an early age by taking painting, singing and classical guitar lessons (inappropriate unreferenced "get to know" ya stuff, and "Blay", not "Neysa", use full name on first mention and last name only thereafter), cultivated her passion for writing songs (inappropriate flowery language), and on and on from there. When translating an article from another language to the English Wikipedia, it is your responsibility to make sure that, first, it is properly translated (this one wasn't, it, e.g., kept going back and forth between calling Blay "he" and "she", which is a biographies of living persons issue), and in addition had promotional content like the above examples. You are also correct that it engaged in reference spamming by linking to sales and "Listen Here" sites in references—don't do that. The song itself is not a reference, independent sources discussing it is. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for taking all the time to write and explain this so well. It's a lot to take into account but I think I got it, and now I can get better on the creation and edition of english wikipedia articles, didn't know different language has different rules! Beside that, other users can benefit a lot from your explanation since I couldn't find any good info on this issue, and it's frustrating to get an article deleted after taking the time to write/traduce it. Will rewrite with this rules on mind and hopefully will not write back with the same problem. Thanks again for your work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exbio (talk • contribs) 02:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of PenTex Energy

The article PenTex Energy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This page does not meet Notoriety guidelines and therefore should be promptly removed

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. Bgrus22 (talk) 09:58, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Kris T Reeder for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kris T Reeder 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/Kris T Reeder 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. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Quick check before I restore

Back in December 2019 you redirected the articles about the stations on the Aonami Line back to the main article (eg. Sasashima-raibu Station). I'm thinking of restoring the articles per WP:STATION, as some of the stations have sources and I am planning on adding more, and also that most (if not all) stations in Japan have articles. Is that ok with you? ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:34, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Ganbaruby, it is certainly not, unless you have found substantial amounts of reliable and independent reference material about a given station. There are articles about similar things is not a valid reason. From this "WP:STATION" (which is just an essay anyway): if insufficient source material is available for a comprehensive article, it is better to mention the station in an article about the line or system that the station is on.. To the best of my ability to determine, that was true of the particular stations in question; they was only ever mentioned in passing or in a directory, not covered comprehensively. Have any of them now been covered in-depth by any reliable sources, instead of just mentioned? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, turns out Sasashima-raibu is covered by reliable sources and can be fleshed out a bit, so I've restored that one. But you're right, the others probably aren't; I'll go through each station and see if I can find sources, and if I can't, I'll leave it as is. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 04:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Mike Verdu

Hi Seraphimblade,
would you be so kind as to mail me the source code of the Mike Verdu article you deleted? I think I can use it as a base, or sort of quarry, for a new article with less problems.
Thanks and kind regards, Grueslayer 06:24, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Grueslayer, you cannot start a new article from an emailed copy as this would violate the attribution requirements of Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA licensing. However, I have restored it to Draft:Mike Verdu, so you can work on it there if you think it's salvageable. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:54, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm aware of the requirements, but it's good to have the sources used, and a general structure. Kind regards, Grueslayer 06:37, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

FYI: The German article is ready. Will start the translation to English now, but I'm slow. ;-) Kind regards, Grueslayer 20:00, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Chandler Smith

The page was subject of an RfD with the result of redirect. That never happened. I'd do it, but I actually know the family...--Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 16:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

It actually was done, but it looks like someone decided it was okay to unilaterally reverse that. I've re-redirected it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 00:12, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Seraphimblade: That was almost two years ago. Smith has since won nine races in the ARCA Menards Series and also competed in NASCAR's Truck Series, a fully professional series, which makes him pass WP:NMOTORSPORT. With due respect, I think his notability is established at this point and the page can stay. --Bcschneider53 (talk) 02:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The redirect decision was made 2018 when he wasn't notable yet. Now he has big-league NASCAR starts and high finishes. Does this really need to go through a Wikipedia:Deletion review when it certainly will result in the decision overturned? Royalbroil 03:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

If there has indeed been a substantial change, that is fine. However, generally speaking, any article subject to a "redirect" or "merge" decision at AfD should always go to DRV (or be discussed with the closer), not unilaterally restored. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 03:12, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. "Substantial change" is an accurate description. The community made the right decision in 2018 to change to redirect and you closed it properly (In My Humble Opinion). I don't understand how someone slipped through the cracks with rewriting the article a short time later but wasn't caught (and I'm not implying that it's your or anyone else's responsibility to watch/police). You're right about DRV or at least discussing with closing admin. Royalbroil 04:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Ilham Nagiyev

16:16, 18 July 2020 Seraphimblade talk contribs deleted page Ilham Nagiyev (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion) (thank)

Hello, can you please tell me where is advertising or promotion? And reason of deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrTaghizade (talk • contribs) 11:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

MrTaghizade, as the article was promotional and there are several other reasons to believe so, I'd need to ask if you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. For example, on File:ZaurDarabzadeh.jpg and File:IlhamNagiyev2.jpg, you have listed these images as your own work. Those are very close-in and clearly posed photographs, indicating you had some way of getting those. Similarly, this is not the first time you've had an issue with attempting to be very pushy about moving an article about a certain individual back to mainspace from draft (which needs to stop; if someone moves something to draft, that indicates that there is a problem). So, please clarify what's going on here, and ensure you make the mandatory disclosures if need be before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I am volunteer and helping Azerbaijani people create or edit article (not paid). On article doesn't have any promotions. Can you please send me facts about promotions? Where have promotions? We can edit article and fix this issues. MrTaghizade (talk) 17:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

