User talk:Liz/Archive 39

Archive 35

←

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

→

Archive 45

Please sir not delete This Article

Please sir not delete This Article Honey Bunny Ka Jholmaal please sir this article of cartoon tv series and this is my and 100+ children's favorite show please not delete this is latest and unique article 117.197.119.196 (talk) 05:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Why have you deleted Ang Pradesh of region of Bihar. I was going to write proof of my page my region. You can search AngPradesh on YouTube . Shame on you

MeraAwaaz (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Restore the article Stephen Zechariah

Hi there, I have recently came across on the article Stephen Zechariah seems deleted. And I also saw that the article was created by a suspected user/banned user. But I strongly believe the person in the article is completely notable to WP:NMUSICIAN and they added the reliable sources in the reference. So, respected Liz, kindly restore the article Stephen Zechariah. ButterSand0 (talk)

 Not done as you are also a blocked editor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Minecraft (game) R3

Hi, Liz. I saw that you deleted Minecraft (game) under CSD R3. It's my understanding that that was a redirect to Minecraft. Such redirects are normally allowed as {{r from unnecessary disambiguation}}. Would you mind restoring it? If you feel strongly about it, you can always take it to RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 16:58, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done, sorry for the delay, Tamzin. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:21, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Please check your email; you've got mail!

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

or

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

template.

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

• The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

But How?

Why you delete Category:Wikipedians who use Android 10 this is not for vandalism or disruptive behavior please explain me as soon as possible. Thank you. HEA42DAVFA (talk) 03:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion by Category:Wikipedians who use Android 10 HEA42DAVFA (talk) 03:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, HEA42DAVFA,

Did you read the notice that was posted on your user talk page? That's the first step you should take. Empty categories are deleted unless they fit a small number of limited exceptions (category redirects, disambiguation categories, categories being discussed at CFD, etc.). This is true for all categories no matter what subject they are about. If they are deleted after being tagged for 7 days for being empty and are later needed, they can be recreated. This has nothing to do with vandalism or disruption, Wikipedia just does not stock up on empty categories that are not being used.

Please do not add pages to this category unless they are relevant. Random pages added to empty categories will be removed. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Question

I didn't want to take this to a noticeboard to avoid the lengthy heated debates that would probably arise, so here I am. Is the following statement appropriate for a user page? This user supports man/woman marriage as the definition needed to protect the integrity of the family, preserve the true meaning of marriage, and keep it as a child-focused institution. – ².O.^Boxing 10:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Squared.Circle.Boxing,

It is important to see isolated quotes in context. Can you provide a link to the page? Sometimes a user talk discussion should occur and other times a noticeboard discussion is called for. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:38, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Johnpacklambert – ².O.^Boxing 16:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi, saw you listed as a resource per How to request Revision Deletion. Would you look at this and decide whether it should be revdel'd? ☆ Bri (talk) 15:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bri,

Revision deletions are often judgment calls but this seems disruptive to me so I went ahead and deleted it. Thanks for removing it and bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:35, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Empty categories

My first question is, since when has there been a "seven days" rule on deleting categories that are tagged for speedy deletion? It can't be called "speedy" if there's a "you have to leave it there for a week" rule, and has to be renamed to something else.

My second question is, then what am I supposed to do in situations like Category:Swedish expatriate sportspeople in the Faroe Islands, where the use of a "fooian fooers" template in lieu of direct category declarations is causing the autogeneration of a non-existent Category:Swedish expatriates in the Faroe Islands parent category, whose status as a redlink is in turn causing it to appear on Special:WantedCategories — but precisely because that category is being autogenerated by a template, there's no category declaration to remove, and thus it's impossible to clear it off WantedCategories by any other method besides immediate speedy deletion? The answer to that isn't, and can't be, "just leave it sitting on WantedCategories as kludge to be worked around for seven days" — if Category:Swedish expatriates in the Faroe Islands is sitting there today, then I have to do whatever is necessary to get it cleared today, and can't leave some entries on that list sitting around for seven days as "non-actionable items". Bearcat (talk) 19:17, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Paid Editor tags on my Talk Page from new accounts

Hi Liz. Thank you for blocking Иван8 for their vandalism of my Talk Page, I greatly appreciate it.

Another new account has done the same, so I was wondering if you would be willing to block them too please? The account is AndrewRyan214. Thanks, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:09, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

I gave them a temporary block and a warning. I'm sorry you've had to put up with this harassment. I can also semi-protect your talk page for a while if this persists with other accounts. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:12, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! If it happens again, I will take up your kind offer of semi-protecting my Talk Page. All the best, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Liz. Another one just popped up from a new account, so it would be great if my Talk Page could be semi-protected. Would you be able to do this for me please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:20, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

I don't know if it is the same person but I've given the page temporary semi-protection. I hope it helps. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:25, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Wow that was quick, thank you so much. None of the accounts so far have been autoconfirmed, so I think this will be a great help. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi again. Sorry to both you, but my poor Talk Page has become a target for vandals again: Special:Contributions/Andy1292111, Special:Contributions/Lev19861, Special:Contributions/Armensar81, Special:Contributions/Acushian, Special:Contributions/DroopyPoopy, Special:Contributions/Ron4554 and Special:Contributions/Kevinhodges.

Could you please consider adding the semi-protection again? Thanks, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

just moving this old topic to the bottom, in case my new reply was missed) MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:33, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MrsSnoozyTurtle,

You shouldn't have to put up with this, I have semi-protected your user talk page for a week and filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Armensar81 on your behalf. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:00, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for all your efforts with this. I really appreciate you creating the sockpuppet investigation on my behalf. Hopefully the folks over there can find a pattern there to stop it popping up again in future. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:00, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

• Warren Stevelmans

Dear Liz, Thank you for support WUKF page a this is a great organization. Reza Goodary's article has credible sources approved by WP:News sources. Unfortunately, the article was not confirmed by one of the users yesterday. Please kindly help for approve. (1), (2), (3), (4). IRIB, IRNA, ILNA are in the list. Also IPNA is Iran Pro Sport News Agency (5) and BORNA News Agency (Reputable news agency affiliated with the Ministry of Sports of Iran) (6). Also It is news from official website of Ministry of Sport Iran (7) (Link open only in Iran). The Reza Goodary (رضا گودری) article already approved on The Persian Wikipedia. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 03:12, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MMA Kid,

I don't review articles, that is done by the good folks at WP:AFC. I recommend you talking to the reviewer for tips or going to the Teahouse which is a resource for new editors to ask for advice or visit Articles for Creation. I'm an administrator and spend most of my time on administrative tasks, not content review. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

You might also look for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts, that's a project for editors interested in martial arts. They might have some resources for creating strong articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for response and help. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

WUKF

Dear Liz, The WUKF page nominated for speedy deletion again. Sincerely. MMA Kid (talk) 02:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MMA Kid,

It looks like WUKF is a redirect page you just created. Did you mean another page? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, Yes. I mean is World Union of Karate Do Federations. Regards. MMA Kid (talk) 02:36, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm confused, this page isn't tagged for Speedy deletion, Proposed deletion or an AFD. It's had no activity since I removed the CSD tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi Liz, I was wondering if you could please redact revision ID 1043430816 on the page Rickey Brady. What the IP editor (2600:1700:64F0:2A20:D194:2B00:6808:EA20) wrote about Brady was pure libel. It falls without a question under criteria 2-- grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material. Thanks, Helen(💬📖) 02:48, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, HelenDegenerate,

Sorry I'm just seeing this. Looks like QEDK took care of it. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:50, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Edits

Hi there! Hope you’re well. I saw your note re my article and I would love any suggestions you may have how to have it post properly as I’ve for years edited revised reposted and been denied over and over regardless of the facts and other credits on wiki that are accurate it’s really strange to me it keeps getting rejected as many other people with similar background have similar worded articles and they’ll allowed and validated even. I seem to keep attracting rejections here and unclear entirely why. Happy to make edits needed just unsure how to do more than I have repeatedly done. Thank you for any suggestions in advance and your time / attention. Wolfstarmoon (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Wolfstarmoon,

I assume you are talking about Draft:Tom Syrowski? I deleted the draft simply because it had gone 6 months without any edits by human editors (not bots). You can get it restored either by asking me (or any administrator) or by going to WP:REFUND.

I don't review content creation, I handle administrative tasks but I think it's unusual for a recording engineer to have an article on Wikipedia unless they are particularly notable. You can receive some editing help at a number of pages including Articles for Creation, WikiProject Music or, especially, the Teahouse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:58, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

My ip is a VPN

The ip that i'm editing from right now is a proxy ip, can you block it?

Hello, User:1.53.126.126,

You are asking me to block your account? From what I can see, you are not a proxy account but maybe one of my lovely talk page stalkers can check this claim out. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:22, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Here's proof: https://www.vpngate.net/en/ (you can see that the ip on the page). Also here: https://www.ipqualityscore.com/free-ip-lookup-proxy-vpn-test/lookup/1.53.126.126

Hello, Enwiki~enwiki,

Okay, thanks for the link, I've never seen that website before. And I've never had an editor come to my talk page, asking to be blocked. And I've never made a block on a proxy IP so I'm not sure of the appropriate block length but I gave them a week. If any admins visiting this page think this is a sinfully short period of time, please correct the duration of the block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

A pie for a good admin

Andrybak has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Being an admin can be tiring and tedious. Put the mop away for a while and have a pie. Thank you for contributions to the project! —⁠andrybak (talk) 10:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

—⁠andrybak (talk) 10:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, thank you, andrybak, that's very kind of you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Quitento

Hello there. You have deleted the article Quitento, which was prod-ed. However, I contested such proposed deletion by providing sources in the talk page. Granted, I should have added those to the article, but it's clear it complies with the general notability guideline. Please restore it. Kind regards. Bedivere (talk) 14:28, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bedivere,

I'm used to editors simply removing the PROD tag if they disagree with the proposed deletion. It has been restored upon your request. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, Liz. No worries! I'm just accustomed to the Spanish Wikipedia procedures in these cases. Proposed deletions are discussed on talk pages and these tags can only be removed by admins or the user who tagged the article. Anyway, good to know. And thanks for restoring it as requested. Kind regards. Bedivere (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Well, on the English Wikipedia, editors can remove speedy deletion tags and PROD tags but they are asked to provide a reason and improve the article if they do so. The restrictions that exist here is that editors can not remove speedy deletion tags from pages they have created and no one should remove an Articles for Deletion tag until the discussion has concluded. Now that I write this all out though, I can see why this system is confusing to newer editors, especially if the procedures are different on their home Wikipedia. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Katharine Towne

Hi Liz, I am not sure reverting to an earlier version is the best thing. The last submitter did add some additional sources (they were not formal citations but nonetheless something). In addition, it removes my decline and comments providing my reasoning for the decline along with some guidance. Granted, I am new to AfC so could be completely wrong. S0091 (talk) 23:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, S0091,

I'm not sure what to do, I haven't run into this before. Everything that I reverted to was in the page history that had been restored. I re-added your AFC decline to the current version.

