Jump to content

User talk:Trillfendi/Archive 2/Archives/ 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Ways to improve HoYeon Jung

Thanks for creating HoYeon Jung.

A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Please add categories.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jasmine Sanders has been accepted

Jasmine Sanders, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 22:30, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Marjan Jonkman has been accepted

Marjan Jonkman, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 23:48, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Katie Moore (model) has been accepted

Katie Moore (model), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 02:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Samile Bermannelli has been accepted

Samile Bermannelli, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 03:12, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stefani Robinson has been accepted

Stefani Robinson, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 03:00, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

HoYeon Jung (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Dundas
Kelly Mittendorf (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Scottsdale

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Your speedy tags

Your spree of tagging articles per a7 is disruptive. You tagged a draft as a7; only articles are eligible for a7. You also tagged a large number of articles. I've looked at a few and undid the tags. They are not even close to an a7. There may be some that are, but I am not going to review them all. Please go back and remove those tags that are inappropriate. I also recommend that you not speedy tag any articles in the future because you clearly do not know what you're doing. Consider this a warning.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:24, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Bbb23 I’m am tagging model articles I see with absolutely no reliable sources or relying on a single unreliable source. No one’s forcing you to check them all but I will continue to propose deletion in AfD. Good day.Trillfendi (talk) 18:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Sourcing is not a reason for tagging articles with a7. You're forcing me or other administrators to waste our time reviewing frivolous tags. I've rolled back all your tags. If I see this kind of behavior again, you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Bbb23 I have previously tagged horribly sourced, unsourced, unnotable people for A7 (even just yesterday) Danielle Knudson is a prime example, and they were speedily deleted without issue or controversy. So you’re the first person coming to me about this. 🤔 Trillfendi (talk) 18:53, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
(edit conflict) You misunderstand. Sourcing in and of itself is not a reason for tagging articles as a7. For example, if the subject of an article wins a notable award, they should not be tagged as a7 regardless of whether the material is reliable sourced or even unsourced (it would be different if the claim is a hoax). The Knudson article may have been poorly sourced, but based purely on what was claimed in the article, your a7 tag was appropriate and the article was correctly deleted. What was claimed in the few articles I looked at today was easily enough to get past an a7 and therefore the tags were inappropriate. I gave you an opportunity to re-review them so you could keep some and remove some, but you were unwilling to do so. Also, if you know how to tag, why would you tag a draft as a7?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:02, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Bbb23 The other day I saw a draft that had been deleted simply because two admins were frustrated that the article wasn’t improving. Therefore I assumed drafts can get tagged for deletion that way. (I don’t recall if it was A7). Now as for a few of these models, articles can swear up and down that they were in this magazine or that ad yet virtually none of them are even sourced. Therefore in my discretion I assumed that to mean it doesn’t show credibility of importance and tagged them for A7. Maybe I misread the tag but that’s how I took it to mean because I’ve done it before and it was removed.Trillfendi (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Chase Carter has been accepted

Chase Carter, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Atlantic306 (talk) 20:58, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sharam Diniz (November 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
I'm not seeing any in-depth coverage here, just routine listings and passing mentions
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Teahouse logo
Hello, Trillfendi! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Theroadislong (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

WP:CIVIL

This was an amazingly uncivil edit summary, for an incredibly minor typo. Especially since the template works the same exact way with an upper case or lower case "b". Please don't do that again. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Muboshgu It had her birthday a whole year off for the majority of this article and even she pointed it out 6 months ago. It’s simply foolish. It didn’t work with a lower case b, evidently.... Just had to point that out.Trillfendi (talk) 20:37, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
You didn't change the year. All you changed was the case of the "b". And you called people "fools". That's uncivil. Assume good faith. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Muboshgu I didn’t have to change the year because the age is supposed to correct itself (today is her birthday) in the template. 2018-1999 is 19.Trillfendi (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018

Information icon Hello. Your recent edit to Washington High School (Cedar Rapids, Iowa) appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. John from Idegon (talk) 17:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Milk Makeup has been accepted

Milk Makeup, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 04:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alanna Arrington has been accepted

Alanna Arrington, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 04:50, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Roos Abels has been accepted

Roos Abels, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

— Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 11:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Miryam Lumpini has been accepted

Miryam Lumpini, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 17:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kelsey Merritt (November 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JC7V7DC5768 was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Please provide multiple independently sourced articles that mention Kelsey in more than passing (paragraph or more). And non routine- and non PRIsh coverage. Thanks.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
JC7V (talk) 04:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