MrTaghizade, the "article" reads more like a CV. Those are inherently promotional. It then goes on to provide several inappropriate social media links (Medium, Twitter, Linkedin), and then an absolutely massive farm of external links. (Generally, one external link, to a subject's official site, is appropriate, and it must go in the external links section, not in the article body.) As above, this is not the first issue you have had. I very strongly recommend you create any new articles as a draft and refrain from moving it to mainspace yourself, instead only seeking review from articles for creation. If I see you once again create or move an inappropriate article in mainspace, I will block you from editing altogether. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Can you move this article to draft? I will edit issues and send to review! Thanks in advance MrTaghizade (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely not. I do not restore advertisements. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:01, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

İ already told you this article is not advertising. President of Football club Baku United FC. We can edit article & fix the issues. Where you see advertising will be fixed! MrTaghizade (talk) 16:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but that will require a complete rewrite. The answer is no. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Send to draft Article complete will be rewrite as Draft. If any issues then delete without decline submission. MrTaghizade (talk) 09:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

The answer is "No", and will remain so regardless of how many times you repeat your request. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:29, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Fernando Bruccoleri

Hi Seraphimblade, Good morning, hope you are safe. I have tried to create the article for a long time, with errors that i have personally corrected as im not an expert here and i have collected more information and references about this person during the last few years. I don't make wikipedia creation or edition on demand. I just want to properly fix and write the article. I would even like you to help me about it by sending your comments. Thanks and kind regards,

--Mandala1813 (talk) 19:01, 25 July 2020 (UTC)Mandala1813

Mandala1813, to be quite frank, I do not believe you. If you are not doing Wikipedia editing for pay, then can you please explain File:Fernando_Bruccoleri_Profile.jpg, which you stated is your own work? If you took an up-close, clearly posed photograph of the individual like that one, you clearly must have some connection. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:34, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

Thanks for your kind reply. This photograph is public, i take it from his social media profiles. Also, it´s indexed on Google by his profile on LinkedIn. Thank you!

--Mandala1813 (talk) 23:25, 25 July 2020 (UTC)Mandala1813

Mandala1813, "Own work" means that you were the photographer, not that you pulled it off the Internet. I will request deletion on Commons accordingly. It is dishonest to say that something is your own work when it was not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:54, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade, Thanks again. I did not do it on purpose, it was merely ignorance when choosing the correct option. If that's the case, I agree to remove the photograph. My intention is to rewrite the article in a suitable way, could you kindly help me? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandala1813 (talk • contribs)

--Mandala1813 (talk) 16:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)Mandala1813

Hi Seraphimblade,

I hope you are well. I have rewritten the article as a draft, fix the errors and the references. Also, I uploaded an image in Wikimedia with the corresponding rights. Could you review it and tell me if I need to correct something else to be able to publish it? Thank you!

--Mandala1813 (talk) 03:36, 27 July 2020 (UTC)Mandala1813

You have not added a properly licensed image. You grabbed the same image from social media and uploaded it again. You did not at least falsely claim it to be your own work this time, but it is still not under a free license. You can't use that image unless you convince the photographer to release it under a free license, such as CC-BY-SA. (Very few images off the Web are okay to just grab and use on Wikipedia.) So far as seeking review, please see instructions for submitting the draft to articles for creation for that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Seraphimblade:,

I want to thank you for helping me to solve the problem with the photograph license of the article and mediate with another user. Also, i want to let you know that i rewrite the respective article, fix some info and references. The article is on review but i hope you can check it and help me with it. It is quite exhausting for someone who has no experience here. Thank you again! --Mandala1813 (talk) 21:44, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Mandala1813

A bowl of strawberries for you!

Thanks for your help! Mandala1813 (talk) 21:46, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).

Administrator changes

Red Phoenix

Euryalus • SQL

Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

GB fan

Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

• There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
• Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
• Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
• There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Weavers' cottage (Kleinschwarzenbach, Zum Weberhaus 10)

...is a cultural monument in Germany and Emmanuel Eni is an international artist. As far as I know is a relevant article in German wikipedia also relevant in other wikis. I dont also understand the speed of this deletions. -PeterBraun74 (talk) 11:20, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

PeterBraun74, we do not permit any type of promotion. For the cottage: It is an important example... (we do not editorialize with things like "important"), and it is remarkable that (we don't editorialize with things like "remarkable", especially with no source), and the rest of it is promoting it, not just describing it. Encyclopedia articles should be rather dry. For Emmanuel Eni, "international" doesn't matter. The entire article is unreferenced and basically pushing his stuff. It contains promotional language like Considered one of the most outstanding contemporary artists of Africa and the Western world. ("Considered" so by whom, according to what reliable source?) Famous for his fearless soul searching philosophical Art. ("art" should not be capitalized, and this is puff), then goes on to a section totally inappropriately titled "Famous Performances", and everything in that section is also promotional junk and editorial. Please remember that each language Wikipedia has its own content policies, so something being acceptable in the German Wikipedia absolutely does not mean it's acceptable here, and vice versa. If you are going to write on the English Wikipedia, it is your responsibility to ensure you are following our content policies, such as neutrality in tone and content and never promoting anyone or anything including by "talking up". We never editorialize in an article, we only state facts verified by reliable sources. Stuff like This performance developed from the installation with the same title the peace restoration performance grew to present a platform to deconstruct and interact with the visual installation. is absolutely not acceptable. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:47, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Now at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2020 August 1. —Cryptic 15:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd already been pinged, but I appreciate the heads up in any case. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:56, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 August 2020

• Special report: Wikipedia and the End of Open Collaboration?