Maybe Anachronist can assist...should I revert my reversion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I left a comment there. I think the version you restored has better content and formatting than the original submission, but the original submission had better sources (while the one you restored has none). I merged the contents of both versions, so now the sources are back as external links. If they were incorporated into the article as inline citations (which is the responsibility of the submitter to make that effort, not me), we may have something worth publishing in main space. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:12, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Thanks to both of you. S0091 (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your merging magic, Anachronist. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:17, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

There was no magic, just manual effort. The submitter has some work to do, particularly learning how to cite sources. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Thank you for clearing out the promo and hoaxes I've found at Category:Stale userspace drafts. Your help is greatly appreciated. Keep up the great work! MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, MrLinkinPark333, but as far as I'm concerned, you did the heavy lifting, going through those old drafts. That's unseen and thankless work that is heroic to me. It's kind of like wandering into uncharted territory. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Sami Jasim Muhammad al-Jaburi

Hello can you please see if this article which was proposed for deletion actually meets the criteria for deletion. Please see my message. 197.52.65.201 (talk) 00:57, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, 197.52.65.201,

Proposed deletion is for uncontroversial deletion. If you disagree with the nomination, then you can remove the PROD tag from the article. In my experience, a good proportion of articles that have been de-PRODded are then nominated for deletion at Articles for Deletion. That action prompts a deletion discussion where you could make an argument for whether you believe the article should be kept or deleted. Right now, it only has an PROD tag which can be challenged by any editor. If you do remove the PROD tag, please respond to the deletion rationale in your edit summary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Liz, so can I remove the PROD tag without making the User who nominated it for deletion keep nominating it for deletion again and again, because I was just reading the reason for nominating it for deletion and I said that It was a bad reason because Rewards for Justice and the FBI are reliable sources and It has other refs not only Rewards for Justice and the FBI. So then the User who nominated for deletion should also see the article Abu Muhammad al-Shimali which all of its refs are based on Rewards for Justice and FBI. 197.52.65.201 (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If a prod is removed, it can't be added back. However, there is an expectation that if you remove the prod, you will improve the article in a way that addresses the concerns. Once the prod is removed, if the next step is to start a discussion at WP:AFD if someone still believes the article should be deleted. I have removed the prod tag, with my reasoning in the edit summary. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Listen to Anachronist, 197.52.65.201. At this point, you can not stop an editor for nominating a page for deletion, but you can work improving the article so that other editors agree with you that it should be kept. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County

Would you mind explaining why you deleted this page? It doesn't seem to be standard practice to delete WikiProjects, especially speedily without any discussion, and your deletion left several traces behind, including hundreds of articles still tagged as belonging to the project. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:08, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Pppery,

Oh, my God, I have no idea what happened here. Thank you for bringing it to my attention so I could restore the page. There is no reason to delete a WikiProject main & talk page unless it is a result of a WP:MFD discussion and the general opinion there is to prefer to turn inactive and defunct WikiProject pages into redirects to active ones. I do know that UnitedStatesian and I have been cleaning up empty categories that were never used for article assessments but those are categories not main WikiProject pages. I'll go through my Deletion log for the past few weeks and make sure that this mistake didn't happen twice. I am very thankful that you came to my talk page and allowed me to rectify my mistake. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:29, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I encountered this myself, somewhat ironically, when doing a similar bit of maintenance (cleaning up "WikiProject X <members/participants> categories" for defunct/nonexistent projects). Also remember to restore any redirects and subpages you deleted, which appears to include Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Articles, Wikipedia:ALVA, Wikipedia:Albemarle, and Wikipedia:ALBVA, and their talk pages. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I went back to August in my Deletion log and I just found those redirects to Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County, Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Left and Wikipedia:WikiProject Albemarle County/Articles which I have restored, all of the rest were empty assessment categories from inactive and defunct WikiProjects which is what we were focusing on. I don't know how this random Virginia County WikiProject got in the mix. Strange but I found Wikipedia talk:ALVA had been tagged for speedy deletion but none of the others were. The rest is all on me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:53, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Tiffany Houghton

Thank you for restoring this page. Is there a tag or chit or something I should attach to the page to indicate that it is beyond the reach of a G4 speedy? Chubbles (talk) 15:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Chubbles,

I don't know of an appropriate tag but there are hundreds of templates and tags on Wikipedia. I posted a comment on Missvain's talk page so she might know or you can ask at the Teahouse, I've almost always been able to get an answer there. Sorry. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:55, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Zoca

Don't fret, this wasn't a draft but an article an admin decided wasn't good enough. Spoiled the whole clogs ecosystem but I cleaned up after whoever it was. Regards, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Martin,

If you want to continue to work on Draft:Zocca (shoe) just let me know or you can ask at WP:REFUND. Drafts deleted due to inactivity can be restored today, tomorrow or next year if you find some better sources. One of the few kinds of page deletions on Wikipedia that is easy to reverse. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

No, as I mentioned another editor had put a bit about zocas onto the main page instead of its own page as is done for all the different types of clogs. I moved the information off to restore the clogs page and I was sat on by an admin so just cleaned it all up. That's why my name was on the stub. As I said, don't fret about it, admin action had condemned it 6 months ago. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

User:Faster than Thunder

Hi Liz. Would you mind taking a look at this? Perhaps there's no real harm since there's no RFA for this user, but it might be seen as misleading. In addition, based on these, this might be a WP:YOUNG editor who might mean well, but might not realize things like WP:REALWORLD; at the same time though, it also kind of seems like this isn't a completely new editor based on some of the technical things they've been trying to do so far. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1077#User:Faster than Thunder and WP:CIR for more on that possibility. Maybe the ANI thread should be re-opened to see if it can be more formally resolved? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Marchjuly,

I posted a message on their talk page. They've only been editing for two weeks, for me, it's too soon to issue a block for competency when it's actually inexperience. I read that ANI thread and there was some question about socking and that's more of a concern to me...if they start being disruptive, I suggest contacting a Checkuser. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Liz. I think you message is probably fine for now. FWIW, I first came across the account because of this edit, which seemed to a bit too BOLD for a major policy page. I only saw the ANI discussion after I first posted here. It seems that there are probably a number of others (including admins) already watching the account; so, perhaps someone will indeed step in if things start getting too disruptive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:16, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Headcount Index by Parish in Antigua and Barbuda

Hi, you removed my CSD tag. The text and table for Headcount Index by Parish in Antigua and Barbuda are fully copied from here on page 25. Citing (talk) 02:59, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Citing,

As I said in my edit summary, if you looked at the source, it says it was published in 2007 and the chart on the article says the data from 2011. That is why I PROD'd the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:20, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Right, but I had tagged it for speedy deletion as an unambiguous copyright infringement -- the text is almost a word-for-word copy of its source. I'm not sure why Earwig is showing it at 0% because it should be closer to 100%.Citing (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Notice

You've got mail. - wolf 20:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thewolfchild,

I don't see an email message. I don't check it very often but I did tonight and I don't see anything from you. Did you use the link on the left or an email address you have? Did you send it today or a few days ago? Let me know and I'll investigate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:45, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes and "b". I'll just resend. - wolf 14:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Still nuthin'...? - wolf 04:14, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

I forgot, I'll check right now. My apologies. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, Thewolfchild, I've responded. Sorry for the delay. Nice to hear from you! Let me know if you don't get my response. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Do not interfere or I will.

I do not need your mindfulness diatribe. I will not assume good faith, as you have attempted to intervene in a scenario in which your elderly assistance is clearly unneeded. I have put three tags, as they are necessary. Your asinine contribution has done nothing and thus, it is highly advisable you retract your choice and do not engage with me on this platform anymore. If you continue, I will seek higher authority in legislative manners. Not a threat, it is a promise. Gongfong2021 (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Gongfong2021,

First, I have no idea what you are talking about. Is this about an article? A talk page comment? I make hundreds of edits a day I have no clue what this is about.

And second, if you continue like this, insulting people at random, you will find yourself blocked. We believe in civility at Wikipedia. That's not a threat or a promise, it's a fact. I've seen plenty of people like you and they don't last very long here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:49, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Wait, is this regarding Chemmalai Maha Vidyalayam? If so, then you must be User:JohnDVandevert. Why are you signing messages Gongfong2021 instead of a regular editor signature? That's why I didn't recognize your name. That is deceptive...you should use your current username so people know who you are. And sorry for "engaging with you on this platform" but I usually respond to messages on my talk page. Especially the crazier ones. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:16, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Now that I've gone through your edit history, John, I've found 5 or 6 other editors you have ordered to "not have contact with me!" including Ponyo and Cabayi, two other administrators, so I'm in good company (wait a second, I tripped over my walker, I'm such an old geezer). I do not think you will make a good Teahouse host with that attitude (nice photo though). And someone thought you were a sockpuppet of John from Idegon who was a good editor but who shared your surly attitude.

Well, this was one of the more peculiar introductions to new editors I've had but back to the actual work of cleaning up this project....I look forward to hearing from "higher authority in legislative manners", it will be interesting to find out who the hell that is. Bye. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I just saw this

I presume in the short while Ashleyyoursmile was here you both had mutual respect for each other and I’m pretty sure her exit subconsciously upset you. I’m not sure how I missed it, perhaps at the same time frame when I had sustained a knee injury. Coming from BN I saw your input and i can tell this hit you hard. Hopefully she’d be back. Celestina007 (talk) 23:40, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Celestina007,

Welcome back to my talk page. Unfortunately, lately we have only interacted at ANI which is a place I try and stay away from these days. I spent my early days hanging out at ANI, trying to mediate conflict, but now I like to stick to the work.

I'm not sure I'm "upset", emotionally, I just think it's tragic. Ashleyyoursmile was like you, a workaholic, and I cleaned up a lot of pages from vandals she reported. She was tireless. And, unfortunately, at least one of those people came back to the project and made it their mission to malign and insult her very personally and graphically. We had to do a lot of revision deletion. And this was before she became an admin so there might have been more after her RfA that she quietly cleaned up herself without mentioning it. I don't know if this is why she left but, if it happened to me (and it was much worse than the message above this one), I would have had second thoughts about being here. And having her departure come after she had weathered an RfA, which, for me was a very unpleasant experience, it must have been serious. Editors usually don't come back after a vanishing and I think someone as active as she was would just have to cut their ties. It reminds me of an outstanding Indian editor we had who had to vanish after he was personally threatened in his off-wiki life. It is so unfair and it seems to happen to the best people, editors who stand up for Wikipedia pillars.