JC7V Ok, duly noted. I’ll give it a few months to see what pops up. Thanks.Trillfendi (talk) 05:03, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Howdy. I've got two 'red colored' editors (who IMHO, might be socks) that continued to push that DeSantis won. I wasn't in any mood to edit-war with them. You're free to do so :) GoodDay (talk) 16:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@GoodDay: I mean, I don’t care who wins, I just care that this is done ethically. Otherwise, as far as I’m concerned people are doing original research.Trillfendi (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Do as you wish. GoodDay (talk) 16:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

FWIW, near all the related articles have DeSantis as governor-elect & running mate as lieutenant governor-elect. Right now the Florida gubernatorial election, 2018 & the United States gubernatorial elections, 2018 articles, appears to be the only ones 'not' doing so. GoodDay (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

GoodDay I was going to edit all that shit myself but I decided these trolls are a lost cause. Just because he declared himself that doesn’t mean it’s the case in the eyes of the law. But then again we’re dealing with Florida politicians....Trillfendi (talk) 01:26, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

The Florida gubernatorial race is over. Gillum has conceded. GoodDay (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@GoodDay: I wish people would take a high school social studies class and realize concession is nothing but words and has no legal bearing. 😂 An official call of the race still has to be made from a reliable source with the final vote as some counties could not meet the deadline. Not from a politician.Trillfendi (talk) 23:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
The race is over. GoodDay (talk) 23:27, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
@GoodDay: You keep updating me on it as if I don’t watch the news or have an Internet connection. Focus on the accuracy of the page.Trillfendi (talk) 01:07, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Trillfendi. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Julia Banaś has been accepted

Julia Banaś, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 05:21, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Hunter Schafer

G2 is meant for obvious editing tests and experiments, not attempts to write encyclopedia articles (however badly). If you look at the edit history you can see that the page was created by the creator in a sandbox and then moved to mainspace. The "brainstorming" bit meant they were experimenting in a sandbox. Hut 8.5 22:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hunter Schafer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Helmut Lang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


Your submission at Articles for creation: Indira Scott (November 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Chetsford was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Chetsford (talk) 00:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Ways to improve Peyton Knight

Thanks for creating Peyton Knight.

A New Page Patroller Doomsdayer520 just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

Thanks for your new article on the model Peyton Knight.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:04, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Luna Bijl

A tag has been placed on Luna Bijl requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from the article namespace to a different namespace except the Category, Template, Wikipedia, Help, or Portal namespaces.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Stefan2 (talk) 19:51, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Queen Radio

But Frank ocean too had a article about his radio show why would this be deleted?? WIKIZILE (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Cora Emmanuel has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Cora Emmanuel. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Fashion Nova (December 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Hell in a Bucket were:
This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.
This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Subject is very clearly notable, needs tweaking to be in article space.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:56, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Your edit summary on Billie Eilish

Regarding this edit summary you left on Billie Eilish, iTunes and other e-commerce sites are acceptable as sources (if not preferred) per WP:RS#Vendor and e-commerce sources. It is frequently used to prove a song was released on its own as a single. It is not considered a promotional link in that context, and I don't think any editor believes we're actually trying to promote or sell Billie Eilish's songs to readers by linking to iTunes. If the songs you removed the references for did not have other sources next to them or articles for them, I would have reverted you as iTunes links are accepted as sources. Please bear this in mind before removing similar sources in future. Thank you. Ss112 12:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Liam Hemsworth

Since you're the only person who understands sourcing versus reports of gossip, maybe you can source Liam Hemsworth. Acroterion (talk) 21:53, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Somebody got it. Acroterion (talk) 21:57, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
@Acroterion: Had I not been in the shower I would have went right over there. Trillfendi (talk) 22:02, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
Not a problem, thanks for helping out and staying clean. Lots more details are popping up now in useful sources. Acroterion (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

A page you started (Sabah Koj) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Sabah Koj.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

This article could use a photo. Please see WP:IUPC for Wikipedia's image use policy. Thank you!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Citrivescence}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Citrivescence (talk) 23:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Queen Radio

Frank ocean too had a radio show to promote his Music and there's an article about his radio show.I don't why merging the Queen Radio to the album page cause that was a radio show by beats has nothing to do with the album.WIKIZILE (talk) 10:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your valuable contributions DreamSparrow Chat 10:05, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:BLPPROD