• COI and paid editing: Some strange people edit Wikipedia for money

• News and notes: Abstract Wikipedia, a hoax, sex symbols, and a new admin

• In the media: Dog days gone bad

• Discussion report: Fox News, a flight of RfAs, and banning policy

• Featured content: Remembering Art, Valor, and Freedom

• Traffic report: Now for something completely different

• Gallery: Photos of threatened species from iNaturalist

• News from the WMF: New Chinese national security law in Hong Kong could limit the privacy of Wikipedia users

• Recent research: Receiving thanks increases retention, but not the time contributed to Wikipedia

• Essay: Not compatible with a collaborative project

• Obituaries: Hasteur and Brian McNeil

• In focus: WikiLoop DoubleCheck, reviewing edits made easy

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Julia wieniawa page deletion

Dear Sir, or Madam - why in the world did you delete this page? Julia Wieniawa is a very talented young Polish actress, very well known, just google her - I am sure that people would appreciate having a Wikipedia entry for Julia Wieniawa in English. I am also sure that sooner or later she will be listed on Wikipedia, so not sure why you deleted MY entry for her. I guess you know how to delete other people's work on Wikipedia, by following some obscure rules here, still in IMHO you are trying to feel important yourself by trying to promote your own importance on Wikipedia, anyway not sure if you will answer me, or delete this entry just as you deleted Julia Wieniawa's page, Julieprus (talk) 11:50, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Julieprus, I see you list yourself as a ten-year editor on your user page, and that looks to be true. (And congratulations on that.) However, that means you ought to have been around more than long enough to be familiar with our core policies such as the neutral point of view and regarding writing biographies of living persons. Please explain to me how you believe that unreferenced promotional claims such as She is one of the most popular Polish celebrities on Instagram. and Julia Wieniawa is one of the most popular, talented and influential young actresses in Poland. are in accordance with the neutrality requirement, or how citing material about someone's romantic interests to an unreliable gossip site is in accordance with BLP. Neutral point of view and the BLP requirements are not "obscure rules"; they are some of our core content policies. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:01, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Dear Seraphimblade Thank you for your response - I guess we will just have to wait for some other person to create entry for this actress - at least I tried but according to YOU it wasn't good enough - I am sure she will do fine without my as you call it "unreferenced promotional claims", anyway life goes on, Cheers!Julieprus (talk) 02:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Lee Kuan Yew Global Business Plan Competition

Hi Seraphimblade,

Hope this note finds you well. I am writing to inquire the deletion of the draft page for Lee Kuan Yew Global Business Plan Competition, a non-profit, global campus innovation challenge organized by the Singapore Management University. This competition is similar in nature to the following competitions organized by the various universities worldwide, and I have followed similar style with abundant independent citations to the competition when drafting the page. I look forward to hearing from you.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/MIT_$100K_Entrepreneurship_Competition

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/KEBA_Student_Investor_Challenge

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/JDC_West

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/SMU_business_plan_competition

Crazymiffyperson (talk) 08:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Crazymiffperson, other stuff existing does not make a bit of difference. In this case, the article was deleted for being promotion. Given that, please clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If you are, you will need to make the required disclosures before we continue. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Axcient

Draft:Axcient, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Axcient and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Axcient during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 19:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Xlovecam page deletion

Hello, i'd like to understand why you erased this page https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Xlovecam I put all articles and the awards that this site won: "best european cam site" =>why don't you want to speak about that ? thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagle13666 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Eagle13666, it is quite clear from your editing that your interest is very much in promoting this site. If you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade,what are you speaking about? I'm creating a page about other cam sites, you will see in the next days. So why are you against my previous page in which i put articles and awards?Will you block other pages as well? cause it means that you have interest to avoid a speach about different competitors

Asia Darts Association

Dear Seraphimblade,

I am writing to clarify that the page of Asia Darts Association is not unambiguously promotional, because the content is about the fact of the organization which include the background, history and milestones of the organization as well as describe and elucidate what the organization has done throughout the years.

Therefore, the current content does not serve to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, it is about the comprehensive biography of the organization.

Yours faithfully, Near — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nearmacc1626 (talk • contribs) 07:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Nearmacc1626, as the article was deleted for promotion, please first clarify whether you are being paid or compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the required disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:08, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Kalladka Tea page deletion

