JonasB

Norre Tranders, Aalborg Trelleborg sighting — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sighting Trelleborg (talk • contribs) 22:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

LGV Bordeaux–Spain moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, LGV Bordeaux–Spain, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Xevus11 (talk) 03:37, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft:LGV Bordeaux–Spain

Hello, JonasB. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:LGV Bordeaux–Spain.

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 deleted. If 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:24, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Linn Svahn

Hello, JonasB

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Slatersteven and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, Linn Svahn, should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linn Svahn.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Slatersteven}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

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

Slatersteven (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

@Slatersteven: She is on her 2nd season the world cup and won her first world cup race today. That should make her notable according to WP:SPORTSPERSON. JonasB (talk) 17:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

It still needs to be source to an RS.Slatersteven (talk) 17:15, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

RS? JonasB (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

wp:rs, reliable sources. There is also the issue of wp:undue, if RS do not care then its not notable.Slatersteven (talk) 17:39, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

And the included reference to FIS is not considered reliable? JonasB (talk) 18:04, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

No, it has to be demonstrated that the persons membership is considered notable by RS. Many people belong to notable bodies. You have to demonstrate that they (and not the body they belong to) are notable in their own right.Slatersteven (talk) 18:10, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

So what sources would you consider reliable? When it comes to skiing results, it doesn't get more reliable than FIS, they are the ones that organize the world cup and world championships. And if you follow the link you can read all about Svahn's participation in the world cup, including her victory in Davos today. Or are you claiming that the world cup is not a major amateur or professional competition? In which case, here are two articles you can nominate for deletion: Andrew Young and Andrew Musgrave. They both have far longer careers than Svahn but neither of them have won a world cup event. So I presume there is no notability there either?

I thought wikipedia encouraged contributions, so I created the article after her win today, partly in order to get rid of seven red links in the world cup-article. It wasn't perfect, I'm well aware of that. But it was a start and I had a plan to improve it. But instead of actually improving it I've had to spend my time reading wikipedia guidelines to try (and obviously fail) to convince someone that a skier can be worthy of an article. And I'm not going to spend my time on an article that risks being deleted. If it survives, I might return to it. But in the meanwhile I hope there are others than can improve it. JonasB (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Books about them new stories about them. I have no idea if that world cup is a major amateur or professional competition which is why we need RS covering it, to establish it is, rather then say the wargaming World Championships.Slatersteven (talk) 09:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I realise that you know very little about cross country skiing, but you can't expect books to be written about an athlete a few hours after their breakthrough race. And the number of news articles will be limited, but there were a couple at least by the time you nominated the article for deletion. So instead of actually doing any WP:BEFORE like clicking on the links in the article and seeing if there were any articles about the other winners of WC-races, and maybe reading a bit about the World Cup (since you have admitted that you know nothing about it), you nominated it for deletion. That is certainly a great way to make people feel welcome at wikipedia WP:DNB. JonasB (talk) 21:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

When I nominated it there was one link [[1]] to an external (wp:primary) source that told me nothing about the notability of her or the event. This article International Ski Federation is not an rs, and does seem to have some red link for for more notable people (i.e. ones who have won a cup more then once). nor are you a new users, thus I fail to see why you should suddenly feel unwelcome by one users nomination of a page you created.Slatersteven (talk) 14:15, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Kuriaki for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kuriaki 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/Kuriaki 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.   // Timothy :: talk  01:52, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:47, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Moa Ilar moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Moa Ilar. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 23:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

You could have at least given me a chance to improve it before you sent it over to draft. JonasB (talk) 14:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

This is your chance to improve it. Draftifying isn't a punishment, its meant to give you time to work on it peacefully without editors swarming over it, adding tags or deletion notices. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 14:33, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Moa Ilar (November 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Ratnahastin were: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Moa Ilar and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ratnahastin (talk) 13:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, JonasB! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ratnahastin (talk) 13:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)