User talk:Gene93k

Jump to navigation Jump to search







Listing AfDs on WikiProject Canada Deletion talks

Hello Gene93k - I see you've applied AfD tags to a number of articles recently, and that you've been dutifully adding the new AfD discussions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada. Unfortunately, the new AfDs have appeared in the wrong section of the list - they've appeared under "Canada proposed deletions", but new AfDs are to be listed just above that heading. I've moved the AfD listings to the correct section.

You're not alone with this - at least one other user has been doing the same thing, and they informed me that the new AfDs are being added by a tool she's using for delsorting. Is this the same situation with you? If so, what tool are you using?

Happy new year! PKT(alk) 14:15, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

  • @PKT: Thanks for notice. Many editors use automated scripts for deletion sorting. Somebody moved a comment used by the sorting scripts to the proposed deletion section. I just moved it back. Thanks again. • Gene93k (talk) 14:42, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Talk:XXXX (TV channel) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Talk:XXXX (TV channel) 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/Talk:XXXX (TV channel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones The Welsh Buzzard ‑ ‑ 09:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

20:49:30, 16 February 2018 review of submission by Dothivalla


Dothivalla (talk) 20:49, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

20:51:17, 16 February 2018 review of submission by Dothivalla


I think I addressed the issues you had with the original submission by cleaning up the citations, adding several non-endorsement citations, and making the entry more 'factual' Dothivalla (talk) 20:51, 16 February 2018 (UTC)dothivalla

February 2018

Just thought I'd let you know that the draft for "Ebony Eyez" was created by a sock of a permanently blocked user who loves creating these terrible articles on no-name female rappers. sixtynine • whaddya want? • 03:33, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Query about awards

Thank you for the pointer on the Grabby awards. I'm looking at a number of bio stubs, and I wonder if there's similar consensus on any of them:

If you could let me know, that would be great. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@K.e.coffman: IIRC, the last big debate about porn awards was 2014, and I did not directly participate. However from what I can see from AfD history:
  • GayVN Awards - gay equivalent of AVN Awards
  • Gay Erotic Video Awards - counts for nothing at AfD
  • Hot d'Or - has not been challenged since PORNBIO was tightened but at least one niche award winner has been deleted
  • Erotixxx Award - successor of Venus Award - Venus Award winners have been deleted at recent AfDs
That said, recent consensus has been that winning the award without good sources does not establish notability (e.g. Janet Jacme). I consider The Big Bad Wolfowitz to be the authority on this, though he takes a harder line on notability than I do. • Gene93k (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Unsourced contents - Miss Progress International page

Firstly please accept my apologies if I am not using your talk page correctly. I am just a pageant fan and I am not experienced using wikipedia. Also, I am not English mother tongue and I am not sure I understand all the info provided in the tutorial texts about how to use Wikipedia. I have just finished editing the Miss Progress International page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Miss_Progress_International I submitted about one month ago. I have done my best to add reliable sources (your message was "Comment: The main substantial content about the pageant is unsourced. The references cited are unreliable blogs and press releases, and one is not about the pageant at all. • Gene93k (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2018 (UTC)". I have removed the source to the article not related to that event and added 2 sources more for each edition, all chosen from different websites/press agencies/newfeeders. Thank you for you attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeitalia (talkcontribs) 19:28, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

02:16:10, 12 March 2018 review of submission by Dsflyerds


I am requesting a re-review because I don't agree with the reason for the declining of my article. I understand that you may feel that the reviews and articles I cited are from "unreliable" blogs and community sites but Run 8 is a small software in it's infancy and those communities and blogs are that keeps the news flowing though the community all sources cited get information directly from the Run 8 Developers in the form of news releases. Compared to other train simulators Run 8 shares a small part of the market share. With that being said there are no articles about Run 8 from major news institutions nor are there reviews from large companies that review games like IGN. I did some research on other train simulators on Wikipedia namely [[Train Simulator (Dovetail Games)] which has all but 2 links cited that are from their own websites. Yet my article is being rejected for the same exact issues. I respectfully request that you appeal the denial of my article as this article is important for the growth of the Run 8 Train simulator. If you are unable to appeal the denial please assist me in how to make the article suitable for the standards for a Wiki article.

Dsflyerds (talk) 02:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

  • @Dsflyerds: Notability in Wikipedia is generally shown by citations to mainstream media that show non-trivial coverage of the subject (see the general notability guideline). Please also see the Wikipedia guideline for reliable sources. In the case of video games, those media sources are sites like IGN. If I accept the submission in its current state, it is likely to be marked for deletion. The only thing that will fix the draft is to find better sources, and it is up to you to provide them. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • As for Train Simulator (Dovetail Games), "what about article X?" is an argument to avoid in Wikipedia. That article is tagged for problems that need to be fixed. However, that game gets some coverage from IGN. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Finally, if you think the decline was wrong, please feel free to resubmit the draft for review so that another reviewer can evaluate the draft. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 12 March 2018 (UTC)


Submission declined draft article on Michael A. Russ, photographer on 12 March 2018

Hi Gene93k, thank you for your quick review of the draft article on Michael A. Russ, photographer, March 12. In your review you declined the inclusion in the English Wikipedia stating "Draft cites non-trivial coverage by one independent reliable source (Seoul Times). Basic notability requires multiple independent reliable sources". • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 12 March 2018. I was asked to improve the submission's referencing so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia“. I have consequently set out to do that over the last 2 weeks and indeed I found some more independent and reliable sources which I included. I also complemented and corrected bibliographic information in previously used sources and references so that they could be verifiable. With the changes made, I am hoping that the notability of the photographer Michael A. Russ is adequately shown. I think I have unburried all sources available to support the quest for inclusion of this article on Michael A. Russ in the English language Wikipedia (there is an article in the German Wikipedia, created several years before). I am hoping this qualifies for a succesful new submittal.

In regard to the removed „Swordfishtrombones“ cover image – as not a fair image usage, I like to point out that Russ has the copyright to this image and agrees to the usage in the article. As it is already published in the English Wikipedia here, I am not sure why I cannot link to that image in the article. This image clearly best signifies the unique photographic style of the artist and represents also his most famous and notable photographic contribution to popular culture. Thank you for looking at the article again.Duschischka (talk) 17:14, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Middle School Article

I thought that a shooting threat was notable??? And did my draft seem biased to you? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Spring_Mills_Middle_School TheRealWeatherMan (talk) 00:54, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

13:15:17, 3 April 2018 review of submission by Jpacura


Jpacura (talk) 13:15, 3 April 2018 (UTC)


Hello,

I am writing to you in reference to the article I have prepared here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:House_Flipper Is there any option please to accept it / review it a bit faster because we release our game in less than 2 weeks and it is being required to prepare a youtube page for it.

Thank you in advance and have a good day.

Best regards, Jakub Pacura Junior Marketing Specialist

Draft:Stellenberg, Bellville

Good day Gene93k

Reliable sources were attached and the google maps reference has been removed.

Thank you

User:Barry Ne —Preceding undated comment added 04:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Indian articles at AfC

Hi, can you please be careful with India-related articles at AfC. You accepted Dinesh Kaushik (politician) but, as is common, it is nigh-on useless because of source fabrication and puffery. Obviously, the guy passes our notability requirements because he is an MLA but we really shouldn't be accepting the rubbish that was in the text. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:22, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

14:36:24, 8 April 2018 review of submission by Amadonshannon


Bio section edited. Referenced and not copied - stupid mistake.

I resubmitted but wanted to follow up here as well. I think I covered my bases - found verbiage that is more salesy that I just didn't notice.


Amadonshannon (talk) 14:36, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Interested in becoming a new page patroller?

User:Amorymeltzer/sandbox/npp/note I know you were recently asked, but I figured it was worth checking again. ~ Amory (utc) 15:25, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

03:51:44, 12 April 2018 review of submission by Wolverinestudent12


I am not asking for a re-review like it says here, what does the newspaper branch event thing mean and what do I need to do in simpler terms? Thank you for taking time to review my page.

Wolverinestudent12 (talk) 03:51, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@Wolverinestudent12: If I may speak for Gene, his comment mentioned that the only reliable source listed in the article (i.e. a source not tied directly to the event's organizers) is a local newspaper article. Since the only independent coverage that appears to be available is local coverage, not the significant coverage that Wikipedia requires to consider a topic worthy of inclusion in this encyclopedia (see WP:N and WP:42), this event, which is a branch of a wider national-level event which is already covered elsewhere (Delco Hi-Q) does not merit its own separate article. (Gene, correct me if I have not interpreted your comment correctly!) WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Patrick Griffin (political consultant), Submission declined on 17 April 2018 by Gene93k, tone

Thanks Gene93k for your review, it was very helpful to me as I worked on bringing my draft closer to Wikipedia standards. Once pointed out, it became clear that the tone left much to be improved upon. Much appreciated! I just resubmitted the article for re-review. MPCStrategic (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

14:38:42, 18 April 2018 review of submission by VickyStarship


VickyStarship (talk) 14:38, 18 April 2018 (UTC)


Hello! Just wondering which bits make it sound like an advertisement? Is it this part? "The studio is staffed by talent from renowned studios such as the now defunct Studio Liverpool, Evolution Studios and Bizarre Creations, including former director of Studio Liverpool Clemens Wangerin, alongside founding members from Evolution Studios. The team have collectively devised or delivered more than 100 apps and games including PlayStation launch titles and AAA franchises such as MotorStorm,[3] WipEout, Project Gotham Racing, Blur, James Bond 007: Blood Stone, Formula 1 and World Rally Championship.[4]"