I wrote the article https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Kalladka_Tea yesterday night around 22:30 IST (+5:30 UTC). When I got up in the morning I saw email saying it has been marked for deletion. After I finish morning chores and started working, I got another email saying it has been deleted. Why did you delete it without giving me an opportunity to contest the deletion? I have been a Wikipedian since 2004. I am a bureaucrat in Kannada Wikipedia and Sysop in Tulu Wikipedia. I have been to two Wikimanias, Wikimedia Diversity Conference Sweden, Wikisummit at Berlin and all. I know very well about NPOV and other policies. I believe that the standard practice is to keep the deletion tag for a week so that the deletion can be contested. That is the practice we follow in Kannada and Tulu Wikipedias. The article which you deleted is actually a translation of the article on the same topic in Kannada Wikipedia. Hence it is not an advertisement by me. I am no way connected with the topic of the article. I strongly object the way you deleted the article without giving me an opportunity to contest the deletion.--Pavanaja (talk) 05:37, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Pavanaja, that article engaged in clear promotion and boosterism. There's some relatively minor stuff (Mr Shivarama Holla, articles should not use "Mr." or the like for anyone), but then goes along with an unreferenced section stating how neat the process of making it is. Then we've got blatant promotional language such as ...people from nearby places flock this hotel to drink KT ("flock to" is unreferenced, and is inappropriate talking up), a list of celebrities who have drunk it (unimportant and boosterism), The popular travel program... (leave out fluff adjectives like "popular"), and ends with an inappropriate editorial (A small hotel on the roadside of a highway becoming popular and getting featured in travel websites is something unique.; the cited reference does not support that assertion). If you believe that is NPOV, I strongly suggest you review NPOV again prior to attempting to create another article. So far as what other Wikipedias do, articles which meet speedy deletion criteria on the English Wikipedia may be deleted immediately, but of course other projects set their own policies. On this project particularly, speedy means exactly that. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2020

• News and notes: The high road and the low road

• In the media: Storytelling large and small

• Featured content: Going for the goal

• Special report: Wikipedia's not so little sister is finding its own way

• Op-Ed: The longest-running hoax

• Traffic report: Heart, soul, umbrellas, and politics

• News from the WMF: Fourteen things we’ve learned by moving Polish Wikimedia conference online

• Recent research: Detecting spam, and pages to protect; non-anonymous editors signal their intelligence with high-quality articles

• Arbitration report: A slow couple of months

• From the archives: Wikipedia for promotional purposes?

• Obituaries: Marcus Sherman, Jerome West, and Pauline van Till

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
• A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
• A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
• An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Seraphimblade. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Ilovemuppets (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you an email regarding Ramdas_Padhye Page

Ilovemuppets, while I have received your email, it does not contain anything which needs private discussion. If you would like to discuss the matter, please do so on this talk page; I will not discuss it over email. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Restore Ramdas Padhye Page

Hi SeraphimBlade,

Please restore the page Ramdas Padhye You had deleted it on the basis Unambiguous advertising or promotion. I was new to wikipedia and don't know how to write the page. I will rewrite the page and you can check it. I request you to please restore the same

Sincerely, Satyajit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovemuppets (talk • contribs) 16:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Ilovemuppets, sorry, but there was nothing salvageable there, so I will not restore it. If you can now write it appropriately, you can always take another go at it, ensuring to stick only to facts verified by reliable sources and staying neutral in tone and content. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:30, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Hollywood Walk of Fame (in-text refs & ext link)

Hello, this is TashaB, and I am writing on your talk page to ask why you again revert my edit of reference/citation on W:Hollywood Walk of Fame when a clear explanation is listed on the Walk of Fame TALK PAGE? Can I assume you were unaware of this explanation? Please review it, and I kindly ask you to revert your last until you have understood the specific WP guidelines that are explained there. And yes, I'd appreciate you removing your last entry on my talk page, as you will see it is uncivil and unfounded. I'll give you some time before adding more to the Hollywood Walk of FAme TALK page. Respectfully, TashaB 17:06, 3 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natasha Behrendt (talk • contribs)

Natasha Behrendt, you have been adding links to that organization and text about it all over the place in addition to creating an article about it, and were pushing for an inappropriate external link when that was not warranted. What you are doing has by this point reached the point of link spamming and reference spamming. This is often a strong indicator that there is a financial incentive which has not been disclosed as required. Regardless, however, that must and will stop one way or the other. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Please be respectful and address the issue at hand that I have detailed, instead of completely avoiding the specific points and justifications that have been presented on the Hollywood Walk of Fame TALK PAGE. My edits stand on their own merit. If I esteem the Smithsonian's online archive and strive to enhance WP articles with such, there is no meaningful difference. I believe you are unreasonable in NOT addressing the issue at all here, instead engaging in ad hominum derision and threat. TashaB 19:48, 3 September 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natasha Behrendt (talk • contribs)

I already have. (I also note you avoided the discussion of undisclosed paid editing). Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:53, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I beg your pardon? I have clearly disclosed I have no relationship whatsoever with Public Art in Public Places. Are you harassing me? TashaB (talk) 19:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I reread your previous messages, and still do not see you doing so. And no, I'm not "harassing" you—you came to my talk page, not the other way around. The excessive addition of links to them still will need to stop, regardless of UPE. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:20, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Ramdas Padhye Page

Hi SeraphimBlade,

Is it possible for you to send me the original page on email which was written as it is very difficult for me to write it again? I will rewrite the page and you can check it. My email id is (personal info redacted)

Sincerely, Satyajit — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovemuppets (talk • contribs) 15:14, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

No, I will not. You will need to start over. That will remain the answer no matter how many times you ask the question. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:15, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Straight Talk Wireless Draft

Hi SeraphimBlade,

This is FrankWS875. I am reaching out about the Draft:Straight Talk Wireless page which you assisted me with back in March.