The WP:BLPPROD policy only allows the PROD to be used on articles that have no sources on the article. It specifically allows non-reliable sources to be used in determining if BLPPROD applies or not. If BLPPROD is added to an article with no sources of any kind then it takes a reliable source to remove it. I know it is an odd way to do it but that is what the community decided to do. ~ GB fan 15:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@GB fan: I’m still proposing an A7 because nothing in that article credibly meets general notability. If another editor disagrees I will propose deletion.Trillfendi (talk) 16:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
If you add an A7 tag to the aricle, I will not remove it. Based on your comment you appear to misunderstand A7. A7 has nothing to do with notability. It has to do with significance. Significance is a lower bar than notability and it doesn't even have to be sourced. There are many articles that survive A7 speedy deletion but are deleted at AFD which does center on notability. Even a normal PROD might work on this article. ~ GB fan 16:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@GB fan: I know it doesn’t always equal = notability but sometimes it’s somewhat of a factor. Depends on the page, I guess. But something with no sources to me is A7. I tried looking for some but couldn’t find any anyway.Trillfendi (talk) 16:35, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
I don't see where you had a conflict on A7. I don't disagree with you that this might be a candidate for and A7 deletion. The only thing we have disagreed on is the applicability of WP:BLPPROD. ~ GB fan 17:42, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
@GB fan: It’s not a conflict per se. I just believe the article has several problems going with it that PROD may be a better solution than A7 or BLPPROD.Trillfendi (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
OK I misunderstood, I thought that was what you were saying on your WP:AFD nomination. ~ GB fan 17:54, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Queen Radio

Why did you delete the Queen Radio Page But frank ocean had the Blonded radio page,the radio show was to promote his Music too but it is still here. WIKIZILE (talk) 16:05, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

@WIKIZILE: All I did was reply with a suggestion of redirection or merging. I wasn’t the one who proposed deletion. Now stop fucking pestering me about this.Trillfendi (talk) 16:58, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Did you have to curse,You just said you suggested a redirection or merging,why merging ,cause Frank ocean radio too was to promote his album Blonde,he did some publicist stunts on his radio.So I think Queen Radio to should have its page. WIKIZILE (talk)

@WIKIZILE: Because there’s clearly evidence that his radio show had its own notability. Get over it. Trillfendi (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Nicki radio had many reliable sources on the internet and verifiable facts.The article had a "significant coverage" but it was merged to Queen (Article about a album not radio).Whyyyy?? WIKIZILE (talk) 19:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Laragh McCann (January 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Buidhe was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
With the exception of sources 3 and 5, these fail WP:ROUTINE and WP:SIGCOV. Source five was written by the subject. No evidence of notability.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
buidhe (formerly Catrìona) 01:59, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Julia Banaś

Hello, Trillfendi,

Thanks for creating Julia Banaś! I edit here too, under the username Doomsdayer520 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Thanks for your new article on Julia Banaś.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:24, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

A page you started (Harleth Kuusik) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Harleth Kuusik.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thanks for your new article on Harleth Kuusik.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:57, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nominations

Please don't nominate articles that you have absolutely no contributions as it is NOT considered a good faith move. Per WP:GANI, editors who have not made significant edits (and you haven't) are supposed to consult with major contributors on the talk page prior to nominating; please do so. —IB [ Poke ] 13:46, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

@IndianBio: I will nominate whatever article I choose to. You don’t decide that and you don’t tell me what to do. Like I said, my contributions are insignificant but readily available to be seen. Now when I RENOMINATE the articles in the future if you touch that I’m just gonna do it again. Trillfendi (talk) 19:32, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
Try it and WP:ANI is where you will find yourself. —IB [ Poke ] 20:24, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
@IndianBio: Tough titties. Trillfendi (talk) 20:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Trillfendi. —IB [ Poke ] 20:44, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Sister Solana listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sister Solana. Since you had some involvement with the Sister Solana redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. PamD 23:15, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Birth certificates

Hi Trillfendi, about Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes, and their child's birth certificate... We can discuss whether Tom Cruise's current legal name is Thomas Cruise or Thomas Cruise Mapother IV and the proper formatting of that article's lead on the article's talk page. But I wanted you to know I deleted the links and reference to Suri Cruise's birth certificate from both articles and I wanted you to know why (and also why I'm so alarmed by your inclusion of these links). Aside from (1) just because someone posts a birth certificate online doesn't mean it's genuine or undoctored and (2) even if genuine, it's a primary source and cannot be used on WP, my big objection is (3) it's a major privacy violation.

I don't know if you have kids or live in the United States or are otherwise familiar with US birth certificates and the process of a new one being written when a child is born. Certificates vary from state to state but here is the CDC's standard recommended form: [1]. You can see it has a ton of personal identifying information, including very private health information about the mother (such as prior live births and "other pregnancy outcomes", STDs and other infections and medical conditions) and child (birth defects, etc.). Imagine if that kind of information was circulated on the internet about any of us or our kids; it would be horrifying. Even something as seemingly innocuous as sex at birth can become a very private matter for people later in their lives. In addition to this medical information, there is personal identifying information that would allow for identity theft. That's why TMZ's website (and Buzzfeed, and pretty much everyone else) has only a blurry picture of the birth certificates, and the link to the original document is now dead.