...because I think this part is covered: should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed VickyStarship (talk) 14:38, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

  • @VickyStarship: That is the most offending of the content. That and the "now available on" paragraph come of a mainly promotional. Wikipedia does not use peacock terms like "renowned". Also one of the "sources" is Wikipedia, not acceptable. Please also note that notability is not inherited from the names dropped. Finally, you have acknowledged a conflict of interest. Your idea of objective truth may not match Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello! Thanks. That was useful. I've cleaned up the piece. Do I need to resumbit, or can you see the edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyStarship (talkcontribs) 15:09, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

PS. Am I going crazy, I can't see where I used Wiki as a reference? VickyStarship (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

  • @VickyStarship: The reference to Wikipedia was titled "PlayStation 3 launch".[1] It has been removed from the current draft. You are welcome to resubmit the draft and another reviewer will probably get to it before I do. • Gene93k (talk) 17:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! Much appreciated VickyStarship (talk) 10:50, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion at User talk:WilliamJE#Deletion sorting reversions

 You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:WilliamJE#Deletion sorting reversions. Hi Gene93k: Requesting your input regarding deletion sorting at the discussion linked above. Thanks for your consideration. North America1000 02:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Stellenberg, Bellville

Good day Gene93k

Your comment of 14 March 2018 refers

I have changed it to show more notability and to have better independent citations

Thank you

User:Barry Ne —Preceding undated comment added 14:54, 26 April 2018‎ (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for accepting my article on Krugersdorp tunnel bank robbery Barry Ne (talk) 18:19, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Crystal Lake (DJ) Notability

Hi Gene, I've added a few reference links to support the fact this act's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Crystal_Lake_(DJ) music was featured in National TV in USA (The Allen show, and Dancing With The Stars), Also was written about in DJ Mag. Are these not good enough sources for Notability? DJ Mag: https://djmag.com/music/hard/live-your-life-crystal-lake-hard-mix Dancing With The Stars (Check description): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJmqIfBLN_c The Allen Show: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jg89g0ecG38 Full cover article (in Hebrew): https://megatickets.co.il/magazine/crystal-lake/

Crystal Lake is the leading Hardstyle act in Israel, I think it's notable in my opinion. Please let me have your thoughts.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.111.160.23 (talk) 07:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Articles for creation: K2 Geospatial (May 9)

Hi Gene93k,

The article wasn't changed since the previous submission, because I already wrote this article in French and it was approved.[2] There is no differences between the French and English version. Can you tell me more about why the same article can be approved in one language but not in another one? It's been near to 4 months that I'm trying to put this article online and I'm still wondering what can I do more to make this possible. I would really appreciate your help on this one. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeaBlanchet (talkcontribs) 17:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

  • @LeaBlanchet: en.Wikipedia and fr.Wikipedia have different reviewers with different guidelines. The first reviewer at English Wikipedia rejected the draft as too promotional (and it is). Wikipedia requires a neutral point of view and it does not allow advertising or promotion. The draft was resubmitted without any changes. It is still unacceptable. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Tomaree High School

== Tomaree high school == Copyright Hey gen93k I work at tomaree high school and moved information from our website to our Wikipedia page. I have full authority to do so whatever I please, I do not see the copyright infringement being relevant. COuld you please advise how I go about this.

Cheers Joelwashere - Technical support officer - Tomaree high — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelwashere (talkcontribs) 01:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

  • @Joelwashere: As general advice, don't do this because it is against multiple Wikipedia guidelines and policies. Your editing the article about your own school is a conflict of interest. Even if you can prove you have the authority to use the text, the text is promotional. Wikipedia does not allow advertising and the text violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. Finally, you are trying to base the Wikipedia article on what the school says about itself. Wikipedia articles are based on what independent reliable published sources say, warts and all. If you insist on using the text, you can contact the Wikipedia OTRS team with proof of permission. • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

U.S. Deletion sorting

Page declined: RidingEasy Records

Hi Gene,

Writing to get some clarity on what I can do to get this page approved: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:RidingEasy_Records

The comment was that the citations do not show additional significant coverage from independent reliable sources, and the original rejection was because it requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable secondary sources.

I don't totally understand, as I've used very well known sources such as L.A. Weekly, The Guardian, and The Onion's AV Club, as well as smaller niche music sites like DangerousMinds and Slug.

I modeled the entry after other independent record label entries I read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_record_labels

This entry has more coverage, from higher quality sources than other approved entries I've seen. Did the standards for record labels change and now it's a higher bar than it used to be? I'm at a loss here.

Thank you,

Jgmartin4nyc (talk) 02:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)Jgmartin4nyc

JKB Research SA deleted

Hi Gene93K

I recently submitted a page about the business called JKB Research SA. You recommended it for speedy Deletion and I can see that it has been removed.

I am writing for some clarity on why the page was not approved please.

This is the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:JKB_Research_SA&action=edit&redlink=1

I submitted this for a client and followed what other similar businesses have included on their pages

You can see plenty of examples here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cannabis_companies

JKB Research SA is the largest cannabis company in Switzerland and as a significant business they require a wikipedia page. As you can see from the citations I included they have been covered by many highly trusted media sources as well as smaller industry sites.

The page I created for them is a lot more objective and specific than previous pages published in the same industry.

This is certainly not some kind of advertising. They are a serious business, leading a fast growing industry. We just want to add a factual page about them.

Please could you let me know how I can change the article so that it is more factual and not classed as advertising?

If you could use examples from the list of other published businesses in the industry that would be helpful.

Also - the article has been completely deleted. How can i recover it to use as a starting point for a new article once I have your recommendations?

Kind Regards

Joel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepfootprints (talkcontribs) 03:37, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

NPOL

Thanks for straightening me out on my misunderstanding. I think it's an example of where I thought I had figured out a general policy only to have my understandings dashed by the fact that policies are sometimes created piecemeal by consensus and happenstance. From my perspective, the idea that every one of the 500+ representatives to the New Hampshire House is inherently notable seems ludicrous, especially if it includes all those thousands of people who have served in that capacity in the past. But I'll just have to live with it. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 04:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Amboy Bank Rejection

Hi,

I see your point that Amboy Bank is not widely known outside of NJ, yet its 130+ year history makes it relevant to its area. There are other NJ banks/credit unions on Wikipedia that are even smaller and have less substantial references, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_Constitution_Bancorp, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_Bell_Bank, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyar_Bank and others. Perhaps the same ruling should apply to them, or Amboy Bank should be allowed to be published. Thanks for your work and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C2013 (talkcontribs) 17:31, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:44:42, 11 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Twain Alexander



Twain Alexander (talk) 17:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC) please help me get my article approved, define notable? how notable the person has to be? and what states a reference is independent. ive seen pages that had less then the page i tried to create and those pages went through.

DocPrime Review

Request on 19:01:42, 14 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Rajeevranjanr


Hi I have submitted Draft:Docprime page. Writing to get some clarity on what I can do to get this page approved. Your review shows that it lacks significant coverage.The Publishers i have mentioned is India's top business publisher. This entry has more coverage, from higher quality sources than other approved entries I've seen. The entry is highly credible and had coverage on most of the media channels. I will be certainly delighted if you help me to understand it. Rajeevranjanr (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Halloween cheer!

Request on 13:44:22, 23 October 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Sebvegt


Hi Gene93k,

Thank you for reviewing the article on Prorize, just wanted to quickly follow up on my submission. Happy to edit it but I do believe it merits consideration. The Franz Edelman award for operations research, which Prorize won, is not only independent and credible, it is considered the foremost prize of its kind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Edelman_Award_for_Achievement_in_Operations_Research_and_the_Management_Sciences. The INFORMS articles that the Prorize page references are not just independent, they are run by some of the foremost scientist in the field of operations. Moreover, the fact that a similar firm would be accepted despite not having the credibility that Prorize does is further prove that it merits consideration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Analytics). Please let me know if I can resubmit (will get rid of any language that would be deemed promotional) with the current references.

Best regards, Sebastian

Sebvegt (talk) 13:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion: AfD tagging of Tarini Choudhury Govt. Girls H.S. & M.P. School

This article 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. Vrisle (talk) 06:24, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 18:25:47, 8 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Hope samantha

Need more feedback on how to get my article approved. Hi Gene93k. As you can see, I'm really struggling to get this article approved. I've scoured every inch of the web to find independent sources, but there's just not a whole lot of stuff out there. It's a 100+ year old organization, and it's parent company has an article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNO_Financial_Group), so you'd think this would be easy. If you could provide any direction on how the heck I can get this thing approved, I would really appreciate it!!

Hope samantha

Hope samantha (talk) 18:25, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 21:09:29, 12 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Miroslav.uzice87



Miroslav.uzice87 (talk) 21:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:22:49, 13 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Passion d


Hi there,

I have submitted an article but it was not accepted the first time. Therefore, I have had it revised and resubmitted. However, it is taking quite a bit of time to get back a response/notification as to whether it has been accepted or not.

Can you please let me know what the reason might be or how long it normally takes to get back an answer.

I would appreciate your reply.

Many thanks.

Passion d (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Passion d: I see that another editor has reviewed the draft. The draft needs to cite more non-trivial coverage from independent reliable sources. Articles about investment/funding/mergers/acquisitions are considered routine coverage. Sources based on what a the people involved say (e.g. privateequityqire.co.uk) are not considered independent. A useful summary of coverage standards can be found at WP:CORPDEPTH. • Gene93k (talk) 20:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I have now made the necessary changes in respecting of including reliable and independent sources. Can you please have it reviewed again.

Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passion d (talkcontribs) 16:53, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

  •  Not done @Passion d: You have already created Good Hemp in article space. The draft would be a duplicate. The main space article is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Good Hemp. You are welcome to improve Good Hemp and join the AfD discussion whether the article should be kept. • Gene93k (talk) 19:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I looked at the references added since the last decline. They appear to routine in nature and one is largely based on what they say about themselves. The WP:CORP notability guideline does not consider this significant independent coverage. Please consult the guideline about the required depth of coverage. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Can you let me know which one is largely based on what they are saying about themselves? I have updated the article Good Hemp now. Can you please tell me how to join the AfD discussion on whether the article should be kept.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Passion d (talkcontribs) 09:24, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Passion d: The WP:CORP guideline says to be cautious about using trade press. Also coverage about funding etc. is considered routine. Three sources stand out:
    • Foodbev Media: Reads like an obvious press release
    • Food Manufacture: Routine, promotional and heavily sourced to entities involved
    • The Telegraph interview: Interviews are primary sources. What company personnel say about the company does not count as independent.
Finally I see that you have already joined the AfD discussion. • Gene93k (talk) 14:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 08:20:04, 19 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Rakeshsingh4146


Hi, Thanks for the review, I understood your point of view and reason for article not being accepted. On the positive note as you have mentioned that "Siliconindia is the only independent source with any in-depth coverage" so based on this link only if I reframe the content as below will that be accepted?

Singsys is Singapore based mobile, web and e-commerce app development agency. The Founder and CEO, Sri Narayan Shukla believes balanced work culture of work and play helps them go an extra mile to meet clients satisfaction level which earned them the title of Startup of the Year for Website design in 2014 by Silicon India Magazine. The company embarked its journey with a team of 3 individuals who have now grown into a team of 100+ professionals. Their team is full of tech enthusiasts who developed mobile and web applications for companies of all size. Samsung and KPMG Financial Services are among Fortune 500 companies for which Singsys has built business solutions.

Reference link - https://www.siliconindia.com/magazine-articles-in/Singsys_Enabling_Customers_to_Annex_a_Meaningful_Online_Presen...-RDFC139773855.html


Rakeshsingh4146 (talk) 08:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Rakeshsingh4146: The relevant notability guideline requires significant coverage from multiple independent reliable published sources. They must be independent of the subject and independent of each other. The proposed would be rejected as promotional and basing an article on one source is bad practice. Compile the facts from multiple reliable and state them in your own words in a neutral point of view. The draft needs to cite additional coverage by reputable independent publications before it can be published. Please consult the WP:CORP guideline for what constitutes significant coverage by reliable sources. • Gene93k (talk) 19:39, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Dear Gene93k, Thanks for the information. I would like to know if I get in-depth coverage about Singsys on below websites will that boost chances of getting my article published on Singsys. I mean to say is there any specific types of websites in particular that need to be approached or it is simply any relaible website? List of websites - https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/ - https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore - https://www.channelnewsasia.com/

I have mentioned these news websites upon finding that wikipedia page are live for articles that have cited news websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakeshsingh4146 (talkcontribs) 08:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Rakeshsingh4146: In general, reliable sources mean reputable media sources (news, books, etc.) that are intellectually independent of the subject. The sites you listed above are reliable, but the coverage also needs to be non-routine and non-trivial. The articles at the sites need to be evaluated individually. Interviews, press releases and other material based on what the company says about itself are not independent. Coverage about funding, mergers and acquisitions is considered routine. Directory entries like the Economic Times page don't count as significant coverage. The full details about what is expected is in the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline. • Gene93k (talk) 13:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Dear Gene93k, Thanks for response, I would like you to explain in detail about - what you mean by non-routine coverage? is it we cannot have back to back post on these sites or something else? - what you mean by article at sites need to individually evaluated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakeshsingh4146 (talkcontribs) 04:21, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Rakeshsingh4146: The definition of what constitutes significant coverage is spelled out in the WP:CORPDEPTH section of Notability (organizations and companies) guideline. It also lists examples of trivial (including routine) coverage:
  • of a product or a product line launch, sale, change, or discontinuance,
  • of the participation in industry events, such as trade fairs or panel discussions,
  • of the shareholders' meetings or other corporate events,
  • of the hiring, promotion, or departure of personnel,
  • of the expansions, acquisitions, mergers, sale, or closure of the business,
  • of a capital transaction, such as raised capital
This is not an exhaustive list. See the guideline for the full text.
  • As for individual articles, the guideline says, "the reputation of the source does help to determine whether the source is reliable and independent." For example, a profile in Forbes is neither independent nor significant coverage. However, a Forbes article detailing a company's history or operations may be significant and independent coverage as long it's not based primarily on what the company or its personnel say. Interviews don't count. The WP:ORGCRIT section of the notability guideline shows a four-part test that should be applied. • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Scale of justice 2.svg

Hello, Gene93k. 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)

Request on 22 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by akashish111

Hello Gene93k, I have submitted an article "Clavax", as much i did my research, subject is notable, popular among in technology. Even then it was not accepted. I revised it and resubmitted same with relevant references. Please have a look again guide me what change can be done. akashish111 (talk) 12:42, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

  • @Akashish111: I see that another reviewer has already declined the submission. Again, please see the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline for what constitutes significant coverage by reliable sources independent of the subject. The references you added don't qualify. One is a press release, not independent. One is a list of companies, again not significant coverage. One is an interview with the CEO. Sources base on what company personnel say are not independent coverage. I also rejected the draft as advertising. The draft has not been substantially improved since then. • Gene93k (talk) 14:55, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Request on 17:01:42, 30 November 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Halle hebbel


Hello Gene,

Can you give me some suggestions on how to more specifically edit my page of Trinity Fellowship Church to get it approved. I tried to base a lot of the formatting and information off of other similar pages that have been published, such as Gateway Church (Texas), and New Life Church (Colorado Springs, Colorado). Can you tell me what is different from my page and these pages so that I can work on making my page approval worthy?

Thank you! -Halle Hebbel

Halle hebbel (talk) 17:01, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

David Meyer football followup

Hello,

I was wondering if you could provide some clarification for Draft:David_Meyer_(football_player) - what is preventing the article publication? By playing with the Packers in one season, that passes the Gridiron notability factor, correct? And there were articles in WaPo and AP. Is there something that needs cut, or is it an issue with the References? I look forward to your response. Bravo1138 (talk) 02:43, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Bravo1138: The standard of WP:NGRIDIRON is not just being on the team but playing at least one regular or post-season game at the top level. His NFL stats are zero games.[3] The Washington Post coverage is routine. The AP coverage is interesting but still routine. But all together, coverage does not add up to passing WP:GNG or WP:NCOLLATH, which demands coverage for the individual beyond being a member of a notable team. • Gene93k (talk) 11:08, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Talley Vineyards submission

Hi Gene,

Can you point me in the right direction for improving the Talley Vineyards submission. I understand the requirement for non-trivial coverage with a national audience, but I think there are a few

I think the vineyard is notable for the following reasons:

  1. The history of Talley Farms (1948) and Talley Vineyards (1986)
    • Referenced from the SFGate coverage and several other (admittedly non-national) write-ups.
  2. Hosting the first "first cybertasting"
  3. The Judgment of Paris 30th Anniversary placing
    • Referenced from The Washington Post
    • The original Judgment of Paris was one of the biggest events in the wine world and the 30th Anniversary, known as "The Tasting that Changed the Wine World", shocked the industry with American wines prevailing once again.
    • Interestingly, the French language Wikipedia article Jugement de Paris does actually specifically name the the 2002 Talley Vineyards Rosemary’s Vineyard Chardonnay as the best California Chardonnay (here, scroll down to "Résultats chardonnays californiens"). I suppose I could link to this or update the English Wikipedia page?
    • I can add dozens more references to this result, but they are all wine related (wine.com, etc.), not sure if that helps?
    • There is a paywalled article in the San Luis Obispo Tribune I could add as well (here is a search result for it)
  4. The book
    • Their book has an ISBN and I could add other citations as well.