I followed your advice, and removed the content which made the page read like marketese or advertising. After taking the time to edit Wikipedia and create a few non-promotional pages, I feel like I have a much better handle on Wikipedia’s guidelines.

However, when I resubmitted the page with the changes you recommended, it still got rejected without really any feedback on why.

Would you mind taking the time to glance at the draft and let me know your thoughts on it?

I thought I had a handle on the guidelines and was very surprised that this draft got rejected.

Sincerely,

Frank

FrankWS875 (talk) 15:13, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I believe what the reviewers said was relatively clear. Is there something about it that isn't? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Deprecating parenthetical citations

Good job on the closing statement. Comprehensive, well stated, etc. Thank you for what must have been a major allocation of time to dive into this one. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:19, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I came here to say this as well. Nicely done. Retswerb (talk) 01:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. And yes, it was a pretty fair bit of reading. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:56, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 40

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020

• New partnerships
  • Al Manhal
  • Ancestry
  • RILM
• #1Lib1Ref May 2020 report
• AfLIA hires a Wikipedian-in-Residence

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Linkspamming by user Shabehr

Hello! You left this user a final warning for inserting external links into articles. Since then they are still at it. I had just warned them when I saw you had them a warning a week earlier. They also seem to be actively refusing to understand our WP:EL policy, per this discussion and this one. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:54, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

See also the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Public Art in Public Places before the admin closed and deleted. There are questions re: both WP:LINKSPAM and WP:RS. Thanks. Barte (talk) 20:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

3RR

Your recent editing history at Wikipedia:Parenthetical referencing shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Francis Schonken, unilaterally undoing part of the closure of a consensus discussion is absolutely unacceptable. Do not repeat this. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

"... part of the closure of a consensus discussion ..." – it is not: that is absolute crap – the closure does not mandate how to implement, and invites to not implement hastily without consensus. And I can only see that you continue to edit war: your edit has been reverted, don't re-revert without consensus after discussion, per WP:BRD. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:51, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Francis Schonken, the part of the close is this in particular: Additionally, WP:PAREN will have its current text replaced with an explanatory note and be marked historical. That is explicitly part of the close and may not be unilaterally reversed. If you would like to challenge that portion of the close, or any other, you may file a closure review at AN, but you may not unilaterally reverse it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

There's no consensus whatsoever on the replacement text (you're just edit-warring to get "your" flavour of a replacement text instated); you refuse diligent discussion about the content of what is the most suitable replacement text; and the RfC closure does not say when a replacement text needs to be instated; but the closure report does say to do step by step after discussion and consensus of each step. Your overall MO in the case is disruption and refusal to discuss to arrive at a consensus. In other words, whatever your other qualities as editor, here you're just a plain and simple edit-warrior. And, in any case, full replacement is highly counterproductive as long as many articles need to be converted, often by editors who still first have to learn how the system works they're converting. --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:12, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion of that is fine. Unilateral reversal is not. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:35, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

A single unilateral reversal of a bold edit is fine by the WP:BRD guidance, and the WP:CONACHIEVE policy. A unilateral re-revert, before discussion shows that that is the way to go is, on the other hand, a no-no, per the same guideline & policy, and that's what you did. You've been pinged in several sections at Wikipedia talk:Parenthetical referencing – would you care to participate in the discussions there? Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 12:16, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Deletion Dancefair wikipedia page

Hi Seraphimblade, pleasure to connect. I noticed you recently deleted the Dancefair wiki page as you felt this was spam and asked me to stop my “disruptive editing”. I hope you dont mind me reaching out to you but I strongly feel that I didnt do anything wrong here. To begin with, Dancefair is an electronic music conference based in the Netherlands and will next year celebrate its 10-year anniversary. Comparable conferences like International Music Summit, Amsterdam Dance Event and Winter Music Conference all have their own wikipedia pages as well so Im a bit confused why a Dancefair wiki would not be allowed. Secondly I am working for Dancefair but throughout the wikipedia page I have tried my best to follow Wikipedia guidelines by sticking to facts only, including multiple references, etc. Please let me know what I can do to make the Dancefair page visible again and what I guidelines I didn’t follow so that I can make changes where needed. Thanks in advance and look forward to hearing from you. Best, Alex Ne obliviscare iv (talk) 08:25, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Ne obliviscare iv, you said it all with "I am working for Dancefair". That being the case, you are doing undisclosed paid editing, which is forbidden on Wikipedia. You will need to make the required disclosures prior to editing further about this subject. Additionally, you will need to refrain from any mainspace editing about this subject, including creating or moving articles about it into mainspace yourself. Since you have a conflict of interest regarding the subject, you must create any article about your employer as a draft and request review from articles for creation rather than creating or moving articles to mainspace yourself. For existing articles, you must suggest edits on the article's talk page and request review, not make them yourself. Also please note that use of editorial language such as "leading" or "renowned" will never be acceptable. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 11:09, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit on Ken Segall article

Hi there. I'm trying to improve as an editor as I get deeper into Wikipedia. In that spirit, I'm not sure why you removed the references to "speaker" in the Ken Segall article I contributed. Segall is equally well-known as an author, advertising executive, and international keynote speaker. To get a better sense before asking you, I looked at another article in Segall's industry, John Gruber. Gruber has a whole section devoted to speaking engagements, though he only speaks rarely. So I'm not sure how to proceed. Would it help if I added a list of important speeches to make it more like the Gruber article? I was purposefully trying to keep it encyclopedic and non-promotional. Any suggestions would be appreciated!Mrylander (talk) 22:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Mrylander, no, a primary source only list of speaking engagements would be quite the wrong way to go. (The Gruber article shouldn't have all that stuff in it, either.) Unless there's an indication that Segall is a particularly influential or prolific speaker, his speaking career would seem rather secondary to his tech career. That being the case, if reliable and independent sources aren't particularly discussing his work as a speaker, the article should follow suit and not do so either. If there are such sources, that may be a different matter. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:21, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2020

• Special report: Paid editing with political connections

• News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki

• In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later

• Featured content: Life finds a Way

• Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests

• Traffic report: Is there no justice?

• Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).

Administrator changes

Ajpolino • LuK3

Jackmcbarn

Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM

There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news

• The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).

Arbitration

• The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
• Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous

• The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
• Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:43, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Asking to restore deleted Wikipedia page of Mira Demartino

Hello Seraphimblade, I would like to kindly ask to restore page of "Mira Demartino" that I spent hours creating. I am a collector who contributes to Wikipedia creating pages for artists that I know, have an permission to use use images of their art works (yes, I realized that they must post their art works on Wikimedia Commons, first, with released license - and I am learning about the process too - thus I apologize if I was not aware of proper process of posting photos of art wors). The content of the page that I created for a sculptor Mira Demartino was carefully researched with all the links and sources checked, and I am perplexed why I was punished by: (a) being blocked from editing for two weeks (b) Mira DeMartinos page was removed. I hope that the page was not removed entirely, since I do not have a copy of the content saved on my computer, and I would have to do it from scratch agaon - I would appreciate your help and guidance. Creating web pages for artists is my contribution to the art worls and Wikipedia should apprecuate my free service, and help me not punish me. I am looking forward to your reply, Monitor333 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monitor333 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Asking to restore deleted Wikipedia page of Mira Demartino

Hello Seraphimblade, I would like to kindly ask to restore page of "Mira Demartino" that I spent hours creating. I am a collector who contributes to Wikipedia creating pages for artists that I know, have an permission to use use images of their art works (yes, I realized that they must post their art works on Wikimedia Commons, first, with released license - and I am learning about the process too - thus I apologize if I was not aware of proper process of posting photos of art world). The content of the page that I created for a sculptor Mira Demartino was carefully researched with all the links and sources checked, and I am perplexed why I was punished by: (a) being blocked from editing for two weeks (b) Mira DeMartinos page was removed. I hope that the page was not removed entirely, since I do not have a copy of the content saved on my computer, and I would have to do it from scratch again - I would appreciate your help and guidance. Creating web pages for artists is my contribution to the art world and Wikipedia should appreciate my free service, and help me, if I unknowingly made a mistake, not punish me. I am looking forward to your reply, Best, --Monitor333 (talk) 15:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Monitor333, you were not blocked here. Your Commons account was blocked for repeated copyright infringements and apparently for abuse of multiple accounts. If you want to challenge that block, you'll have to take it up at Commons; the English Wikipedia is a separate project and we hold no authority over what happens on Commons. Please do note, however, that the English Wikipedia also prohibits both copyright infringement and abusing multiple accounts, so if you do the same here, you'll be blocked here as well. You did infringe copyright with the article in question, as at least the lead was copied verbatim with only a few minor changes from [16], which is marked "All rights reserved". You may not copy text from an "all rights reserved" website into Wikipedia (basically, the vast majority of the text and images you find on the Internet are not appropriately licensed for copying here). Additionally, the content was promotional rather than neutral, which is also prohibited (as just a quick example, but by no means an exhaustive one, "talking up" terms should not be used, and trademark symbols should never appear in articles). Articles must be written entirely in your own words and be neutral in tone and content. Additionally, in your talk page comment, you stated Mira DeMartino, artist and author of the art work, granted license to use the image ALIGNED Mira DeMartino.png freely on Wikipedia/Wikimedia. Looking forward to seeing the image fully restored. That is not sufficient. First, the copyright holder must verify permission via OTRS; your simple statement that you received permission is not sufficient. Secondly, "permission to use on Wikipedia/Wikimedia" will not work. The copyright holder must grant permission to release the file under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license, which would allow anyone, anywhere, to use the work in any way, provided that they maintain the license and provide attribution. Otherwise, the image would have to meet our nonfree content requirements, and in the biography of a living individual, that's all but impossible, since a photograph of the individual could be taken to use as a free image. Since all revisions of the page contained the copyright violation, it cannot be restored, as we can never restore copyright violations. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Seraphimblade Thank you for your detailed reply. My intention was to write an objective article about the artist. I run into a problem, unknowingly, using photos of the artist's artworks, that were missing properly secured license to use the images - and I apologize for that. I am learning from my mistakes, and I know now that before editing any artist's page I must ask or guide the artist to grant a license to use any photo depicting his/her work, under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. But, I would like to argue that I do not deserve a statement that I" was blocked for repeated copyright infringements and apparently for abuse of multiple accounts" - I run into the problem while editing the same article and repeating the same mistake, adding images, a few times, to the same page, images, that did not have properly granted license, only a permission from the artist. It was not my intention to break the rules, that I know now that I did not follow. I hope that my Commons account would be soon restored, and I will be able to work on this article, and other articles in the future. I understand that this article has to be rewritten, and I would appreciate, in the future, your comments on my draft, that I plan to work on soon, before it can be published. The bottom line is this artist deserves a Wikipedia page, and the article must pass Wikipedia criteria. Thanks again.