But we really don't know why she left and I expect we never will. But I hope WMF & Wikipedia finds better ways to protect their editors who come under fire. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I have no idea what the circumstances are but I was sad and disappointed when I learned that she had retired. Really too bad. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:11, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

It really is awful, I respect her decision all the same. I really was routing for her to become a celebrated sysop just like you. If what was intended to be a hobby that brings you happiness is doing the inverse of that, then dropping it is a good idea. Celestina007 (talk) 22:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

"Celebrated"? LOL, there are those who would disagree with your evaluation. I keep busy but I just hope to be in the top 50% of admins, better than average. I could have benefited from your support at my RfA which was a squeaker! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:19, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Anyone who doesn’t appreciate you, clearly do not know about your works at G13's, you carry about 90% of the workload there and this is not even an exaggeration. But yeah! I get your drift. Celestina007 (talk) 01:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Pist Idiots

Hi Liz, I saw you deleted an article on Pist Idiots back in August and dare I say accurately. I am Australian and listen to a lot of music and have never heard of them. They released a debut studio album this week, and according to ARIA, it's on track to debut inside the ARIA top 50 albums this Friday. https://www.aria.com.au/charts/news/amyl-and-the-sniffers-steps-pist-idiots-aiming-for-top-tens-on-this-weeks-aria-charts

As such, I went to create a stub article in preparation and saw it had been deleted by yourself. Are you able to un-delete or send what was done, I can do some research, add some content and make it notable for Friday, assuming their album does debut inside the top 50. Thanks Tobyjamesaus (talk) 04:58, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tobyjamesaus,

I checked and it was a completely blank pages. Nothing there. So, I can say with 100% confidence that your version will be an improvement! I generally advise folks to start in Draft space and submit it to Articles for Creation for review...you have a greater chance of it surviving editors who patrol new pages if you get a review from the AFC folks. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

LOL - a blank page??? Oh Lordy... Ok thanks. Yeah, well, I planned on working on it for a bit first. I've created quite a lot of pages, so I am fairly familiar with what makes something notable :). Thank you though. Tobyjamesaus (talk) 05:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC).

Abdulrahman Akkad

Hi user:Liz, how are you , I think this article is promotional Article ,can you look into it, and if you want delete it and delete the promotional links Social Media stay safe --Hasan AB123 (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Liz,

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.

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)

Batch deletions

Liz

Thank you for your entirely reasonable comment on my talk page. I have only one comment to make.

Oops! ----Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 11:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Anthony,

And thank you for your very reasonable response! I've made the same mistake...and other admins, too. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the page Rise Up Dubai

I saw that you put the Speedy deletion nomination in that page, which is entirely necessary and you did that. But the page author/creator is removing or playing with the tamplet by renaming it. I just re placed the speedy deletion nomination tamplet but he will do that again. So please do something, otherwise he will not Stop doing disruptive editing Jogesh 69 (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jogesh 69,

Thanks for the alert. I'll check on the article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Luca Stricagnoli

@Liz: Hi liz , i hope you are keeping well, you helped delete an old draft of mine last year, i worked on a very simple short new version a few months ago that one of the other editors that previously rejected it said was better, it was then rejected for a few reasons, so the newest editor gave some pointers for more context and citation. I was working on that while not to make it like a resume, i was nearly ready to put up the new draft for review when it was deleted without notice, that editor was a bit rude and i didnt find it on the deleted log and dont know how to get it back, I am always willing to work on things but i thought this was a little harsh can anything be done?. thanks for listening Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 11:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mickmonaghan343,

You're going to have some problems here. Draft:Luca Stricagnoli was deleted as being promotional and another version was previously deleted in a deletion discussion in 2020. I think your best bet, if you don't want to start from scratch, is to ask the deleting administrator, Bbb23, to "userfy" it, that is restore it and put it in your User space, like your Sandbox where you can work on improving it.

Alternatively, you could file an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review, arguing that it shouldn't have been deleted but I'd recommend contacting the deleting administrator directly and making an appeal to them. Don't argue with them, I'd say that you are aware of the problems that existed with the draft and you have some ideas on how to fix them (which is honestly what you just told me). It never helps to be polite...administrators' goal is not to make your life difficult but to remove content that they believe is unacceptable from the project. If you have ways to fix the problems they saw, mention that. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:33, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Thanks for your message and advice, i asked to userfy it but im not to hopeful as i got a bad vibe about this editors attitude compared to everyone else who have been very helpful.Below is what was said and no reply since.

Hi Bbb23 I was in the middle of editing my page and you deleted it, I have been working on this a long time and was following guidance from another mod on how to fix it and get it approved.The last mod told me to find more citation and that does make it a little one sided but he rejected the unbiased original one for lack of context , can you reinstate it please and i would appreciate your adviceMickmonaghan343 (talk) 14:05, 16 September 2021 (UTC) .

My advice is to do something else on Wikipedia besides promote Stricagnoli. The only thing you've been doing for the last three years is work on that draft, and all you've achieved is an advertisement.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Mickmonaghan343 (talk) 11:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Zakarid Armenia

Hello, I require your help at Zakarid Armenia because there is a person who reverted my Afd for the third time already. SonofJacob (talk) 09:38, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Salts and ACPERM

Hi, Liz. Thanks for deleting Ziaul Hoque Polash. I noticed that after deleting it, you salted it too. However, when you salted it, you protected it against creation by non-confirmed editors (I think I've seen you do that before). Given WP:ACPERM forbids non-autoconfirmed editors from creating pages in the mainspace anyways, I think you meant to put it under extended-confirmed protection. Sdrqaz (talk) 10:03, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sdrqaz,

You are correct. Thanks for noticing and brining it to my attention. I'll fix that right now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Stephen Borthwick

Hello, Liz. Just wondering, did you notice that I had disputed the speedy deletion tag for Stephen Borthwick (schoolmaster) on the Talk page? Moonraker (talk) 17:09, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Moonraker,

Just a cursory look at the old version, prior to the first deletion, and the last version of this page, but the references look similar to me. The AFD was just closed in January 2021 so it was not that long ago. But taking into account your years of experience, I will restore all edits and move it into Draft or User space (I'd recommend User space) for you if you wish.

Since you have autopatrolled status, this might sound silly but the only way I know to get around a recent AFD deletion decision is to have an AFC review and approval. Otherwise, if you move it back into main space, even with improvements, it will probably just be tagged again for deletion (and it might be tagged in Draft space which is why I recommend moving it to a User page). Let me know what you think. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:13, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, helpful reply. Well, yes, the references are mostly the same, and they are good ones. I have a saved version in user space. You may see my point that one AfD decision (a bad one in this case, in my humble opinion) can’t be for all time. Perhaps an AFC review is the way forward, but on the other hand is there an AfD review, and is there any time limit? Moonraker (talk) 21:56, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Disruptive editing by User:Pitzzaboy. Thank you. ― Tartan357 ^Talk 21:05, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Tartan357. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

A kitten for you ! :D

The furret lover (talk) 05:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, The furret lover. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 46

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

• Library design improvements deployed
• New collections available in English and German
• Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Request for Extension of Full Protection for the Kisii people Article.

Hey Liz,

Thank you for protecting the Kisii people article which was being vandalized through blanking and deletion of content. However, I'm requesting you to extend the full protection of the page to 6 months or indefinitely because the article seems prone to vandalism. I'm sure once the current page protection is removed, there are still going to be more attempts to vandalize the article. I believe long term protection of the page will be very beneficial in preventing future vandalism. I will appreciate your extension of full protection for this page. Thank you! Nyanza Cushitic (talk) 22:35, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nyanza Cushitic,

The standard approach to protection is to have the duration and level of protection the minimum possible to avoid disruption, especially for full protection which doesn't allow any editors to edit the page except administrators who are not supposed to use their status to change content in content disputes.

I would feel more comfortable if you posted your request to extend the protection to such a long duration at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for increase in protection level. Administrators who patrol that noticeboard have a better feel for what an appropriate level of protection would be and for the length of the protection. Until that decision is made, I'll make sure that the article is not the site of an edit-war. But admins kind of specialize in these tasks and I'd rather have an admin experienced in this to make such a big decision, especially since I imagine that full protection for six months would be a decision that would be appealed. I don't think I've run into full protection of an article for such a long period of time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Liz, thank you for your suggestion. Can you please block Wojak6 from editing this article? His edits are very destructive and vandalizes articles. His vandalism actions on the Kisii people article were very unacceptable and destructive to the article. This editor has done serious damage to many articles and needs to be blocked indefinitely to stop vandalizing articles. Nyanza Cushitic (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Nyanza Cushitic, are you discussing your differences on the article talk page? Could you invite other editors to participate in the discussion? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

About deletion of "Draft:Shorash Baker"

Hello Liz,

I've read your comment about the deletion, I want to address to you the subject personally. we are "Kurds", we are already being suppressed by the dictatorships, if you do a simple google search about "Afrin City" you will see the pictures of bombing and destruction. The Turkish media and it's huge online army is trying with all its resources to eliminate our presence on land and online... therefore, I was not able to gather enough "satisfying Media links, resources" for this article, because they make sure that our culture, artists, names, etc.. get played-off.

However, the artists I tried to make an article about, "shorash baker", if you do also a simple google search about his name, you will find his official record label, Spotify verified artist profile, verified artist YouTube channel, etc.. Please consider this subject, and the circumstances about this small occupied city, at least to have its people's and culture online.

Thank you.

Hello, Xelilof,

This draft was deleted because it hadn't been edited in 6 months, not for any political reasons. With no activity after 6 months, drafts are considered to be "abandoned" and are deleted. If you want to continue to work on it, I can restore it for you or you can make a request at WP:REFUND. I didn't make any judgments about the notability of this person, that is done by reviewers at Articles for Creation. You should discuss their review with them.

When you make a talk page post, please sign it with 4 tildes (~~~~) so that it includes your username, a link to your talk page and the time & date of your message. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

About deletion of "Jashmir"

The article "Jashmir" was removed for copyright infringement after it was run through a plagiarism scanner. The page on the website that was supposedly plagiarized was created after the Wikipedia article, not vice versa! Whoever wrote the article on that website simply copy pasted the Wikipedia entry.

Please review the deletion. Thank you! Moonswimmer Mooonswimmer 16:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Mooonswimmer,

You were absolutely correct here. When I looked into this case, it was very strange, Enverceylan, a new editor, asked another editor to tag it for a copyright violation (he asked several editors to do this for him), and after you reverted this tagging, another brand new editor reverted you. Have you had contact with Enverceylan? He tried writing an article about himself at Enver Ceylan but I can't see why he was so insistent about this article being deleted.