Let me know what you think,
Bryandamon (talk) 22:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Bryandamon: From the sources given:
    • SFGate: Okay, as I wrote in my review comment.
    • New York Time: Incidental mention. The article needs to focus on Talley Vineyards in depth.
    • Washington Post (Associated Press): Another incidental mention.
    • If the book you are referring to is Our California Table, it is a primary source, written by a principal of the company. The "custom" publisher looks suspiciously like self-published.
    • As for Judgement of Paris, fr.Wikipedia and en.Wikipedia have independent notability and content guidelines. If you want to edit the English-language article, please remember to cite reliable sources and take note of relevance and due weight of content.
    • If the 1948 and 1986 works are independently published, please produce them.
    • Free sources are preferred of paywalled sources when available.
  • Finally, again please see the WP:CORP guideline for what is considered significant independent coverage and please not that local business press does not contribute to notability for companies. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback.
For the Judgement of Paris, on the English Wikipedia, since it is just supporting the claim of the wine winning California's best Chardonnay, would the following citations work:
Then if that was approved, a link to the English Wikipedia page on Judgement of Paris would suffice for notability and defense?
Also, for the 1948 and 1986 claims, the SFGate article supports this as well, I could add the citation appropriately:
  • The winery was founded by the Talley family. Oliver Talley began growing vegetables in the Arroyo Grande Valley in 1948.
  • Talley produced its first wine in 1986.
Bryandamon (talk) 01:28, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Bryandamon: As good as it is, SFGate is just one source. Notability per WP:CORP and WP:GNG requires significant coverage from multiple independent reliable sources, intellectually independent of the subject and from each other. The facts are not in dispute, but do multiple published sources of significant audience acknowledge them in a non-trivial manner? That is the notability question. Notability is not established by association with important subjects. Also, awards don't count for much with WP:CORP without significant acknowledgement from independent reliable sources. This draft needs to show additional reliable source coverage to get a stand-alone Wikipedia article. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Gene, How about the following books (there are several more that are similar):
  • Nalley, Richard; Editors of FOOD & WINE (Oct 7, 2016). FOOD & WINE 2017 Wine Guide: America's 500 Best Wineries. Time Inc. Books. ISBN 9780848753757. {{cite book}}: |last2= has generic name (help)
  • Haeger, John Winthrop (Nov 17, 2008). Pacific Pinot Noir: A Comprehensive Winery Guide for Consumers and Connoisseurs. University of California Press. pp. 371–372. ISBN 9780520942110.
  • @Bryandamon: The Haeger book looks like a good source. I can't see Nally book's contents online. You are welcome to apply the sources and resubmit the draft. Another editor will probably review the it before I do. • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi Gene, sounds good, thanks for the help. I'll update the article and resubmit.  FYI, I think this link should show the Nalley section on Talley (unfortunately no page numbers).
Hi Gene, if you wouldn't mind taking another look, I found an article specifically on Talley Vineyard in the LA Times.
Brown, Corie (May 3, 2006). "The Accidental Vintner". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved December 10, 2018.

Sara Jay Rejection

SARA JAY REJECTION

Hi Gene. Happy holidays. I am perplexed by your rejection of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sara_Jay. You write 'and it has been protected against recreation. While the subject may pass the letter of WP:PORNBIO, the consensus is that, without significant coverage from quality sources'. The previous chatter about Sara Jay's notability was years ago, before she was inducted into the adult Hall of Fame. The editor who spearheaded that rejection has since been banned from Wikipedia. Chrissymad, the editor who rejected the first draft is also gone. 'Significant coverage' from 'quality sources' gives no guidance. Are you saying the links are inaccurate? The links are accepted industry standard links like AVN or XBIZ. Can you clarify? It seems to me that if the industry itself has bestowed the highest honor on a person for Hall of Fame how can you possibly say that she's not notable? Ilovepitts (talk) 12:05, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Ilovepitts:
    • WP:RS is a very clear guideline. The references are of low quality. The porn trade articles are refactored press releases which do not meet the standard of independent reliable sources.
    • Hall of Fame is not an automatic keep anymore. Articles without significant reliably-sourced content are redirected (e.g. Mai Lin, Honey Wilder) or even deleted (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janet Jacme).
    • Discussion at at porn-related AfDs since Sara Jay's Hall of Fame induction indicate that that new fact is not enough to overturn the permanent WP:SALTing of the article.
  • Finally, until an admin removes the mainspace creation protection, reviewers cannot publish the article. This is a dead end proposal. • Gene93k (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Ilovepitts: Since my previous reply, I reviewed the talk archives at WikiProject Pornography (esp. Archive 8 and Archive 9). The recommended course of action would be taking the deletion with protection to deletion review. • Gene93k (talk) 12:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 13:13:34, 11 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by Fan of chengcheng 04


The rapper who I am making a page about is not quite famous internationally and there is very limited information about him which are available from websites which may not be reliable according to wikipedia but they are actually reliable ones for the fans. So I hope you understand and help me out

Fan of chengcheng 04 (talk) 13:13, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Fan of chengcheng 04 (talk) 13:13, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Fan of chengcheng 04: Either a source is reliable (having a good reputation for fact checking) or it isn't. Self-published sites, user-generated content and open wikis are not reliable sources for facts or notability. When reputable media in any language take note of Kid Milli or Kid Milli achieves something to pass WP:MUSICBIO, only then should he get a Wikipedia article. • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

@Gene93k: According to Wikipedia:Notability (music) Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. Kid Milli has come in a famous hip hop survival show in Korea. Has won first, second or third place in a major music competition. He got third place in Show me the money 777. Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels. The label he is under Indigo music releases music through LOEN/ Kakao M entertainment who are a major record label in Korea.

Fan of chengcheng 04 (talk) 13:36, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:Shaw Media newspapers has been nominated for discussion

Category:Shaw Media newspapers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:58, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Request on 18:37:48, 27 December 2018 for assistance on AfC submission by KyleLes



KyleLes (talk) 18:37, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @KyleLes: You made a request for assistance but did not specify what kind of assistance. To clarify the decline, the Wikipedia:Notability guideline requires a subject to have non-trivial coverage from multiple reliable published sources that are independent of the subject and independent from one another. The references cited in the draft were 1) the product's website, 2) a partner's certification and 3) the product's website again. None of these qualify as independent reliable sources. If the product has coverage by reputable media beyond mere mentions or listings, please cite them in the draft. • Gene93k (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Antonio Breez

He is eligible for a wikipedia article and I already added those info in the article, the why you declined the submission? may I know please.. Ajimathew908 (talk) 05:38, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

  • @Ajimathew908: Most of the references in the draft to not satisfy the reliable sources guideline. The reliable references do not show how this musician meets any of the criteria of the WP:MUSICBIO notability guideline. Interviews and announcements do not count as significant secondary source coverage. • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @Gene93k: The platforms he’s been on are not platforms for non acclimated artist. in addition to those he’s been in news papers ( attached) as well as many television debuts centered around him. as well as radio Success. how can we get this article approved ? Ajimathew908 (talk)
  • @Ajimathew908: The Wikipedia:Notability (music) guideline is clear. A musician needs significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Failing that, a musician needs reliably-sourced proof of achievement such as making a reputable national chart, rotation on a national network or multiple albums released on a major record label. If the artist has significant TV coverage, please add citations to reliable sources that verify it in the draft. Again, blogs, interviews and promotional material don't count. If the draft is published in its current form, it will likely be deleted. • Gene93k (talk) 11:32, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft for Dr. Mirkin

Hello Gene! Although I am an avid user of Wikipedia and I appreciate everyone who takes their time to make a contribution here, it is my first time attempting to actually write an article here. I found your comments for my draft on Dr. Mirkin very useful and helpful and have since edited the draft to make the necessary changes. If you have the time, can you take a look at the edits I made and please please tell me if there are other things I can do to improve the article? I do read the guidelines and other things but I get lost sometimes and don't know if what I'm doing is right or not. It would be much appreciated, thank you very much!Baladtheimpaler (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Request to reassess stub template

Hello Gene, I have added information for Papikonda National Park page that you marked as stub few years back. I feel it can be removed from the "stub" category with the additional information added. Appreciate your review and update. ChanduBandi (talk) 11:18, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Electric blue Song?

Hello, so far as I know you created the Electric Blue article. Since years I am searching for a song played in a electric blue episode. In this Song a band sings near a swimming pool. I didnt remember of the text but they always sing "electric blue" in the refrain. Have you any idea which episode this was? --91.21.46.15 (talk) 01:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

  • I did not create the article. The editor who created it promptly disappeared. I just did a technical clean up on it 10 years ago. I noted at the time that it lacked sources. (It still lacks good sources.) I have no special insight into the background of this series, sorry. • Gene93k (talk) 05:56, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Reply

You may block me but I can create another account.

--Memedoggo (talk) 16:40, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Increase/decrease

Hi. In the articles like XNXX where the Alexa rank was just updated, it seems that the {{Increase}}/{{Decrease}} indicators are backwards from what I would expect (i.e. updating from 93 to 94, but with a decrease indicator). Am I missing something? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 14:49, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

  • @AlanM1: Alexa represents it as ranking down (94th place was 93rd) since last survey with the red down arrow.[4] • Gene93k (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Doh! I don't know why that didn't occur to me. Thanks. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 07:58, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

ANI

Hi. You may be interested in this thread. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 08:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Help

Hello. Help move the article to the main space --- Draft:Aliya Prokofyeva. Thank. 93.77.185.154 (talk) 13:12, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Are you still manipulating the facts?

cannot believe you're still around and writing lies all along. unavailable, that's why wikipedia is not credible at all, as liars like yourself around. here you go, i'll give you another medal , XXX

Needing advice about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kamorosano#Your_draft_article%2C_Draft%3ACowgirl_Magazine

Hello sir,

I was hoping you might guide me on how to get my article published. COWGIRL is a legitimate national magazine that is a significant part of the western lifestyle culture that I believe warrants inclusion on Wikipedia. The draft that was declined because: 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. 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.