--Monitor333 (talk) 01:55, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Asking to restore deleted Wikipedia page of James O'Keefe (cardiologist)

Hello Seraphimblade, I would like to kindly ask to restore page of "James O'Keefe (cardiologist)" that I have no personal connection to. I think you are mistaken for your cited "copyright infringement" to http://www.canadiangay.org/GHist/Jun/08.html. Though the page needed editing to better adhere to Wikipedia formatting, it was not copyright infringement and provided informative information on an influential figure. I am looking forward to your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JeezBreeze (talk • contribs) 17:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

JeezBreeze, I'm afraid you may not be looking forward to my answer, as it is no. Substantial portions of the article were indeed direct copies of that exact site, and we can never restore a copyright violation. In addition to that, the article was also promotional rather than neutral. If you believe there is a sufficient amount of reliable and independent reference material from which to write an article about this individual, you are welcome to write a new one, but it must not contain any text directly copied from any other source and must be strictly neutral in tone and content. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

G11 page re-created by same editor

Hi Seraphimblade. Thankyou for accepting my G11 nomination of Bakhtiyor Fazilov. Unfortunately the article has been re-created by the same editor: link. It has since been nominated for G11 by another editor (not a sock of mine, I promise!), so would you mind having another go at it please? Is there anything that can be done to make it stick this time? Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 07:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

1292simon, when a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it will be placed into the queue for someone available to act on. It isn't necessary to notify someone of it as well. If in the future you have concerns about repeated recreations, you can add {{salt}} to bring that to the attention of the reviewing administrator. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks for the explanation. Sorry, I didn't mean to jump the queue. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 21:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Asking to restore deleted Wikipedia page of Alex Ferrer (DJ)

Hello Seraphimblade, I would like to kindly ask to restore page of Alex Ferrer (DJ) that I have no personal connection to. This page is 7 years old and it took me hours to create it.

I am a music fan who contributes to Wikipedia creating pages for artists that I respect and follow, have an permission to use use images of their art works, but I´m not advertising or promoting them, neither I get paid to do this contribution, but again it takes a lot of my free time to work on this contributions.

Please let me know if something in the page needs to be changed and I´d gladly modify but restore it when possible, thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maaambo (talk • contribs) 14:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Maaambo, afraid that is a no. The page was indeed promotional, full of puffery such as (and this is, by no means, an exhaustive list): featured on a mammoth list, diverse quality sound and distinctive image ensures a dedicated following, With an addiction for music, His credentials include an eye-watering list of worldwide tours, and on and on like that. Puffery like that has absolutely no place in an encyclopedia article. In addition, it was filled with inappropriate external links. Articles are required to be neutral in tone and content, and not to promote anyone or anything. Whether promotion was the intent or was done for pay is not relevant. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Ram Setu Controversy page

Hi Thanks a lot for giving your opinion in the 'Ram Setu Controversy' page. Am the author of the page. Actually there is a separate page created for the discussion where I had posted my point of view as well so am posting it here again if you may want to consider it in the course of your opinion.

As far as the POV fork is concerned am in the course of making necessary corrections. Thanks.

Being the author of the article Ram Setu Controversy wanted to point out a few things here for your consideration before giving an opinion. Regarding the suggestions to merge the Ram Setu Dispute article with two others Thanks a lot for your suggestion to merge the article 'Ram Setu Dispute' with the existing two pages on the topic. Subsequent to your suggestions and having gone through the proposed articles I would like to bring to your notice that my page traces the time lines of a "Media Controversy" and different aspects of various disputes that have been raised with respect to the Ram Setu at different points of time. My page is not about the academic angle as much as it is about the controversies and at that, the page covers not just academic controversies but legal as well. That's why it's been named Ram Setu 'Controversy'. To give an example we have several TV shows that for example have episodes that update viewers about the controversy and the history of the entire dispute over the Berlin Wall or an episode that would cover the entire political history of tension between any two nations. Being a native of India I know that this topic is hotly debated here and if you check the wiki search history the term "Ram Setu" is searched hundreds of thousands of times, this is because that is the term we use for the bridge in this part of the world and basically whole of South Asia. Wikipedia does not have a single page that covers the entire controversy from every angle. The page is unique because the entire dispute pertaining to the Ram Setu from all the various angles, academic as well as legal and chronological has not been brought together by any other single page on Wikipedia. Bhumi2tandon (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumi2tandon (talk • contribs) 13:24, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Bhumi2tandon, I'm sure that's all very nice. We still do not permit POV forks. Please feel free to work on the existing articles rather than trying to do that again. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:32, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

POV forks

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

The POV forks have already been fixed please check. Actually this is my first wiki page submission so I guess every place has its own style and language in which content is required to be written. Be it newspaper or websites :))

You cannot "fix" it. The whole thing is a POV fork. The answer was "no", and will remain "no" no matter how many times you repeat the question. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 14:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

You are entitled to your opinion and I respect that but a gentler tone would be appreciated. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumi2tandon (talk • contribs) 14:20, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Mr Seraphimblade At 14:20 I objected to a high toned message from you and requested you to use a gentler tone and within 20 minutes of my message you went ahead and declined my draft page submission and arbitrarily closed a discussion that was posted on the page with respect to the merger of the page which was started today morning only and in which only you had given your opinion so far. The page was supposed to remain open for atleast seven days as per guidelines. I find this act on your behalf highly vindictive and prejudiced. Let me remind you that while Wikipedia grants some discretionary powers such vindictive acts are not covered by that.