I'm sorry for not being more thorough when I checked this article. Thank you for bringing it to my attention. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Have a good day

Hi,Mrs Liz.I just saw your sentence I wish we had more editors with knowledge of that country to evaluate the notability of Azerbaijani athletes and the quality of the sources used.If you need any help with this, I'll be happy to help.As a sports journalist in a famous news agency in Azerbaijan, I have some knowledge about these issues. Good day again. MuradAli2000

About deletion of Anup Shukla(More Than 10 Years Old Page)

--AnupShukla (talk) 12:37, 24 September 2021 (UTC) hi Liz On September 22, 2001 I suddenly came to know that my page which is more than 10 years old has been deleted,I don't understand why and how this happened,I think this page got deleted due to some misunderstanding,I would like to tell you that this page was not created by me,I have done many international projects,Any updates that have been made are done by the same people who were involved in some way in the international project,I feel very unfortunate that such an old page has been deleted in such a way, I feel as if injustice is being done to me,So I request you to restore my deleted page I will be very grateful to you. my page link is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anup_Shukla IMDB -https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3754623/

About Deletion of Shakir Subhan

Hello, Article about a youtube vlogger Shakir Subhan has been deleted by you, a day ago. The reason you said was recreation of already deleted page. So my reply to you is, article firstly created by someone who wrote in a bad way, that why it got deleted by other user. But later, i created it most perfectly with additional references over 27 News think so. Still it got deleted by you with reason "Recreation". I was created the article as Shakir Subhan (Mallu Traveler), but someone renamed it to Shakir Subhan. Whether its recreation or not, the article i provided was perfectly Written about a well Notable youtuber person. I request you to recheck again & bring back the same article to wikipedia. Otherwise i need to be suggest same article to other extended confirmed users to bring back it... So thanks for your time to read it & hope your reply Xavier 500.30.10 (talk) 16:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

• News and notes: New CEO, new board members, China bans

• In the media: The future of Wikipedia

• Opinion: Wikimedians of Mainland China were warned

• Op-Ed: I've been desysopped

• Disinformation report: Paid promotional paragraphs in German parliamentary pages

• Discussion report: Editors discuss Wikipedia's vetting process for administrators

• Recent research: Wikipedia images for machine learning; Experiment justifies Wikipedia's high search rankings

• Community view: Is writing Wikipedia like making a quilt?

• Traffic report: Kanye, Emma Raducanu and 9/11

• News from Diff: Welcome to the first grantees of the Knowledge Equity Fund

• WikiProject report: The Random and the Beautiful

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft talk:Susovan Sonu Roy

Hi Liz, I'm pretty confused here. They're obviously a sock of [1] and [2]. This thing quacks like crazy. Waggie (talk) 06:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Waggie,

I don't see what you are seeing but I'm not familiar with every sockpuppet and every article. I suggest bringing this to the attention of one of the admins who has blocked the sockpuppets as they will be familiar with their habits. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

I figured a quick look at the history of the deleted article and talk page history would have made it clear (I can't link to them for obvious reasons. It's OK, though. Although, maybe leave it for a different admin if you're not familiar? That said, it's your tools and your prerogative. Please have a good day/night! Waggie (talk) 06:47, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Namchak Tsasum Lingpa (September 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Namchak Tsasum Lingpa may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bkissin (talk) 15:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Liz! It was coming up as 88% on Earwig. Bkissin (talk) 15:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

It's no problem, Bkissin, I look at hundreds of CSD G13 drafts every day and if one looks especially promising, I'll submit it to AfC for review. I didn't stop and analyze the content. Sorry to take up some of your time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Maybe you can answer a question for me, Bkissin, it seems like notices like this should be directed at the page creator, not the individual who places a submission tag on a page. I've also been congratulated for successful drafts that I didn't write, I just put an AfC submit tag on the page. I always thought that the page creator should get a notice like that, not me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I used to do the same thing around the G13 drafts! Unfortunately Liz the same thing happens to me. I think it's an issue with the Helper Script. I'll bring it up on the AfC talk page and see what people know about it. Bkissin (talk) 00:04, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Star Wars drafts

Hi Liz. You deleted this under G5 because of the user who created it was violating a block or ban. Even though that was the case, I believe I had made some edits to it and was one of the editors maintain it etc. Can this be recovered? Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Favre1fan93,

I thought the primary contributions were from the sockpuppet but I'll track it down and look at it again. Other editors can have made some edits to a page and it can still be deleted, for me, it's whether the sockpuppet was the primary editor in terms of content added to the page. It's a rather subjective opinion by the admin looking over the page, I've seen some admins delete pages where the sockpuppet only created the page and then made no further edits to the page but I look at whether they were the primary content contributor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Liz: Thank you. If I personally recall, I do believe the sockpuppet did create the bulk of the edits, and my contributions could have been minor afterwards. If you can't restore it for the reasons you stated, is there a way at least that the wikicode for the table could be copied, even into a personal sandbox of mine, so I could restore the template properly? I do find it a useful template, and I could start from scratch, but I know I might miss some elements that were in the previous version if I did. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:07, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi again @Liz:. Just wanted to follow up on the possibility to restore this template or at least salvage the coding? I have since realized/remembered that the template helped autocategorize articles into Category:Star Wars drafts and now that cat has essentially been emptied as a result of this template being deleted. Thanks. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 01:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Something.

I just noticed that some of WoW's old contributions are now back in the contributions log. Is this a mistake or did an admin intentionally do this? 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Direct link btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Willy_on_wheels~enwiki 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Disregard, just realized this was a different person. 69.117.241.47 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I was looking at both accounts and couldn't understand what was going on...but slightly different usernames. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Levi Sharan

Hi Liz. Thanks for your tireless efforts working on WP.

You removed the {{db-afc}} tag at Draft:Levi Sharan because "it's not been six months since the last human edit. For today, that would be March 28, 2021". The last edit (prior to my tagging) was May 9, and this was not a meaningful/real page edit, but merely a page move to correct capitalisation. The last real edit on this page was December 29, 2020. It would certainly qualify for CSD#G13. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, P199,

One other admin and I review anywhere from 200 to 300 expiring drafts each and every day of the week and we don't make distinctions between "meaningful" edits and those that are just cosmetic. We just see when the last edit by a human editor was done. The quality of an edit is a subjective judgment that would vary too much among administrators. We just go by the calendar and discount edits by bots. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:42, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate your incredible hard work, but in this case you may need to show some leeway, especially since you are suggesting that the next time this draft may come up for deletion is March 28, 2022! And only because requesting deletion was a human action by me! That is utterly defeating the purpose of this process... Thanks again. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Your inaction sacrifices proper application of WP policy for expediency. This is not right... Please take appropriate action. Thanks. -- P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, P199,

I don't understand the urgency you are feeling about the deletion of this draft. Is there a problem with this specific draft or is this your opinion about stale drafts in general? If you have problems with Draft:Levi Sharan, you need to let me know what they are or you can consider another criteria for speedy deletion that might fit. If you want to challenge Wikipedia policies and how they are practiced, you should start a discussion and present your argument at Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion and see if it resonates with other editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Benahficial Creed

How you are doing, I, Benahficial Creed in the flesh, well, in the pixel. Lol. I, Benahficial, as know as #ItsCreed, would love some help with my wiki page, please. Benahficial (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Benahficial,

I recommend visiting the Teahouse for help, there are very experienced and friendly editors there who can answer any questions you have. Good luck! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I did a lil bit can u give me your thoughts? Benahficial (talk) 22:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I moved your draft to User:Benahficial/Sandbox as it shouldn't be on your main User page. You have no sources, you need to have substantial coverage in newspapers, magazines, books, mainstream websites (and social media doesn't count) in order to be judged to be notable. You have to have a notable career to have an article on Wikipedia. If no one has written about you, it's too soon for you to have an article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:40, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Restore talk page of premature deletion

Hello! I noticed that you accidentally deleted the page University (film) before the PROD expired and you also ended up deleting the talk page as well. Could you restore the talk page as well? (not sure if there's anything that was of note on it before it got deleted) ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:06, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Blaze The Wolf,

•  Done Yes, that was my mistake. There is a list we use, User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary, and typically, those PRODs listed at the top are the ones coming due in the next hour or two. I thought those listed at the top were for today, 9/22 but they are for tomorrow, 9/23. I've never seen such a gap in time before in the listings. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:12, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

That's very interesting. Wonder if you somehow got through all the PRODs for today. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:14, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Good job Mohammed12313893 (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, not sure how I earned this but it's always nice to get some appreciation. Happy editing! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:54, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Lmao, perhaps because you are internet famous & a Wiki celebrity? Celestina007 (talk) 22:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 Guild of Copy Editors newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors September 2021 Newsletter Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021.                  Current and upcoming events September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Drive and Blitz reports June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive). Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Aj Raval Article

Hello, I noticed that you deleted the AJ Raval article because it was created by a user who was banned/blocked.

Leaving aside the blocked user for a moment, that article had an extensive deletion discussion which resulted in no consensus and ultimately resulted in the article not being deleted. I am confident that the subject is notable (and there have been some articles/references that have come out since that discussion which further buttresses their notability).

Therefore, I would like to request that you restore the article. Alternatively, I can recreate the article, though I am unsure how to retrieve the previous version. Thank you. Koikefan (talk) 02:53, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

G5

I have undeleted Draft:Istana Gedung Dalom 2, Draft:Islam in Lampung (2), Draft:Islam in Lampung, and Draft:Gong Gajah Mekhu, which you deleted as WP:CSD#G5. While they were created by sockpuppets of Dedy Tisna Amijaya, G5 requires pages to have been created in violation of the sockmaster's block or ban. This was not the case, as the master and their puppets were simultaneously blocked on September 29 per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dedy Tisna Amijaya/Archive#29 September 2021. G5 can not be applied before that date. This was also explained to the IP who tagged these pages as well. ✗plicit 03:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Talkback @ MISSION 33 Talk Page

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at MISSION 33's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Click here to see the Discussion →MISSION 33 (talk) 04:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Ibiza

Hello, Liz. Can you check my first stub-article User:Владлен Манилов/Ibiza (Philipp Kirkorov and Nikolay Baskov song)? I think it fits the criteria WP:NSINGLE. The song reached a place in the national charts. Kiselyov wrote about the music video. I want you to check my English in the article and correct it if there are any mistakes. Can this exist as a stub in the mainspace? Thanks. — Vladlen Manilov ✉ / 05:16, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Article for Deletion Daura, Nigeria

The Article Daura already exist and I unknowingly created another Daura, Nigeria. Therefore you can go on with the deletion. Thank you Uncle Bash007 (talk) 08:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Callanecc

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
• Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

• DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

Arbitration

• A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
• Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
• The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

• Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
• The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Boyz (Jesy Nelson song)

There are two versions of this article, one of which is spelled Draft:BOYZ (Jesy Nelson song). There has been vandalism; I have tried to revert some of it. The two versions should probably be merged. I think that the proper place is in draft space, because the song is not yet released. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Greg26 93 and "Back TO Christ" promotions

Thanks for dealing with those. There's one more at Draft:Back To Christ but I didn't know if it could be speedied. Meters (talk) 06:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Meters,

Yes, I saw that page. You know, admins differ in their judgments of pages and, for me, although that draft will never be an article, it doesn't have any unacceptable content on it that would warrant a speedy deletion. I'm not sure what CSD tag would even be appropriate.