I have put together the following list of subject coverage. Is there anything here that qualifies COWGIRL as having significant coverage?


https://cowboylifestylenetwork.com/cln-insider-cowgirl-magazine/

http://portfolios.fidm.edu/gallery/42281893/Home-Decor-trends-for-COWGIRL-Magazine-JulyAugust

http://portfolios.fidm.edu/gallery/42282723/COWGIRL-Magazine-trends-June-2016

https://www.americanhorsepubs.org/newsgroup/17270/20603/

https://www.ridetv.com/press/ride-tv-announces-%E2%80%9Ccowgirls%E2%80%9D-season-2-new-title-sponsor-cowgirl-magazine

https://www.junkgypsyblog.com/cowgirl-magazine/

https://www.montanacenterforhorsemanship.org/blog/archive/201602/natural-horsemanship-students-published-cowgirl-magazine

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/ou0y/cowgirl-magazine-cowgirl-is-for-women

https://www.clazyu.com/press/cowgirl-magazine-features-story-c-lazy-u-staff/

https://santafesir.com/sublime-in-santa-fe-cowgirl-magazine-article-features-historic-property/

https://kirstiemarie.com/cowgirl-magazine/

http://www.namarchador.org/2011/01/cowgirl-magazine-cover/

http://blueribbonbuckleco.com/2018/10/were-featured-in-cowgirl-magazine/

https://returntofreedom.org/return-to-freedom-featured-in-cowgirl-magazine-oct-11-2016/

https://tierraconceptssantafe.com/tierra-concepts-featured-in-cowgirl-magazine/

https://tetonheritagebuilders.com/cowgirl-magazine-features-elk-ridge-lodge-big-sky-cabin/

https://www.toughenoughtowearpink.com/george-strait-tough-enough-to-wear-pink-golf-tournament/

https://clare-bowen.com/2014/12/photos-cowgirl-magazine-scans/

http://wranglernetwork.com/portfolio-view/cowgirl-magazine-interviews-sherry-cervi/

WIKIPEDIA MENTIONS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ty_Murray

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_North_Ommert

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hailey_Kinsel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mabel_Strickland_Woodward

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattie_Silks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lulu_Bell_Parr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_Lillie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_mounted_shooting

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Maggiori

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucking_horse

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_Clark_Sargent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pawnee_Bill

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallon_Taylor

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Smith_College_people

Cowgirl is a bi-monthly women’s magazine that focusses on the Western Lifestyle.[1] It features articles and departments on horses, fashion, equestrian activities, travel, and profiles women with extraordinary accomplishments in the Western industry.[2]

History Cowgirl was founded in 2010 by Callan Kane, a former media executive based in Bend, Oregon, who saw a niche for a printed magazine geared to an unserved segment of female enthusiasts. In 2013, Kane joined forces with Ken Amorosano, current publisher of True West Magazine,[3] and a former entertainment industry publicist, who purchased a fifty percent interest in Cowgirl. The team increased circulation and broadened the magazine’s content, while focussing on expanding its online and social media presence. In 2016, Kane sold her interest in Cowgirl to Amorosano who became the sole owner and publisher. Cowgirl Magazine is based in Cave Creek, Arizona and employs a number in-house and independent writers, bloggers, production staff, and photographers.

Cowgirl is the title sponsor for the RIDE TV television series, Cowgirls.[4]

ISSN 2330-1457 - https://www.worldcat.org/search?q=n2%3A2330-1457&qt=results_page

Frequency: Bi-monthly Publisher: Modern West Media, Inc. Total Circulation: 35,000 Founder: Callan Kane Year founded: 2010 First Issue: January 2010 Company: Modern West Media, Inc. Country: United States Based in: Cave Creek, Arizona Language: English Website: cowgirlmagazine.com

Thank You Kamorosano (talk) 13:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

References

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Unjustified AFD

You recently nominated the page on Madison Ivy for deletion. In spite of the figure's notability, you did not take time in reviewing the citations or copy editing. Majority of the sources are credible especially compared to pages on her counterparts. Furthermore, you did not open a discussion on the talk page either. As a wiki editor, that is just bad decorum. StreetSodatalk 19:11, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  • @StreetSoda: Wikipedia etiquette makes no such requirement. In fact, the article is a plausible candidate for speedy deletion per WP:CSD#G4. If you believe the article should be kept, you are welcome to defend it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Madison Ivy (4th nomination). • Gene93k (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • This article was deleted twice at AfD per editor consensus and salted. Please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's guideline for reliable sources. Another editor has stripped the article of the worst sources (e.g. Daily Sport, a satirical tabloid that states it should not be taken seriously). YouTube is not a reliable source. Interviews are not independent secondary sources. Reprinted press releases like the Adult Video News also don't count as independent reliable source coverage. Now that WP:PORNBIO is now defunct, porn awards (even if they were documented) don't count toward notability without notice from reliable independent sources. • Gene93k (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as other porn articles, please note that WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a valid rationale. Other poorly-sourced articles will be dealt with in due course. • Gene93k (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Finally, I notice that you have started several draft articles for porn performers that have already been deleted from Wikipedia. For example, Hitomi Tanaka has been deleted from Wikipedia five times and also salted against recreation. Please study Wikipedia's notability guidelines, especially WP:BASIC and WP:ENT, before continuing. • Gene93k (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
    • That still doesn't warrant you the prerogative to nominate the article without due process as Wikipedia's internal indexing (esp. lookup on past creation attempts) are not readily accessible unless you are an editing connoisseur. Also, I am an advocate for stringent citation practices which I admit to be no expert at. But blatantly tagging AFD without an effort in salvaging the content is dispiriting to say the least. Take pages on old Olympic athletes for instance that are often sourced on one reference. By your logic, a whole slew of these articles should be gone in no time.StreetSodatalk 00:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  • @Streetsoda:In Wikipedia, due process is at AfD, please discuss the article's notability there. Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia is neither a bureaucracy nor is it a court of law. If a deletion proposal is contentious, it goes to AfD for editor consensus. Madison Ivy has been at AfD three times before (deleted twice), and the most recent consensus to delete was less than six months ago. I was active in the prior AfD debates, and I concurred with the consensus assessment that Ivy did not even meet WP:PORNBIO. The article's citations are still of low quality and they do not solve the notability issues raised previously. As for salvaging the article, you need to find non-trivial coverage in independent and reputable published sources. No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. Interviews and press releases are not independent. Finally, whataboutism about WP:NSPORTS and other guidelines will not fly in Wikipedia. WP:PORNBIO was recently struck down as a poor predictor of notability. Several won-an-award-but-the-sources-are-crap porn bios are now being cleaned up, following the new consensus of editors. Again, it will be more productive for you to participate in the Madison Ivy and Lena Paul deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Season's greetings

"Pleaded" vs. "Pled"

The AP Stylebook uses "Pleaded as does the Chicago Tribune. Most reporters follow the AP stylebook. "Pled" is also correct. The editor changed a correct spelling to an incorrect one. Some WP editor, a few years ago, probably changed tens of thousands of the latter usage to the former, I'm guessing to run up an edit total for whatever reasons. Happy holidays. Activist (talk) 14:56, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck

                                                 Happy holidays

Golden star-rotating.gif
Happy New Year!
Golden star-rotating.gif
Gene93k,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year - 1908 Australian postcard.png

   – 2020 is a leap yearnews article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

North America1000 22:18, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Maltese female models

A tag has been placed on Category:Maltese female models requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of 5th AVN Awards for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 5th AVN Awards 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/5th AVN Awards 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. Sandstein 20:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Gene93k, I had the above notice posted on my page today and thought you might be interested. I don't know who the other active editors are these days though who might want to know about this; could you let me know? Or let them know about this? Thanks. pumik9 • (talk) 03:50, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Need assistance

Hi Gene93k,

Thanks for your edits to the Valhalla High School (New York) Wiki page. I am really a beginner (as you can tell), so I am still learning ...

I based my initial changes on the Wiki page of the Horace Greeley High School, which is close to Valhalla. Please have a look at that page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_Greeley_High_School.

It seems like that school's page is full of text meant for promotional purposes and "academic boosterism" ... And I don't see citations for all of these entries there, either. Is all of that allowed?

Could I just add a reference to, for example, the fact that Valhalla High School was granted the Blue Ribbon award? I will then leave the description of the school, etc. out. I realize that I will have to provide a proper citation.

Thanks for your help!


Halvalla

(18:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halvalla (talkcontribs)

  • @Halvalla: While Horace Greely High School is also on my watch list, I haven't looked at it for quite a while. A quick glance tells me that it needs a substantial clean up. That said, existing problem content does not justify other problem content. The new content at Valhalla was obviously problematic enough to revert. It is okay to note a Blue Ribbon distinction. It is not okay to copy and paste what the school says about itself in the first person. If VHS clubs and athletics are distinctive, state facts that you can cite to reliable independent references. I can see that HGHS club content is unsourced, the references for sports do not appear to support the content, and the notable alumni section is already tagged for issues. I will see what can be salvaged. You can find additional guidance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice. • Gene93k (talk) 18:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


SpaceNinja80 (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC) I didn't want to start a new thread just to say hi back. My edits were automatically signed when I was responding to the talk page from my phone. It's interesting that my first acquaintance is such an accomplished contributor. It looks like our areas of expertise will overlap in places. I'm still trying to figure out how to set up my own user page. Did you have to compile the user facts for yourself, or will WP generate those? If I contribute 10 individual items to the list I'm working on, will WP credit me for 10 edits? Will I have to create new pages for the red items? I'm also proofreading a translated article given to me when I signed up, but I need paper media to source. I'll get around to the tutorials when I'm done correcting the grammar. Advice is welcome in the meantime. Thanks again. SpaceNinja80 (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Stephen Kelly concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Stephen Kelly, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

AfD

Thanks for expressing exactly what I was trying to say, only much better. Couldn't remember that link for the life of me, and you stated your argument better too. I guess not being able to go to work has me a bit addled. John from Idegon (talk) 00:23, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Need help

Hi, can you please tell me if this a reliable source or not? Thanks.মোহাম্মাদ ইসমাইল (talk) 09:38, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