Had you deleted my page the first time you went through it and thought it to be a POV fork I would not have objected but the action was done within 20 minutes of my submitting a message respectfully objecting to you high toned message this is clearly a vindictive act and highly objectionable behaviour for a place like wikipedia. Let me remind you no one not even you OWN the Wikipedia and small editors like us are the reason the Wikipedia exists. I would really appreciate if you stay away from the draft page now since I do not trust your neutrality in the matter anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhumi2tandon (talk • contribs) 15:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).

Administrator changes

John M Wolfson

Bduke • Nilfanion • Philosopher • Rspeer • Yunshui

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

TonyBallioni

CheckUser changes

EdJohnston • Oshwah • Yamla

Yunshui

Oversight changes

Anarchyte

Yunshui

Guideline and policy news

• Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

• Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
• Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
• Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.

Arbitration

• The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
• The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.

Miscellaneous

• A reminder that standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. (American Politics 2 Arbitration case).

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:52, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2020

• News and notes: Ban on IPs on ptwiki, paid editing for Tatarstan, IP masking

• In the media: Murder, politics, religion, health and books

• Book review: Review of Wikipedia @ 20

• Op-Ed: Anti-vandalism with masked IPs: the steps forward

• Discussion report: Proposal to change board composition, In The News dumps Trump story

• Featured content: The "Green Terror" is neither green nor sufficiently terrifying. Worst Hallowe'en ever.

• Traffic report: Jump back, what's that sound?

• Interview: Joseph Reagle and Jackie Koerner

• News from the WMF: Meet the 2020 Wikimedian of the Year

• Recent research: OpenSym 2020: Deletions and gender, masses vs. elites, edit filters

• In focus: The many (reported) deaths of Wikipedia

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement case

Hello, Seraphimblade. I'm sending this message since you commented on the AE case on Heba Aisha that you'll look at it a few days ago. The case was recently archived so I was wondering if it is being dropped or if someone would be interested in looking at it? Sorry if this comes at an annoyance. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 09:46, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Tavi Arajakate, I did plan to look at that, but have had some things come up myself. Sorry for that, and unfortunate no one else could either. I think it might be a bit stale to look at by this point, but if there are ongoing issues you're certainly welcome to raise them again. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:46, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Prominent

I come from project opera, where you said that "prominent" is puff. I agree. Can I turn your attention to List of important operas? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:33, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, I would tend to agree that the use of "prominent" in the title there is probably not ideal. Has there been any discussion of renaming the article? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Most project members - as you can see in the move discussions - dislike the title "prominent". It would be nice if the first move - a supervote - could just be reverted as leading to a puff name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:36, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I took a look, and it looks like a recent RM was closed as a "no clear option" close, which allows for an immediate new RM. So if you think that you have a better title, that certainly could be proposed. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 04:26, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Draftification

Hey SB, just a heads up that I reversed your draftification of Academy of Vocal Arts. Village pump consensus recently established here limits draftification to recently-created articles, and that article has a long history. Any questions, let me know. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Also, if you could please restore the deleted Talk:Academy of Vocal Arts, that would be awesome. Thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:57, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

UnitedStatesian, that particular article was draftified in lieu of remaining deleted. While it now is at least sufficient for a stub, so I will not reverse it, please ensure that you do not do something like that again without first discussing it and ensuring you know why it happened. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:10, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 41

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020

• New partnership: Taxmann
• WikiCite
• 1Lib1Ref 2021

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:48, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Seven years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:58, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:22, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Appeal at ARCA

Hi Seraphimblade. I wanted to let you know that The C of E is appealing at ARCA a topic ban imposed by a consensus of administrators at AE, which you commented at as an uninvolved administrator. The ARCA request is at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_The_Troubles. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 07:48, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Sankey Photographs

Hi, I have made some changes and I think the article is ready to go now, but I have moved it here: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Draft:The_Sankey_Family_Photography_Collection This is to give it the correct title with Cumbria archive service and not to avoid the disputes with yourself and Rodney Araujo. I deny that there is any element of spam, it concerns a business which closed in 1970, two photographers, both deceased and a large collection of photographic negatives.

The bibliography gives some idea of the scope of the collection and is evidence of notability. I do not see why the 14 books listed would not qualify as reliable published sources. In any case further proof of notability is hardly needed as Wikipedia already contains Sankey postcards (Submarine B4 and airship HMA 1 for a start). The collection is the very stuff of notability with pictures of ship launches, royal visits and visits by Churchill.

If you search ebay for "Sankey Postcard" you will find hundreds.

As to my style of writing, I can only try to put the facts in a logical order and hope that someone else will polish them once it is released into article space.

I too would claim to be a deletionist, at least I don't think that every episode of the Simpsons deserves an article but the Sankey collection is a lasting record, people should be allowed to know where to find it and when Sankey photographs are used on Wikipedia the reader should know who took the photograph and why.Peterrivington (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2020 (UTC)