Yesterday, I had to restore a lot of just crappy articles & drafts that I deleted because I misread an SPI report. I couldn't make any sense of the writing, it seemed like nonsense to me, it wasn't coherent in any way. But it didn't violate any of our guidelines as long as it wasn't in main space. I think I might tag some of the pages for MFD but the bottom line is that we see a lot of content that is junk or misplaced and, in many cases, we wait for CSD G13 to kick in to delete it because there isn't a CSD criteria for just bad writing. We don't even delete drafts that are not written in English. So, we live with the criteria that we can use.

Of course, you could tag that page and another admin might find grounds to delete it. But I didn't see any CSD criteria that fit, in my judgment. Thanks so much for paying attention, especially on a weekend. ;-) Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

That's pretty much what I thought about the criteria, too. Meters (talk) 06:57, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Mexico City Grand Prix

Hello Liz. I'm a little confused by some recent actions of yours relating to the Mexico City Grand Prix. See my comments at Talk:2021 Formula One World Championship#Piped links and also User talk:Island92#Mexico City Grand Prix. Are my assumptions about what it will take to fix the problem wrong? --DB1729 (talk) 04:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, DB1729,

I am not following you or the conversation you linked to about piped links. There was a CSD request to move an article to Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton) which I did. It seemed straight-forward to me. Are you saying that this was a contentious move request? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:46, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I assumed it was going to have go through RM because of this requested move in February. Also all you have really done is swap the article with the redirect. We need Mexico City Grand Prix to point to the F1 race Mexican Grand Prix. Ultimately I think the F1 race will be titled Mexico City Grand Prix if/when primary is established. --DB1729 (talk) 04:51, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I'll ping Tvx1 who tagged the redirect and requested the page move and see what they have to say. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:55, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I believe most of those involved are among our friends across the Atlantic. They may be waking up soon. --DB1729 (talk) 04:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Just for reference, in case you missed it because it was sort of buried; here is my relevant comment from one of the talk pages I linked:

We cannot currently link to Mexico City Grand Prix because a) it's not a redirect, it's an article, and b) it's...badminton. We can't, that is, until after we get that article moved to the current redirect Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton). To do that, that redirect and its content will have to be deleted and its edit histories merged to make way for the move. Also there was a requested move in February to move the badminton article there in the first place, so all this will need to go through another WP:RM process. Then, after all that, we can have a redirect named Mexico City Grand Prix that points to the Formula One race.

Keep in mind several facts are now untrue after your page move. Also pinging User:SSSB while I'm at it. DB1729 (talk) 05:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Final note for now. Maybe I don't understand how edit histories work with moves, and I hope I'm not the bringing bad news, but here is the edit history of the current redirect at Mexico City Grand Prix. It contains only your page move. There was an article about badminton with that title, so is that edit history now moved to here at Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton)? If so, what happened to the edit history of the redirect that existed at Mexico City Grand Prix (badminton) before your move? DB1729 (talk) 05:50, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

The edit history of that redirect was deleted, I assume. The edit history of the article on the badminton tournament was moved to the disambiguated tile along with the article itself. The only thing that was left to do to make Mexico City Grand Prix correctly redirect to Mexican Grand Prix, was to simply change the target of that redirect. I will do some further cleanup shortly.Tvx1 06:19, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I did notice though that the article’s talk page wasn’t moved along. I tagged that one as well.Tvx1 07:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I've been pinged so I'll comment: Googling "Mexico City Grand Prix" gives the majority of sources about Formula One (I went through 5 pages of results and got nothing else), so I don't see why a WP:BOLD move is an issue. SSSB (talk) 08:12, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you for your input. I'm fine now with everything so far, assuming everything's good on Liz's end of this. I believe I made several incorrect assumptions about something I obviously don't know a great deal about. I intend to step aside from this issue now. Sorry for the (my) confusion. DB1729 (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Nano-oligosaccharide factor (NOSF)

It's a patented product. The one ref is to a COI paper written by a company employee as last author, and the only other link in the article is to the firm's website. Sorry if that wasn't clear, but it's 100% advertising for the product. Jclemens (talk) 06:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

FWIW, I took it to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Nano-oligosaccharide factor (NOSF). No action needed on your part. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

4 October 2021

Ma'am I am wandering like a lost soul for the past two weeks everywhere just for the sake of one article Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana, begging and approaching so many people just for help. Honestly I'm in a state of literally crying. Finally, I reached here because I have heard that you are one of the chief admins in Wikipedia. Ma'am I have been editing indian WP:TVSHOW articles of Wikipedia since the last two years and I have seen and gathered knowledge of what all are the minimum and maximum requirements for a WP:TVSHOW. I firmly believe that the show Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana does have everything that a good WP:TVSHOW article needs but nobody is giving it a chance. It is also because so many earlier editors caused so much of mess in creating drafts of the show that it is highly protected that only administrators of Wikipedia can create it. Ma'am you too are an administrator so can you please help to create the article? I assure I will produce all the material required for the article in a Word document and send it to you through e-mail and you can verify it yourself. Or else, atleast give the page creation access to the extended confirmed users also because the extended confirmed users create articles respecting all that Wikipedia needs. Please I beg you can you help with Zindagi Mere Ghar Aana?--117.193.146.71 (talk) 11:36, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hi. Hope you will de doing well. I got this notification today. "01:30, 4 October 2021 Liz talk contribs deleted page Cupid Chan (R2: Cross-namespace redirect from mainspace) Tag: Twinkle (thank)." Can you please guide me if I have done anything wrong? Because all I can see is a draft now which states that "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use" It's concerning for me because I consider it unethical to take money for writing Wikipedia pages or get paid to make any edits. I joined Wikipedia after getting inspiration from the project and I won't take any money for writing Wikipedia pages for someone. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyatthewheels (talk • contribs) 13:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

PROD deletion

Hi Liz! In May, you deleted the article for PayScale after its PROD from ScottishFinnishRadish expired. Per Archive.org, the references on the page at the time included six sources that each look to me to clearly qualify for WP:NORG:

• https://techcrunch.com/2014/04/24/warburg-pincus-buys-compensation-software-service-payscale-for-up-to-100-million
• https://www.geekwire.com/2019/salary-compensation-data-site-payscale-valued-325m-new-private-equity-investment
• https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/03/technology/03money.html
• https://www.seattletimes.com/business/payscale-shows-you-the-money
• https://techcrunch.com/2006/10/12/how-much-money-do-you-make
• https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2019/08/26/payscale-concur-new-ceo.html

Could you please restore the article?

I know you put in a lot of work to handle the PROD queue, but I have to say that instances like this make me question whether the system should exist. When topics like this are being deleted, it doesn't seem that there are enough safeguards in place to preserve valid work by writers, especially while the redirect restoration issue remains unresolved. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Per NORG, articles discussing new hires, promotions, valuations, rounds of funding, etc do not contribute to notability. We're left with no where near enough sourcing to establish notability. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, that's an (understandable) misinterpretation of WP:NORG. What that guideline dictates is that articles consisting only of hires/promotions don't contribute to notability; it doesn't dictate that any article discussing a hire/promotion doesn't contribute. I'll grant that the Business Journal one is perhaps a little borderline, but it's still clearly a reported article that has many details about the company beyond just announcing the new CEO. Ones like Geekwire, at more than 600 words, aren't borderline at all. And then there's sources like the 2006 TechCrunch profile or the 1400-word New York Times profile that aren't related to any of the trivial coverage examples. You could always try taking it to AfD after it's restored, but it's not a close call (especially given that a WP:BEFORE would turn up additional substantial coverage like [3]), which is why I was disconcerted to see it deleted via the PROD process. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:57, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Dropping by, I was curious, and this is the sort of article I tend to have doubts about, so I looked at the NYT article, which certainly surprised me by being quite substantial coverage. DGG ( talk ) 06:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Liz: I'd appreciate a reply when you have a moment (at least on whether you're willing to restore or I should go through WP:REFUND). Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Qatar Turkish School proposed deletion

Hi Liz ! As you cancelled my proposal to delete Qatar Turkish School, I just wanted to understand why the mentioned article is relevant on Wikipedia. Thanks --78.100.47.43 (talk) 13:36, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Undeletion guide

Hi, I would like to participate at WP:Requests for undeletion to restore pages, and would like to know if there is a undeletion guide that admins follow. WP:Viewing and restoring deleted pages only says to follow WP:Undeletion policy, which doesn't say much. I have restored some pages in the past, but only for individual requests at my talk page. Whereas I see WP:Requests for undeletion is more streamlined and rule-based. Is there a check list an admin goes through? Jay ^(Talk) 19:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jay,

There isn't a guide to restoring pages although there is some guidance at the top of the page that covers the basic purpose of the process. My advice is to first, go to the deleted page whose restoration is being requested and read the deletion summary to find out why the page was deleted. Secondly, if you go to edit a request to reply to it, above the edit box is a line that states "Show attendant instructions". If you click on the link that says "Show", it will show you the most common responses that are given to restoration requests. You can choose whether or not to add your own response to a template.

My own judgement is that, ordinarily, CSD G13 stale drafts and PRODS are restored upon request unless there are other issues with the content...the most common problem that might occur are copyright violations. But if that is present, it is typically mentioned in the deletion summary. A page with copyright violations is never restored under any conditions. Aside from G13 draft requests, the second most common request is that pages deleted through AFDs be restored. There is a template for that where you add the admin's name who closed the AFD discussion and the requester is advised to approach that admin or go to Deletion Review to request a restoration. WP:REFUND is only for uncontroversial restorations. There is also a special template for CSD G11s and CSD A7s which you can use. If it is another speedy deletion criteria, you'll have to write your own response or adapt one of the templates.