I know that you didn't upload a birth certificate, but even just linking directly to one, or to a website that purports to republish it, in my mind, crosses a line (ethically and morally if not legally). I hope you'll understand why I felt it was important to revert you and delete the link to the birth certificate (albeit now a dead link). I hope if you've linked to any birth certificates elsewhere on WP, you'll fix that, and if you happen to see someone else linking to a birth certificate, you'll fix that and inform them of the problems. (Note this doesn't apply to long-dead people's birth certificates; I believe the HIPAA rule is death + 50 years. Also, a properly-redacted birth certificate is OK.) In case you don't believe me or want to read further, please see: [2] [3] [4] Thanks for reading this long post. Levivich? ! 06:39, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

7 rings

Just a heads up that a user re-added the Kali Uchis comparison bit which you had removed, [5].--NØ 16:34, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: Thank you, I removed it and put a note there to tell them not to. Trillfendi (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Andy King (writer)

Hello Trillfendi. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Andy King (writer), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: how exactly is "co-created award winning [television] series" not a claim of significance? Thank you. SoWhy 08:25, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Emma Watson

While you are right and only one infobox example is needed here, could I point out that the label is "known for", not "best known for". Britmax (talk) 19:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Britmax: It’s implied. Trillfendi (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, I do not infer it. Britmax (talk) 21:14, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
@Britmax: If Emma Watson is “known” for Beauty and the Beast then Rami Malek is “known” for Twilight.... I’ll let you come to your conclusions on that. Trillfendi (talk) 21:23, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Cora Emmanuel (January 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by K.e.coffman was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Does not meet WP:NMODEL; significant WP:RS coverage not found.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
K.e.coffman (talk) 01:38, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gisele Fox (February 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF were:
This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
Need more sources as she doesn't seem to have enough WP:GNG articles or meet WP:ENT (lead roles in lead productions)
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:46, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: RJ King has been accepted

RJ King, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

~Kvng (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Sarah Stage for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sarah Stage 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/Sarah Stage 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. power~enwiki (π, ν) 02:58, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Shanelle Nyasiase has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Shanelle Nyasiase. Thanks! Legacypac (talk) 02:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@Legacypac: I already created the Shanelle Nyasiase page therefore I requested deletion of the draft. Trillfendi (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok, you should redirect the page then after the ANi thread is closed. You can post at ANi that you are happy to drop the issue. Legacypac (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

WP:OWN on Drake (musician)

Hi. I have Drake (musician) on my watchlist, and I've noticed a trend. Seems like everytime I see your name pop up, it's followed by a hostile, disparaging, or just downright rude edit summary. Examples:[6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]. It's fine to be passionate about an article you've worked hard on, but let me remind you that you don't own it, and others are allowed to make changes to the page. After all, this is an encyclopedia anyone can edit. Please remember the policies of WP:OWN and WP:CIVIL. Also remember that edit summaries are not sufficient substitutions for discussions; the talk page should be your primary method of communication with your fellow editors. If you have a problem with an individual editor, instead of reverting their edit and cursing at them in the edit summary, next time if you could, please start up a talk page discussion. Sro23 (talk) 21:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sro23: It’s not about my personal opinions about the artist, I’m unbiased in that regard. I’m no longer nice about it when I continue to see amateur editors with a few contributions come here doing disruptive, pointless things that mess up the article such as removing factual information and reliable sources, or trying to turn this article into a TMZ article infested with gossip because they don’t know what they’re doing, but want to get mad at me when I replace it. I’m not sitting by about it anymore. They claim they know the policy of taking it to the talk page yet they never do as archives show. So the only way to communicate those reasonings is in the edit summaries, it seems. It’s not ownership, it’s righteous indignation. Trillfendi (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Noah Baumbach deletion

I responded to your vote in regards to it having not shot a frame yet on the deletion discussion. That’s not true. Rusted AutoParts 17:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

This made me laugh out loud.

Policy. Eleven hours later. PaulCHebert (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

@PaulCHebert: Believe me... it’s not dramatic irony. I knew full well. I don’t trust TMZ when it comes to GOSSIP bullshit without facts. The Kardashian family can make all the Instagram comments and tweets they want but where is the official statement? When it comes to verifiable admissable evidence, well history is in their favor. They didn’t just say “hey, we saw the check”, they showed the alleged check and the alleged text messages. That’s all I ask. Trillfendi (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Discussion at User_talk:MagicatthemovieS#"Wiki_rules"_vs_"no_consensus"
 You are invited to join the discussion at User_talk:MagicatthemovieS#"Wiki_rules"_vs_"no_consensus". ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:20, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Trillfendi/Archive_2/Archives/_1&oldid=1140007517"