  • @মোহাম্মাদ ইসমাইল: Short answer: credibly verifies XBIZ's assessment but is of little value as evidence of notability. The article is an obvious press release. Even if you accept it as a reliable reference, it is not count as significant coverage to pass WP:BASIC for the persons, WP:NFILM for the videos nor WP:CORPDEPTH for the companies and products. The XBIZ Award generally lacks the coverage of independent sources to support claims of WP:ENT notability. Moreover, porn award nominations ceased to count towards notability years ago, long before WP:PORNBIO was taken down. • Gene93k (talk) 10:31, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for making it clear. What do you think about this? and what is the difference between this and this source?মোহাম্মাদ ইসমাইল (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

  • @মোহাম্মাদ ইসমাইল: Few porn sites are considered reliable. Nearly all, including thelordofporn.com, are self-published. Porn trade press, such as AVN and XBIZ, may be considered reliable, but most of their articles are republished press releases. Comparing porn awards with mainstream arts and science awards has been done to death at AfD. The key difference is coverage by reliable sources that are independent of the award's recipient and its granting body. You can do a quick GNews search on the Man Booker Prize 2011. 35th AVN Awards gets some incidental coverage from independent reliable sources, but almost nothing about the award winners. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the answer.মোহাম্মাদ ইসমাইল (talk) 14:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Stephen Kelly

Hello, Gene93k. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stephen Kelly".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 08:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice

AFC-Logo.svg

Hi Gene93k, 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)

Draft:Purezza concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Purezza, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

New Delsort category

Deletion sorting

Since you sometimes perform deletion sorting for AfD discussions, check out the new Delsort category/page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Products. Take a look, and note the criteria for posting there, listed atop the page in a box. Thanks for your work to manage Wikipedia! North America1000 21:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Ricky Martinez

hallo, I must have done something wrong when I nominated AFD Ricky Martinez, from his page I can find the reasons I gave for the deletion but here it shows the old debate. Can you please help me?. thank you --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 22:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

thank you, I appreciate it. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 22:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Purezza

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Purezza, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Praxidicae (talk) 13:56, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: The real creator of the page is Fatbobcat22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log), who has just been notified. Apparently, the article was promptly recreated at the leftover draft redirect when the main space article was deleted. The pattern is 1. Create a stub that can get past AfC; 2. Load up the advertising once the page is published. • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't check who it notified. Sadly this was actually accepted by an AFCer...Praxidicae (talk) 14:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @Praxidicae: Not your fault. I approved the previous version at AfC. That's my part of this mess. Purezza appeared to pass WP:CORP when I approved it, but it's really not worth the trouble. Nuke and pave at the very least. • Gene93k (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Request on 17:33:31, 24 July 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by 1836Texas~Republic1846


Request for a further review of the article. I am asking that you further review the article I have submitted, and take note that all content is purely factual, with sources for the facts provided. I understand the strive that all articles have an extended reference list so to ensure the accuracy and legitimacy of as much information as possible. However, the subject of my article is a difficult one to find so many sources, and not because of a lack of importance. It is merely due to the subject itself. I can assure you that such an article is used extensively by many forms of people, including personnel in the fire service profession, as a reference for study, material and resource reference. As a simple search will show, many articles are about Fire Departments throughout the world, with many of their references being the same type as the ones I have listed. This is because as a municipal government department, there are not an abundant of sources out there available to cite other than the ones already listed, but this does not remove from the significance of the subject matter. Many of these other pages also have alerts at the top of their pages, mostly due to the same reasons mine has been rejected, a lack of references cited. These pages are still important and of great help to the people that read them. I know you can see that I myself, have not written any other articles before, but I have used many that contain information of Fire Departments, and I know the importance that these articles serve, so it is difficult for me to agree with your uninformed decision that this article is simply not "Wikipedia Worthy."

1836Texas~Republic1846 (talk) 17:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

  • @1836Texas~Republic1846: The draft is substantially unchanged since the original submission. The previous reviewer tagged the draft for possible copyright infringement. I see no effort to address this problem Proof of permission would only be the first step. Please familiarize yourself with the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline, especially the WP:ORGDEPTH section (depth and audience of coverage). The only reference that plausibly meets the WP:ORGDEPTH standard is the book citation, which I cannot evaluate online. The book by itself is not enough. The general notability guideline requires multiple non-trivial coverage by reliable published sources that are both independent of the subject and intellectually independent of one another. In addition, the WP:ORGDEPTH states that routine coverage (announcements, personnel changes, etc.) and local news sources don't count. The content may be true. However, the content must be editors' own words based on facts that are verifiable through citations to independent reliable sources. Even if you can prove permission to use the text, the article should not be based primarily on what the department or the City of Waco says. • Gene93k (talk) 18:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
  • What you have failed to notice, is that the material originally flagged as copyright infringement (which is false, but I digress), was the departments logo (image). This was removed by the FIRST rejection. It was mistaken to be flagged as a copyright issue, but the article doesn't NEED the logo, so it has been removed and I have no intentions at this time of even attempting to use it. The fact that you cannot find vast information on the book cited, is the fact that only a small number of copies were ever printed. I believe if possible to even find, Amazon would be the only place to buy it, and I doubt they even have a copy anymore. Every single line of text was typed by myself, with the knowledge I have gained from the sources cited, as well as gathering MUCH of the information on my own, from the department itself. Which obviously, is not published, but is also public information seeing as how the topic is a department within a municipal government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1836Texas~Republic1846 (talkcontribs) 18:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
  • @1836Texas~Republic1846:It's not that I failed to notice. A draft copyright flag, placing the draft in Category:AfC submissions declined as copyright violations, is about content. The reviewer who tagged the draft, Dan arndt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), can clarify why they tagged the draft. Again, copyright is only the first hurdle. The citation style is vague at best, completely lacking in inline citations. Inline citations match the facts asserted to the reliable references that can verify them. If the reference is a book, the references need specific page numbers. A book can be found in a library where a reader can verify. The publisher calls itself a printer of commemorative books, and a Worldcat search only lists the book in two libraries, the Library of Congress and the Waco-McLennan County Library. Again, however reliable that source is, it is still one published source where multiple sources are required. Facts need to be compiled from published sources. If you are getting non-published information from the department itself, you are doing original research, which is against Wikipedia's core content policies. Inline citations also serve to keep out original research. If two or more independent, reliable, non-local published sources describe the department in a non-routine and non-trivial manner, the department is notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The draft is short of that. • Gene93k (talk) 20:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

afd

Hallo, i am sorry to disturb you. I nominated J. D. Slater Again but on the page of the AFD of today I see the old discussion. did I do something wrong? thank you --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @AlejandroLeloirRey: I see that you fixed the nomination. If you are doing a 2nd, 3rd... nomination by hand, please use the {{Afdx}} instead (for example, {{subst:afdx}}, {{subst:afdx|3rd}} or {{subst:afd|PAGENAME (2nd nomination)}}). Again, Twinkle automates this process, saving substantial effort and grief. Twinkle is available as user preferences checkbox item. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
thank you. I really appreciate ur help. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 19:31, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Cscr-featured.svg
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cellcast Group

Notice

The article Cellcast Group has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The organisation is not notable, the article also contains significantly inaccurate information, the article is about a company that has launched Babestation and Psychic Today on to various TV platforms. The sources that exist are about the channels, not the parent company. The article has no hope of meeting WP:NCORP notability criteria. - "A corporation is not notable merely because it owns notable subsidiaries. The organization or corporation itself must have been discussed in reliable independent sources for it to be considered notable."

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. ForExampleFromWahWei (talk) 17:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Granted

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hi Gene93k. Based on your experience at Articles for Creation and because you have the autopatrol permission, I have added you to the "New page reviewers" user group for three months. Please check back at WP:PERM if you would like to make it permanent. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. The culture around NPP is a bit different than AFC. So, before doing any new page patrols you need read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember:

  • Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging pages for maintenance so that they are aware.
  • You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
  • If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
  • Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.
  • This allows you to "unreview" an accepted article from AFC to allow a second look while in mainspace. To do this simply click the green check after accepting an article from AFC.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

My Draft

Hello, it says that you have reviewed my draft, Saint Lucia national under-20 football team, but I have no knowledge whatsoever on if you have accepted or declined the draft. Please do so soon.

Thanks and best wishes, --WellThisIsTheReaper, 15:50, 15 Octoer, 2020

  • @WellThisIsTheReaper: I just did the new page patrol function (confirming a legitimate page). As for being ready to publish, I will leave that to editors more familiar with WP:WikiProject Football's guidelines. That said, I may do some technical clean up, time permitting. • Gene93k (talk) 22:59, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi User:Gene93k, thanks for reviewing my article Molly Stewart (pornographic actress). I have other articles waiting to be reviewed as well, when there is time please assist me with that. --Ajpoundz (talk) 23:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

"The 2019 conspiracy is an end product of long-running conspiracy spinning."

Can you explain this a bit? I don't see how a person, even a president, can theorize about a conspiracy relating to a scandal that hasn't happened yet. I understand how he'd refer to the Ukraine scandal involving Hunter Biden's 2014 appointment, but the Ukraine scandal in the sentence I corrected is clearly the one involving Trump's 2019 phone call. Thinking about THAT scandal in 2016 is impossible, no? Anyway, thanks in advance, I'm probably missing something really easy here and will feel stupid for asking later! 142.51.204.154 (talk) 14:27, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19 pandemic data Saint Lucia

It is good to see you are doing a fine job of updating the covid data for Saint Lucia. Are you aware firstly that toady's figure seems to be revised downwards by one? and also however, that the days press release has a different figure to the dashboard? Sill that's better than Dominica where "new" press releases are at least a week old Simuliid talk 19:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Simuliid: The dashboard gets updated last, sometimes a day later. The Ministry of Health is the source for all St. Lucia numbers. Today's total has been updated to 8 new cases.[5] In recent days, the Chief Medical Officer announces the day's test results on the TV news first. I then look for an official posting. • Gene93k (talk) 22:07, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! 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) 01:42, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Hello Gene93k,

A chart of the 2020 New Page Patrol Queue

Year in review

It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by Rosguill who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to JTtheOG and Onel5969 who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to John B123, Hughesdarren, and Mccapra who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by DannyS712 which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.

Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 DannyS712 bot III (talk) 67,552 Patrol Page Curation
2 Rosguill (talk) 63,821 Patrol Page Curation
3 John B123 (talk) 21,697 Patrol Page Curation
4 Onel5969 (talk) 19,879 Patrol Page Curation
5 JTtheOG (talk) 12,901 Patrol Page Curation
6 Mcampany (talk) 9,103 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 6,401 Patrol Page Curation
8 Mccapra (talk) 4,918 Patrol Page Curation
9 Hughesdarren (talk) 4,520 Patrol Page Curation
10 Utopes (talk) 3,958 Patrol Page Curation
New page reviewer of the year cup.svg
NPP Technical Award.png
Reviewer of the Year

John B123 has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.

NPP Technical Achievement Award

As a special recognition and thank you DannyS712 has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Rita Pavone albums

A tag has been placed on Category:Rita Pavone albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 16:18, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.


Nomination of Box Springs, California for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Box Springs, California, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Box Springs, California until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

COVID-19 pandemic data Saint Lucia Again

Hello - I see we have a disagreement on recoveries. I think you may need to factor in the 4 "Number of COVID-19 Repatriations from Saint Lucia"? We still have a disagreement of one from the two sources mention. Personally I would trust the official government source over the local news. But either way it must be supported by an inline citation. Keep up the great work Simuliid talk 12:05, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

  • @Simuliid: The Loop News article is a government source (press release) published through a press site. The author is the Ministry of Health and Wellness. I use loopslu.com, because MoH releases to the press before they post on their own site. Here are the missing five recoveries from the horse's mouth. "The Ministry of Health also reported a total of five recoveries for today, January 9, 2021. This brings the total number of active cases presently in country to 119." You will notice that the text matches verbatim. The dashboard said 309 on 8 January (and the numbers added up). The 309 figure is unchanged since then despite the 5 recoveries reported 9 January. As for repatriations, the dashboard number has not been maintained for months, and the dashboard has counted recovered repatriated patients as recovered since March 2020. Again, all numbers come from the Ministry. A press release is on a news platform is the author speaking. The ministry updates the dashboard number like we update the Wikipedia numbers, and you have seen the obvious mistakes they've made. Total - Active - Dead = Active added up on 8 January. The math has been off by 5 since then, as Total and Active are regularly reported. The 5 Dead figure reported in December has not changed since then. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @Simuliid: The dashboard numbers have been erratic since 11 December and they have been especially sloppy since the holiday shutdown. When there is a discrepancy, I have cited a Ministry of Health press release in the main pandemic article as a source of firmer numbers. The 314 figure comes from arithmetic of cited numbers. At the risk of citation overkill, this is where it also can be derived:

Saint Lucia COVID-19 reports 6 January 2021 through 9 January 2021

  • Given: 5 dead reported 17 December
  • 6 January - 294 reported
    • With all numbers except deaths reported, 382 total - 294 recovered - 5 deaths = 83 active[1]
  • 7 January +9 recoveries
    • Note 383 Total - 294 recoveries - 9 recoveries - 5 dead = 75 active[2]
  • 8 January +6 recoveries
    • Here's where we get 309 recoveries (294 + 9 + 6)
    • Note that 395 total - 309 recoveries - 5 dead = 81 active[3]
  • 9 January +5 recoveries not on the dashboard
    • This is where 314 comes from (294 + 9 + 6 + 5)
    • Saturday reported a day late: 438 total - 314 recovered - 5 dead = 119 active[4]

References

  1. ^ "Saint Lucia records cases #381 and #382 of COVID-19" (Press release). Ministry of Health. 6 January 2021. total of 294 recoveries to date
  2. ^ "Saint Lucia records case #383 of COVID-19" (Press release). Ministry of Health. 7 January 2021. Ministry of Health has reported a total of nine recoveries for today
  3. ^ "Saint Lucia records cases #384 to #395 of COVID-19" (Press release). Ministry of Health. 8 January 2021. Ministry of Health has reported a total of six recoveries for today
  4. ^ "Saint Lucia records cases #396 to #438 of COVID-19" (Press release). Ministry of Health. 10 January 2021. Ministry of Health also reported a total of five recoveries for today, January 9
  • Weight of evidence: MoH goofed on the dashboard numbers again. The Ministry of Health and Wellness is the sources of all COVID-19 data in Saint Lucia. They conduct COVID-19 testing in daily batches, usually reported daily. The dashboard is a scoreboard for convenience. When the dashboard numbers don't add up, the MoH press releases should take precedence. • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Stephen Paddock

Hey, I changed the word ¨terrorist¨ to ¨mass murderer¨ (because terrorism is political or religious). I know the difference. Why did you revert my edit? Koridas 📣 15:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

  • @Koridas: I had to revert further back. The edits by Shkoonk introduced two instances of "terrorist" in two edits. You manually reverted only one of them. I took the page back to the last version before the offending edits. The diff should show that your change is still substantially there. • Gene93k (talk) 15:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Jessi Slaughter cyberbullying case

An article you may be interested in, Jessi Slaughter cyberbullying case, has just been undeleted. Any help you could give to this, included BLP-related edits, would be very much appreciated. --Bangalamania (talk) 11:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:2011 in Saba

A tag has been placed on Category:2011 in Saba requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 16:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft Denial - Alexa Nova

Hi Gene93k, I saw you had declined my draft submission for Alexa Nova wiki page. I've only ever had one PR person who put out articles for me early in my career, and at the end of every one, the name of PR agency was disclosed. You can obviously tell which are paid for by PR companies that way. I did not use any link references that were self-published (besides my Steemit blog for my list of scenes) nor did I use any re-published press releases. XXXBios biography was written about me without my knowledge, wasn't paid for whatsoever, even though it was based on interviews with me, is that not considered independent coverage?
Are only pornographic actors/actress that have crossed over to mainstream eligible for a wiki page? Since there doesn't seem to be any references that are able to be used.
In process of drafting, I was consulting with an admin that told me iafd links can be used as a basic info reference (such as birthdate), is that not correct?
According to WP:ENT, the qualification is, "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Being one of the performers ('significant role') in a nominated scene ('other production') more than once, wouldn't that qualify as notability as far as Wikipedia's standards? The only online proof of prior years' AVN/XBIZ nominations that exist are award roster lists. I don't see why they wouldn't be an acceptable reference, so I would appreciate any explanation or suggestion of how it might be possible to prove past nominations for notability. I looked at other porn performer's wiki pages (such as James Deen), to help me draft this submission and get examples of what acceptable reference links for adult industry would look like. IAFD/AVN/XBIZ links are often used as references in all the porn performer wiki pages I have seen. The AVN pornstar page of me, was not self-published or a re-published press release. The award nomination rosters is what should prove notability, where else would you suggest I find references of nominations that you would consider acceptable? Do you not consider multiple past AVN nominations enough notability?
The definition that is in place by wiki, as I had quoted above, seems to be vague enough to include multiple award nominations as notability.Alexanovatv (talk) 22:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

  • @Alexanovatv: First of all, Wikipedia's general guidance about autobiographical articles is don't do it. At least one other editor has already advised you about this. Conflict of interest, even if properly disclosed, is strongly discouraged. A closer look at the AVN citations are cast listings, non-significant coverage. Articles like "Wicked Pictures, Axel Braun Celebrate 'Shades of Red'" are promotional material from the film companies. Wicked Pictures and Asylum.com are not independent of the actors. Databases like IMDb and IAFD may verify some basic facts, but they don't count as significant coverage, and they don't establish notability. Wikipedia stopped presuming porn award winners notable in 2019. Porn award nominations were discounted in the early 2010s. Award roster listings like XBIZ do not count as significant coverage. As for WP:ENT or WP:ANYBIO, all claims need to be supported by references to independent reliable sources. Porn press rarely satisfies this requirement. Finally, since you mention James Deen, please note that he gets significant coverage from sources like GQ, The Daily Beast, Vanity Fair, etc. No such coverage is evident in the draft. A straight news article from AVN or XBIZ would improved the draft, but that may not be enough. • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2021 (UTC)



Thanks for the response. Yes, I'm aware James has articles like that because he is famous in mainstream as well, partially due to scandals. So I guess that answers my question about how adult performers can't be considered notable unless we crossover to mainstream it seems, since "porn press" is rarely considered an independent reliable source, as you said. The context of the references provided for the DVDs listed, are just to prove the existence of the movie and show the box cover image, it's not to promote those movies. Being on the cover of a DVD isn't considered playing a significant role in that production? An AVN pornstar page doesn't prove any notability either? That wasn't paid for by me at all. I thought AVN could be considered a reliable source if it's not a paid promotional article?Alexanovatv (talk) 00:17, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

  • @Alexanovatv: Mainstream crossover is not required for notability, but key requirementa are acknowledgement from sources with good reputations for fact checking and the depth of that coverage. The Pornography WikiProject does give some guidance about reliable sources here. While AVN is listed as a reliable news source, the guidance cautions readers to distinguish factual news reporting from unlabeled press releases. It also warns that AVN porn star profiles are unreliable. The references for the DVDs listed don't count as significant coverage, even for the featured performer. The porn trade press coverage for them is too routine in nature. They might prove existence, but not significance. • Gene93k (talk) 01:44, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Acid Witch albums

A tag has been placed on Category:Acid Witch albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 19:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:The Lead albums

A tag has been placed on Category:The Lead albums requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

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. Liz Read! Talk! 18:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

About Brahman.