The templates will likely cover 95% of requests you'll see. My only other comments are that requesters will often say that they want to restore a CSD G13 stale draft but the page wasn't deleted as a G13. The reason why they state this is that there is a form for requesting stale drafts be restored, because most restorations requested are G13s, and they just use the form any way because most of the requesters are new editors who started a draft and then forgot to come back and work on it. So, you need to confirm the real reason for deletion. Also, after a G13 has been restored once via WP:REFUND, if it is deleted again and the editor comes back to ask for it to be restored a 2nd time, ask if they will actually be working on the draft. Just last week, an editor came to ask for a draft to be restored for a 4th time and in between deletions, they never did any work on the draft. After 2 or 3 restorations, G13s are typically refused. Also, sometimes an editor will be told "No", a restoration can't be done and they will keep coming back and requesting it again and again. At this point, you might need to post a admin response on their user talk page because there might be other issues going on.

I think the only element that can vary among admins who work at WP:REFUND is that occasionally, an editor will ask for a page that was deleted through speedy deletion to be restored to Draft or User space. Some admins will accommodate that request and restore the page to an editor's Sandbox, others will not and just point the editor to Deletion Review. But I think the best guide to working at WP:REFUND is just reading over the page and seeing how other admins handle a variety of different requests. Luckily, the page is only archived after 7 days so just reading over a week of requests and replies will cover most of the cases you'll run into.

I'm glad that there will be another admin patrolling WP:REFUND. Right now, there are 4 or 5 admins who regularly check the board but sometimes requests can sit for a day or two before an admin gets to them. Be sure to read back a few days and not just look at the bottom of the page for the newest request because sometimes an admin will miss a request from a few days ago but that is obvious by looking for the red links. I'll just add that WP:REFUND is one of the more pleasant admin duties because some times you'll get a request from an editor who wants to work on a draft that was deleted 2 or 3 years ago and it's nice to think that a new article might come out of a forgotten deleted draft.

If you see anything in appropriate or confusing, just ask me, Hut 8.5, Graeme Bartlett or Muboshgu (whom I consider to be the regulars) and we can offer some advice. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response! I'll keep referring back to this advice as I get familiar with the undeletion cases and how they are handled. Jay ^(Talk) 20:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

The attendant instructions says If you are fulfilling or rejecting a request, please ping the original requestor (if s/he is a registered editor). Many requesting editors are comparatively new, and a ping helps such editors to be aware of the action that has been taken, whatever that may be. Where does this ping happen? I don't see any response being added to the requestor's talk page, or a ping happening in the undeletion response. Also, I see some restorations have a comment summary like Dummy edit to reset G13 clock after undeletion. Is it required? Jay ^(Talk) 08:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Not sure if you got a chance to look at these additional questions. Jay (talk) 06:53, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Harlem African Burial Ground

Hello sir Liz, Sir I will do it as you told, thanks for the great advices.Superatp 02:00, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Questions re: Rama Kirve

Hi Liz,

While patrolling new pages, I've noticed that you deleted Rama Kirve in this logged action owing to ban evasion. I'm not an admin, so I can't see if the deleted version is similar to the version that's currently present on the page. Does the deleted version look similar to the current version?

Best, — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:18, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Application of G5

Hi Liz. You said G5 didn't apply; can you help me understand why? I'm guessing it has to do with the timing of a sockpuppetry block/unblock and subsequent creation of a sock. My reasoning follows the bullet of the policy that states When a blocked or banned person uses an alternate account (sockpuppet) to avoid a restriction, any pages created via the sock account after the earliest block or ban of any of that person's accounts qualify for G5 which seems to me to apply. ☆ Bri (talk) 23:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bri,

It's a bit confusing and if you scan up further on this page, you'll see that I misunderstood it about a week ago and another admin corrected me. I needed to restore a bunch of pages I had deleted that were actually not eligible for deletion under the G5 criteria.

Let's say there is an Editor A, Editor B and Editor C. Editor A is created and starts editing and a week later Editor B is created and starts editing. They both edit for a month. Then, an SPI is filed and on Day 1 Editor A is blocked for multiple accounts. Then, on Day 2, Editor B is blocked for being a sockpuppet of Editor A. Then, a week later, Editor C is created and starts editing until they are blocked as a sockpuppet of Editor A. In this case, even though Editor B was a sockpuppet and was editing at the same time as Editor A, Editor A was not blocked at this time and so Editor B was not an incidence of block evasion, therefore, their page creations are not eligible for CSD G5. However, Editor C's page creations ARE eligible for CSD G5 deletion because at the time Editor C created the pages, Editor A was blocked and so Editor C was both a sockpuppet and an incident of block evasion.

So, it one sense, CSD G5 is misunderstood, it shouldn't be applied to the page creations of all sockpuppets but to incidents of block evasion, when sockpuppets are created after the sockmaster has been blocked. This usually means that in the initial complaint of an SPI case, when the sockmaster is first identified, the sockpuppets in that first case' page creations should not be tagged CSD G5. But those of every sockpuppet coming afterwards are eligible for CSD G5.

I hope this clears things up. Take if from someone who learned it the hard way! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:11, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Following your terminology, A is the master Sasha Boudville, B is Adarna Herna [4] and C is Lara Hatsumi [5]. So therefore aren't all the Lara Hatsumi creations G5 eligible? ☆ Bri (talk) 01:46, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

You know, Bri, I wrote out a long explanation of how you were wrong and when I reread it and checked the reports, I realized that you were correct. Then I wrote out a second reply stating you were right and I was wrong. This is the third response and I have to say now I'm not sure and I'm going to ping Bbb23 to see what the right answer is.

Here's what happened after I looked at the article you tagged for CSD G5: If you look at Sasha Boudville's contribution page, it states that Bbb23 blocked them on 12 September 2021 for being a sockmaster. So when I then checked the SPI case, it was in my mind that they were blocked last month and I didn't see that the original case was September 2020 and the follow up case was September 2021. So, I realized that, yes, they were a blocked sockmaster in 2020.

But then I checked their block log to see why Bbb23 had issued a recent block when the SPI was in 2020. The block log states that in 2020, they were only blocked for a month on 20 September 2020 for sockpuppetry despite the SPI. So, when Lara Hatsumi was created on 20 October 2020, they weren't a blocked account any longer and so even though Lara Hatsumi was a sockpuppet, I don't know if this could be considered block evasion because Sasha Boudville wasn't blocked when that account was created.

I haven't run into a case this murky before and it didn't help that when I glanced over the SPI I just read 2020 as 2021. But hopefully, the wise Bbb23 can deliver a verdict. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Liz, I think your last reasoning is correct. I also think both of you should stop torturing yourselves. :) --Bbb23 (talk) 02:55, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I'm getting ready to stop torturing myself by taking the pageant stuff off of my watchlist. I hope that somebody else is ready to step up to it. It's a real time suck. BTW this is amusing in retrospect. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:34, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't think this is the right interpretation, Bri and Bbb23. In Liz's first line, the creations of editor B that were started after editor A was blocked are in my opinion eligible for speedy. As I see it, the block was evaded not by creating the account, but by creating the article. (the creations by B before A was blocked are of course not eligible) DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

گردليدان

Hello sir Liz, Sir can we use another languages as a redirect page title in English Wikipedia? Thank you Superatp 03:25, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Superatp,

First, thank you for your formality but I'm not a "sir". You can just call me "Liz".

Yes, we have redirects in foreign languages. Check out Category:Redirects to English-language terms. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:32, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Meditation as Medication for the Soul | need your help in improving article

Hi Liz, Thank you for your previous support in reverting gibberish edits on Meditation as Medication for the Soul.

• It is marked for deletion by some user stating it promotional. This page is not written to promote or publicise an entity or person, it is just an article about a book focusing on benefits of meditation. Please guide me on how I can improve this article or please help me rewrite this in a neutral tone. --Jake Peraltaa (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	I don't know how you keep writing such amazing, high-quality warnings to people. Having tried writing some myself, I appreciate the effort that goes into them. Thank you for the good work! Enterprisey (talk!) 23:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Wow, thank you, Enterprisey. They take time to write because I proofread them several times. I've found that sometimes the first draft sounds harsh because I'm frustrated at that moment but I don't want the editor to feel like I'm scolding them. That reaction never produces a positive result and the goal is for every editor to develop better editing habits. And we can all improve, including me. Blowing up at an editor or embarrassing them on their own talk page doesn't make them feel like doing better work, it either makes them want to quit or they continue to work and simply resent you.

I have to say that I model my messages on ones I've seen written by JBW and Cullen328. I remember being very impressed years ago by an extensive message JBW left on a disruptive editor's talk page, carefully explaining policy when I think most admins would have simply blocked them. It takes more time but good editors are really our most precious resource here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

And thank you for the response! That's a really smart philosophy. I would like to quote it on my user page, if you don't mind. Enterprisey (talk!) 05:28, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Expatriate soccer players in Malta

A tag has been placed on Category:Expatriate soccer players in Malta 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. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 15:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Faster than Thunder

Argh, Faster than Thunder is still at it, continuing to be oblivious to their warnings.

They know about user talk pages; they've left comments for others and removed warnings from their own; I don't know why they're not listening to the comments on their own.

I've RFD'ed yet another WP:RFOREIGN redirect Μέγαρα and left a final warning. TJRC (talk) 00:52, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TJRC,

Thanks for alerting me that they were active again. I don't see enough disruption to warrant a block but I'll keep an eye on their contributions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess I'm venting. I wouldn't suggest a block prior to a final warning in any event, and they hadn't had one until just now. TJRC (talk) 01:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it's not great that they haven't communicated or responded to talk page messages, that's not a good sign, but I don't see them on a page creation rampage. I've heard that editors who work on mobile devices don't even see talk page notices and I wish we had a solution for that. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:37, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of "Marcia Pally"

The new entry for "Marcia Pally" that was speedily deleted was substantially different from the previously deleted page. It did not contain any of the alleged flaws of the previous page. The subject is certainly notable and I believe that the new page is entirely factual, objective, and well referenced. Given the above, I do not understand why it was deleted without discussion. I would respectfully request that it be restored or at least that the deletion be discussed.AlexaVamos (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AlexaVamos,

The page was tagged as a CSD G4 after a very conclusive AFD decision to "Delete". If you would like the page restored, please make an appeal at Wikipedia:Deletion review and you can present your argument. If I restored it right now, it would immediately be tagged again for speedy deletion and a different admin would delete it. You need for there to be a Deletion Review decision that overturns the AFD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Holy ejaculation

Hi! Is there anything non-obvious going on with the deletion of the redirect Holy ejaculation? As far as I can see, it's not a typo or misnomer for Ejaculatory prayer, just a regular synonym that sees occasional use [6]. – Uanfala (talk) 08:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Uanfala,

Those books you found all look like they are 100-200 years old and I don't think there is a religious use of "ejaculation" any more. I thought the page was vandalism so perhaps we used the incorrect CSD tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, if you searched for the title of the target article, you'd get similarly old results (and besides, we try to account for common historic names anyway). The redirect was neither a typo, nor vandalism, so would you mind restoring it? You can take it to WP:RfD if you still are of the opinion that it should be deleted. – Uanfala (talk) 21:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Didn't Batman say that?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

That's twice I've done a double-take at my watchlist... ~TNT (she/her • talk) 22:10, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I'll restore it and send it to RFD and we can stop talking about Holy Ejaculations here. This is a PG talk page although sometimes strong words are used. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't disclose my age, but I will disclose that I'm older than 13. Sorry, Liz, I'll shut up now.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, it's now up to the 2 or 3 editors who regularly comment on RFDs. They are a thoughtful bunch though and take redirects very seriously so I hope they won't keep it just for amusement's sake. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey! There's at least four of us. ;) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Well, however many there are, you really take redirects and the purpose of redirects very seriously unlike the majority of editors. I know this because my poorly prepared nominations get shot down regularly because you all saw value in a redirect that seemed totally implausible to me. So, who knows maybe there is one very very innocent person out there that will type in "Holy ejaculation" on Wikipedia in order to get to an article about prayers. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Glad to hear you appreciate what we do. :) RfD can be a bit alien to outsiders. Often we're looking at things that don't occur to most people (like "Actually this was an article for 3 days in 2007 and for some reasons still gets views"), or that would be invalid arguments in most other venues (like "It's a popular meme"). One thing I like about it is that most people really do "Call them like we see them". Not much inclusionism or deletionism, although certainly everyone has individual kinds of redirect they're more conservative or liberal on. Potentially offensive redirects are always an interesting category. With them I try to just always think about whether the redirect will take the reader somewhere useful (like this racial slur) or mislead them (like "Gaza Holocaust", deleted after five RfDs).

Anyways, I'll shut up. :D Get me on the topic of redirects and RfD and I'll ramble all day. Do let me know if you ever have questions about RfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 22:59, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For all the round the clock arduous tasks you perform. You are indeed a tireless contributor Celestina007 (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Does Fandom count as a Good Source?

Im curious because I'm trying to a make page on an Internet Series called Madness Combat, and I need some help with fandom counts or not. Thegibuspyro (talk) 21:29, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Thegibuspyro,

I can't help you with creating articles as I mostly deal with admin and maintenance tasks so I recommend you take your questions to the Teahouse and Articles for Creation both of which are set up to help new editors. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:32, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi @Thegibuspyro:, no Fandom is not a reliable source because it is user generated. You can read more about what is considered a reliable source at WP:V and WP:RS. Also, feel free to ask questions at the Teahouse. S0091 (talk) 22:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, S0091. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

1. Corrosive RfA atmosphere

   The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.

2. Level of scrutiny

   Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.

3. Standards needed to pass keep rising

   It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.

4. Too few candidates

   There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.

5. "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

6. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
   Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
7. Admin permissions and unbundling
   There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
8. RfA should not be the only road to adminship
   Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.

---

There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

CSD on Draft:Qissa Meherbano Ka

Hi - the IP that created the article is from a known IP range for Bttowadch. They've shifted mostly to using IP accounts and draft space because their user accounts get caught fairly quick. Please reconsider the CSD on that draft. Thank you. Ravensfire (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Ravensfire,

If you look over my talk page, you'll see multiple discussions over CSD G5 tagging along with mistakes I've made by not reading SPI cases thoroughly. I will not delete a page tagged CSD G5 unless the page creator has been blocked for sockpuppetry and whose account was created after the sockmaster was blocked. You very well may be correct that this IP is a block evading sockpuppet but until I see confirmation, I won't delete that page. You are free to approach another administrator and see if they will oblige. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Perfectly understandable, appreciate the reply! Ravensfire (talk) 03:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Association for Asian Performance

Hi Liz! I would like to bring the page Association for Asian Performance [[7]] back to life with proper notability, citations, and credit. Since you deleted the page on 19 January, 2021, Wikipedia notified me that I should contact you prior to recreating the page. I have found a sizeable amount of notable source material beyond what has been included in previous iterations of the Association for Asian Performance Wiki page and plan to reinvent the page properly this time. Thank you for your dedication to Wikipedia! --Camargue19 (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Camargue19,

As a contested Proposed deletion, these pages can be restored upon request so I have done so. Good luck with the article! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Apparent meatpuppetry/proxy editing

Hi Liz, I noticed that you protected the Stephen Zechariah page due to sockpuppetry. A new-ish uer @Ram Dhaneesh: appears to be doing the bidding of the Spreadmediaglobal sockmaster here. This tag team effort mirrors previous attempts to create the SZ article [8]. Ram also previously created a page on Deri Lorus under a different title after it was salted [9]. Would appreciate it if you could take a closer look at this. Thanks.-KH-1 (talk) 03:26, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Yaacob I ben Aaharon ben Shalma

You deleted by G4, but it does not seem to apply. It had an additional reference and an additional illustration added, and the earlier deletion reason "contains no information beyond that available at Samaritan High Priest no longer applies . I've restored it. I will add some other information also. DGG ( talk ) 05:23, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, David,

I defer to your judgment, always. It didn't seem like there was much there. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

I went back to the original deletion argument and I'm not certain I did the right thing, it turns out that this is a complicated problem, and I've asked for advice on how to handle this and a number of similar drafts. I'm consulting the author and the deleting admin; both are more knowledgable than I. There are always one or two decisions a day that leave me with a residual feeling of doubt, and I've learned to go back to them, because very often my feeling turns out to be correct. I do not know how my mind works to generate this sort of feeling, but it does. DGG ( talk ) 04:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Señorita Panamá 2021

Hi Liz, i noticed that you deleted the page of Señorita Panamá 2021, I see that the apparent reason is because it was created by an already blocked User, I understand the situation of that user, even so the event is real and is currently being developed in the country whose final night will be celebrated on November 7 with concrete and real references, previously I add several references of The National Contest. My question is about the possibility of being able to restore the page and what can be done to improve it and not be completely eliminated even though the creator user has been blocked / removed. Evanex ( talk ) 03:17, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Papua New Guinean educationists

My mistake. Please go ahead and delete. Sorry. Roundtheworld (talk) 18:28, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Taros1990/sandbox/Hiroyuki Sekino

From what I could tell, Taros1990 (talk · contribs) started editing while its master, Michaelse2002 (talk · contribs), was blocked for unrelated reasons. (Michael's initial block was on 10 Oct and only extended to indef after Taros' discovery; Taros began editing 11 Oct.) —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 02:08, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Problem

Hello, @Liz! If you don't mind, Can you check at Makerfield (UK Parliament constituency), I don't understand if it's ok to put "+" and "-" signs. I think increase & decrease templates are correct in this case, persistently changing by ips. Thanks ~ Limited Idea4me (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Reverted edit at Template:Infobox Wikipedia user

Hi Liz, could I ask if you remember the reason for Special:Diff/1032469784? There were two parts to the edit you reverted, you mentioned categorization in your edit summary, but the categorization code I replaced simply doesn't work any more. {{substr_any|{{{location|}}}| {{str find0|{{{location|}}}|,}}+2| 50-{{strlen quick|{{{location|}}}}} }} for |location=Cambridge, United Kindom evaluates to {{str sub old|Cambridge, United Kindom|9+2|50-24}}, and this evaluates to the whole original string "Cambridge, United Kindom" because the template str_sub_old doesn't evaluate expressions. Maybe it used to. Immediately above there is already an attempt to categorize into Category:Wikipedians in {{{location}}} so I'm reasonably sure the code I replaced wasn't doing anything useful at all. I just can't see the problem myself but if you could let me know what categorization it broke it would be appreciated! Many thanks, User:GKFX^talk 10:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Joeyjoeymintzmintz's empty categories

Hi Liz, I almost tagged the cats as WP:C1 myself, but I wasn't sure if (1) I had to wait until they'd been empty 7 days or (2) I tag them and then an admin deletes them only after 7 days elapses. You're much more experienced in this, and I'm assuming #2 is good?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Bbb23,

This is commonly misunderstood. The empty categories are tagged CSD C1 when they are first noticed by a human editor or by a bot (see Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories) and after a 7 day waiting period in Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion, if the categories are still empty, they are deleted. The tagging starts the 7 day period because, otherwise, it's impossible to know when the category was first emptied. The waiting period is because categories are sometimes emptied "out of process", as a way around WP:CFD or by enthusiastic new editors, so some editors scan Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion to recover or restore those categories. Hope this clarifies things.

I've also learned that categories can be a rare exception to the CSD G5 rule (see Wikipedia:REVERTBAN) as the deletion of categories that have not been emptied can be disruptive to other pages. I think categories that have been created by ban evading sockpuppets that ARE empty, can be simply deleted under CSD G5 and don't need to be tagged CSD C1. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:01, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Liz. I think it would be useful if this was made clear in WP:C1 itself, which has no guidance.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) 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/A Christmas Miracle For Daisy (TV Movie) 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.

BOVINEBOY2008 02:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Possible sleeper

CaptainFalcon73847 was created around the same time as the other socks. Politanvm ^talk 02:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

And GiantFalcon1919 is active now. Is this an LTA? Politanvm ^talk 03:01, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for spamming your talk, but CFalcon05 was just created. Politanvm ^talk 03:05, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

And FalconsChokeOnCaptainFalcon. Is there a way to block account creation? Politanvm ^talk 03:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Politanvm,

Thanks for alerting me. I've blocked them as well. I don't know if they are an LTA but they are very active tonight. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Maybe a bit too passionate about sports. Adding onto the list, we have User:W kut a w Captain Falcon, but maybe it’s not worth it to block them ASAP since they’ll just create more accounts and some of the disruption is on drafts and user pagers nobody will ever see. If there’s anything else I can do to help, let me know. Politanvm ^talk 03:24, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Blocked. I've gone to a Checkuser with a request for advice. I don't know what else to do at this point. The account creation blocks seem to have no effect. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I’ll just keep an eye out for some of the more visible disruption. I’m not an expert in LTAs, but maybe the list of users they complained about at User talk:BusterFalcon9 would narrow down who it is. Politanvm ^talk 03:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

The Spine of Night

Hi Liz. While reviewing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ConyJuul, I noticed the unusual history of The Spine of Night (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). It was an article, but was then redirected by a misguided newer editor to Draft:The Spine of Night, without merging any of the content to the draft. Having looked at the deleted version for the SPI, it doesn't look to me like an article that would have been speedied or draftified (although it does need some copy-editing and referencing improvements). Would you be open to restoring the article? Or if you do think the deleted version was draftifiable, could you please restore and then histmerge into the draft? Thanks. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 20:50, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tamzin,

It took a while to figure out what was going on here. The page was deleted as a CSD R2 cross-namespace redirect, which is what it appeared to be but it turns out that Limited Idea4me had removed the content and turned it into a cross-namespace redirect so I restored the page and reverted back to before the content was removed. This is an unusual step to take for any editor, to redirect an article page to Draft space, much less for a new one to do, so thanks for catching it.