Brahman does not refer to Krishna or Vishnu in Hinduism, it is considered formless absolute. Hellobunny001 (talk) 10:57, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, got it. About Brahman- Hinduism has many sects, Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism, literally all of the sects associate their deities Vishnu/Shiva/Shakti with Brahman. And all the sects have countless articles to support their claim. Hence, it is better to maintain neutrality. Hellobunny001 (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, It will be better if the page related "Brahman" can be made semi protected. I don't know how to apply for it, I'm new here. Hellobunny001 (talk) 17:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Here, https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/beliefs/intro_1.shtml All of the sects have scriptural references to associate their specific deities to Brahman.

I think under such circumstances, going with neutrality will be the best option.

And if possible, please make the page semi protected. Hellobunny001 (talk) 18:27, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

  • @Hellobunny001: You appear to be seeking protection to enforce your assertions in a content dispute. The page's edit history show no obvious signs of significant vandalism or disruptive editing. Semi-protection would only block anonymous and newly-registered editors, including yourself. A protection request at WP:RFPP will likely go nowhere. Moreover, your edits are repeating the assertions at Talk:Love Jihad and reinstating an edit made by a blocked sockpuppet account. As for sources, the BBC page you cite is not the only view found at BBC.com regarding Hinduism. Final point, Wikipedia does not consider scriptures, even when cited, as reliable references for facts. • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for talking to me. May be I will have to know more about these Wikipedia edits. It seems quite puzzling at this moment.

The topic related Brahman was always neutral before someone actually cited sources from his particular sect & changed it, that's why I asked for a protection. Anyway, it's fine as long as it's neutrality doesn't get vandalised.

Thank you again. Hellobunny001 (talk) 03:49, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

RfC WP:Notability people

I made an RFC here can you add some comments? Not sure if I created it correctly either--Cs california (talk) 09:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

BLP:CRIME

Thank you for your attention to my edits on Jake Paul. What do you think of using my previous verbiage to describe the accusation with the new sources? Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

  • @Dreameditsbrooklyn: "In April 2021, Justine Paradise stated in a video that... " might be a better choice of words IMO. NPOV prefers "to say" or "to state" over more loaded terms like "to claim" or "to accuse." • Gene93k (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

Dear Gene93k, thanks for your comments, I did not delete information from Cecilia Gessa's biography but I have tried to UPDATE her profession, since she is no longer dedicated to pornography but focuses her career on the production and direction of works by theater, however in the section on Cinematographic career I have maintained its past as a pornographic artist. Thank you very much for understanding and for your contributions. Gllrmurgiles (talk) 12:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)gllrmurgiles [1] [2]

Jelani Caine

Hey, just a head's up that this editor looks to be very young and is on the spectrum, per their user page. I don't know if they'll stick around, but just wanted to let you know. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (。◕‿◕。) 16:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Assist

Hi you just posted on my page at swwiki. In many years I have not been in deletion stuff at enwiki, just went thru the list because someone at swwiki wants to translate articles from a school list at enwiki and I checked the choices. So help me to understand: what is nowadays in enwiki the difference between putting the Prod-tag and entering an article into the Afd-list? I assumed the tag would do that (and think, it was like this formerly, probably long ago, because at swwiki we copied procedures from en and with us it works that way) Kipala (talk) 17:54, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

  • @Kipala: English Wikipedia deletion policy (in place since the mid-2000s) gives 3 deletion mechanisms: 1. Speedy (no applicable here); 2. PROposed Deletion for routine, uncontroversial and uncontested deletion. If the deletion is contested in any way, deletion must go through community discussion, 3. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion: The article is nominated for in-process deletion in a debate that typically runs 7 days to allow a consensus to form. The link describes the 4-step procedure. I can help you through the process, if you want. • Gene93k (talk) 22:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles for Creation July 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive

AFC-Logo.svg

Hello Gene93k:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unreviewed articles. The drive is running until 31 July 2021.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is currently a backlog of over 2900 articles, so start reviewing articles. We're looking forward to your help!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for Creation at 21:53, 7 July 2021 (UTC). If you do not wish to recieve future notification, please remove your name from the mailing list.

Help With Allen Chastanet Political offices Box

Hey Gene can you help fix Allen Chastanet Political offices Box I simply did a basic edit and it shows funny. Thanks in Advance. Akim Ernest (talk) 22:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2021 Saint Lucian general election

Ambox current red Americas.svg

On 29 July 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2021 Saint Lucian general election, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 01:56, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

HEY

@Gene93k:

Hey i dont really know how to use this, but i would like to get a chat with you regarding an edit!

Thank you!

Have a nice day — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andresgvz2021 (talkcontribs) 10:18, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amir Cyrus Ahanchian

I am following the directions on WP:DRV which advise attempting to discuss a deletion with the closer. The bio was deleted in December 2010 due to lack of notability. I believe this to have been a mistake due to the number of sources found on A Google search using the term ahanchian vs xenon some of which date back to November 2010. Please could you tell me if you were aware of these sources at the time of deletion? Amirah talk 06:00, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

  • @AmirahBreen: My only involvement was alerting the Actors and Filmmakers task force that a relevant AfD debate was open. I was neither the closer nor a material participant. That said, the Google search does not show significant, non-routine coverage by independent reliable media sources. First off, a raw Google search is never proof of WP:RS coverage. In this instance, the Google hits yield only routine coverage of the Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures court case. Court reports from sites like justia.com, govinfo.gov or casetext.com don't count as significant or independent coverage. An independent search yields only a 2010 news report about an appeals court ruling. The coverage is routine in nature and does not discuss Amir Ahanchian with any biographical depth. Cannot see the content of the deleted article, but there is very little to demonstrate notability for this person. • Gene93k (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg
New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Gene93k,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

New page reviewer of the year cup.svg

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.


To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:31, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
NPP Barnstar.png
  • On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

About the article "Kristen Scott"

Hello @Gene93k:

I take the liberty of writing to you regarding your decision not to publish my article. First of all, I would like to clarify that I am a user of French Wikipedia. I use Wikipedia in English in order to be able to make available to English-speaking readers my articles which do not appear in English but which nevertheless concern American personalities.

To come back to the article, I am surprised at your decision not to publish the article since it exists in French. It was I who created it and its admission and the interest of the article was not questioned (of course, each article is never finished and it can always be improved). Is it possible to reconsider your decision?

Regards --Hemerocalle40 (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

  • @Hemerocalle40: French Wikipedia and English Wikipedia have independent and different notability guidelines for inclusion. That said, fr:Kristen Scott is tagged for a lack of secondary sources, the very reason the corresponding page was removed from English Wikipedia. You are free to resubmit the draft for another editor to review. However, the article is likely to be renominated for deletion if it is published without substantial improvement. I declined the submission for an obvious lack of objective notability, but the draft's promotional tone (especially multiple poorly supported superlatives) is equally unacceptable. The Charlotte Stokely article you created has many of the same problems. It was also removed from English Wikipedia by editor consensus, and I see that the page has been nominated for deletion again. • Gene93k (talk) 20:35, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Gene93k: If I may, the banner is only there to inform that the article lacks secondary or tertiary sources (according to wikipedia France) and that readers are invited to add more if they have any. I prefer to specify it. But this in no way calls into question the admissibility of the article on wikipedia Fr, and fortunately. I know United States has an English Puritan tradition, but I find it a shame and disappointing that these actresses do not belong to English Wikipedia.--Hemerocalle40 (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Reliable secondary source coverage is the basis of notability. Editors at English Wikipedia concluded that the missing secondary coverage did not exist and that the notability problem was therefore insurmountable. This isn't because English speakers don't like pornography. For the longest time, porn star biographies enjoyed a special exemption from general requirements for significant secondary source coverage (WP:PORNBIO). English Wikipedia editors eventually agreed to close that loophole. Since English Wikipedia notability guidelines were tightened in 2019, editors have conducted an ongoing house cleaning. Porn industry sources tend to be crap, and articles the solely rely on such sources get purged. Finally, logs for fr.Kristen Scott indicate that the French Wikipedia article was also deleted in 2017. The history indicates that you recently recreated the page from a redirect. I suspect that maintenance tag is only the beginning of a longer process. • Gene93k (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Gene93k:, Can I then delete this article ? Since he will never be admitted, what's the point of keeping him ?--Hemerocalle40 (talk) 13:25, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Boo!

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

A Dobos torte for you!

Dobos cake (Gerbeaud Confectionery Budapest Hungary).jpg 7&6=thirteen () has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.


To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen () 16:50, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Little Lights Free Education High School for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Little Lights Free Education High School 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/Little Lights Free Education High School 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.

Thryduulf (talk) 16:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Barangays of Catanduanes

A tag has been placed on Category:Barangays of Catanduanes indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 17:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

<div style="font-size: x-small;">The article is a derivative under the <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License</a>. A link to the original article can be found <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk%3AGene93k">here</a> and attribution parties <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gene93k&amp;action=history">here</a>. By using this site, you agree to the <a href="https://www.gpedia.com/terms-of-use.php">Terms of Use</a>. Gpedia Ⓡ is a registered trademark of the Cyberajah Pty Ltd.</div>