We've been having some issues recently with articles being moved to Draft space and then the page creator doing cut-and-paste page creations of new versions of the article in main space, leaving us with two versions of the same article, one in main space and one in Draft space, so maybe that is what happened here. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Star Wars Theory no one told me my article had been prodded

I did not get any message on my talk page that an article I created had been prodded. You deleted it on 10 May 2021 with the message "deleted page Star Wars Theory (Expired PROD, concern was: This may be mentioned in a few reliable sources, but I'm not seeing enough depth-of-coverage to meet WP:WEB or WP:GNG)". I would like this version of the article restored since it had reliable sources giving it significant coverage. If someone disagrees they can send it to AFD in the proper manner. Dream Focus 05:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Dream Focus,

Can you give me a link to the exact page? It's the responsibility of the editor tagging pages for deletion to inform the page creator though I recently de-PROD'd an article when I saw that this step had been omitted. If things are as you say, we can see who forgot to notify you. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Dream Focus is almost certainly talking about Star Wars Theory. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 17:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

That's it. Star Wars Theory is a popular YouTube channel, with people that worked on the Star Wars films doing interviews, as well as bestselling writers of Star Wars books. I see after you deleted it, someone else created a different article there it then it got erased by another prod. I created my version on 2021-01-12 and you deleted it on 10 May 2021. Dream Focus 17:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, Firefangledfeathers .This is a bit tricky because since the PROD deletion, another editor recreated the page and it was deleted, for a third time, on CSD A7 grounds. But I was able to restore your version, deleted as a PROD and keep the other edits still deleted. It doesn't look like there is a whole lot of substance to this article, Dream Focus, so it might be tagged for deletion again, this time in an AFD discussion which would make a deletion more permanent. Good luck. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Issues regarding Akpakip Oro speedy deletion removal

The article Akpakip Oro is a hoax, such kingdom never existed in Nigeria and there is no archaeological evidence to support the claims presented in the article. from my understanding the cited references do not present any evidence of such kingdom. The page contributor User:Joe Bassey, who maybe from the Oron ethnic group is well known for formulating things attached to Akwa Ibom State or the Oron people most of which have been deleted. The article should be deleted because wikipedia is not a place for personal research or hoax and i think the article is entirely formulated because after searching google i could hardly find any evidence. Emma emmanuel okon269

Help with Red Assessment Categories

Hey L: quick question: would you be willing to fully protect the 13 problematic Wikipedia version 1.0 statistics pages, to prevent the bot from re-adding the red categories to them? The admin. with whom I was working is on a short wikibreak, so I am coming to you. If you are amenable, I'll drop in the list of pages below. Thanks in advance, UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Wuh, huh?

Please list a page that is currently protected so I can see exactly what you are talking about, what has been done in the past and why full protection is needed. Before saying "Yes", I need to see that this is necessary. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:04, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

There is not a page that is currently protected, though there have been ones protected in the past by User:Gonzo fan2007, with whom I was working on this. An example of one to be protected would be Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/South America military history articles by quality log (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs); if you look at the history, it is the only easy way to stop the bot from re-adding the red category after I (or you) remove it, which is all that the bot does. I have just removed the cats from that and from the 12 other pages that should be protected for this reason; happy to give the list of the 12 if you agree. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. TornadoLGS (talk) 04:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

It sure was

Yes, obviously I had no idea. Need to do a bit of reflection on whether there was anything I should have picked up on earlier in the process, but it did come as a shock. Girth Summit _(blether) 05:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Girth Summit,

When I originally left that message, I actually read the big reveal on the SPI case report and then posted on your talk page as I was in shock. A bit later I saw the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard and realized that there was a public discussion of the situation and you really didn't need a talk page notice. I think that some people will think the discovery was a result of the RfA but it was really a coincidence.

The thought I'm left with is that Icewhiz obviously could edit quite well, if he had acted as responsibly and productively as Eostrix, he probably could have become an admin himself rather than banned, that it was a choice that he made to be disruptive because Eostrix was a promising admin candidate that got almost unanimous support. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:09, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Pluto (minor planet)

I noticed you removed Pluto (minor planet), for WP:R3, even though it not a typo, or a misnomer, as Pluto is part of the minor planet catalogue and the similar Minor Planet Pluto redirects. It is not misinformation like Pluto (asteroid) or Pluto (comet) would be. Pluto (minor planet) also fits in with other currently unnecessary disambiguation articles like Jupiter (planet) and Makemake (minor planet). Beanpickle (talk) 17:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello,Beanpickle

The deletion summary doesn't say "typo or a misnomer", it says "Recently created, implausible redirect". I think it is implausible that a reader would search for Pluto (minor planet) as a way to get to Pluto instead of just typing Pluto. We don't need more complicated version of a simple names as a way to get to the simple name. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

But what makes it different than Minor Planet Pluto or Pluto (planet)? Beanpickle (talk) 00:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I haven't looked into those two pages but the major difference is that another editor tagged Pluto (minor planet) for speedy deletion as, as an admin, I patrol the CSD categories and evaluate articles and pages tagged for deletion. But I don't actively go out looking for redirects to delete. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I must have misread the page or something similar. Beanpickle (talk) 02:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

draft:Diary of a Wimpy Kid (2021 film)

Thank you. Moving it to draft again was what was needed, but I didn't know of any other way to request it than a G4. If I had moved it back to draft space myself, it would have been move warring. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon,

I think we have a problem right now of moving pages in and out of Draft space and I don't see an obvious resolution. If an editor objects to the move, they are supposed to move the page back to main space but instead of doing that, we have some editors simply copying the contents of the Draft page into a new main space page which leaves us with two versions of the article with two different edit histories. But I don't think that was the case with this article though. I didn't think it was wise to delete the article, despite the AFD, because the movie will be released in another month or two and there will be an article about it in main space. There are just some editors who are eager to have that article appear now. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that there is no obvious answer. Much of the problem has to do with movies that have been produced and not yet released. There is discussion at the film notability talk page again, but I have been trying to call attention to this problem for more than a year. The guideline is poorly written, and there are two very different interpretations both of what the guideline says, and of what the guideline should say. Some film studios and directors have ultras, fanatical fans, and they aren't willing to wait until the film is reviewed. Another factor, to which you allude, is editors who create two copies of an article, one in draft space and one in article space. I think that they do this on purpose to game the system, because then the version in article space cannot be moved into draft space. This isn't restricted to movies; it also has to do with people and companies. I sometimes write an AFD in that case, and sometimes say that the draft should be kept. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The AFD for Wimpy Kid has said to move it to draft space, so you were just reinstating what the AFD had said to do. No one wanted it deleted. It is just that animation studios have ultras who want to see animated movie articles as soon as possible. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Recreating a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion

Hi there, Liz! Hope you're fine! I'm here to ask a question that can I recreate this page again? The page was deleted as per as deletion discussion. Because the page didn't meet with general notability guideline. But I've found some sources which meets with general notability guideline. So I hope that if I recreate this page, it will meet with GNG. Thank you so much!  ||  Orbit Wharf 09:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Urgent Arb request

Hello, Liz. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

DGG ( talk ) 16:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

List of spiritual entities in Islam: Difference between revisions

Greetings and first thanks for warning me instead of blocking me instantly about List of spiritual entities in Islam: Difference between revisions. But I must admit, I am really puzzled and disappointedm, about the rule. If there is really a rule, if justified or not, we always have to request deleting an article again after someone removes the templatem without any reason, deleting nomination is easily exploited and articles promoting a certain status of "unprofessionality" have a clear advantage. I think you are not in the position to bend the rules, but I request your advise how to properly act in such a case.--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 00:14, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Chaonians

The Chaonians article has has edit warring between some editors for a few days. Can you make a short page protection or sth else to stop it? [10]. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:20, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

No worries, I just noticed that they have now solved their dispute on the talk page. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Typhoon Olga

I redirected the Typhoon Olga (1976) page to its section in the 1976 season because I thought the original article was deleted for good; only realized it was deleted to give way for a more comprehensive draft which was about to be published at that time. Apologies for the confusion I caused. Vida0007 (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/ProTaylorCraft

Thanks for catching that! S0091 (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, S0091,

Well, the hoax intrigued me, it was so implausible and easy to check that it was false. He's had an amazing number of sockpuppets for a young teenager. Tag any draft you see about the legendary Cody Taylor. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:10, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
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)

Speedy deletion of User:Santana MontanaQP

The page User:Santana MontanaQP has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Spencer^T•C 15:04, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse ping

My apologies for the unnecessary ping to the TeaHouse. I should have read the thread a second time before I saved my reply (rather than after). Meters (talk) 01:01, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Meters,

Thanks for the apologies, Meters, but I was getting so many unnecessary pings that I kind of stopped checking them regularly. I've had 99+ notifications almost all the time. I should probably just clear them out completely and start over with 0. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I exacerbated the problem. Meters (talk) 01:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

HordeFTL

Hwy, that's not a name I recognise. Didn't know Efem itis went back that far. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Deepfriedokra,

I didn't recognize it either. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HordeFTL. I checked a half dozen of the tagged pages and everything seemed okay. I wish page taggers wouldn't attack their job with such gusto, it's easier to handle a few articles at a time rather than over a hundred. As far as CSD G5s, there is really no reason to rush their deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

New message from Taking Out The Trash

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Taking Out The Trash's talk page.
Message added 20:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Taking Out The Trash (talk) 20:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Jovan actor

You deleted page Jovan (actor) as per Wikipedia Policies but I can say that was three years ago and hehave changed alot and he now pass the criteria of Wikipedia Nactor, has more reference rewritten properly. All the things has been solved २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 01:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, २ तकर पेप्सी,

I think the article was in terrible shape. But I'm willing to restore it to Draft space where you can continue to work on it and submit it to Articles for Creation. Please know that if you move it right back into main space of the encyclopedia without AFC review, then it will just be deleted again. You can't sneak it back into main space without AFC approval. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Sure will mind and send it to Afc for New page pattroller review. २ तकर पेप्सी (talk) 01:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Okay, you can find it at Draft:Jovan (actor) and I put an edit notice asking that it not be tagged again for speedy deletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:51, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

draft

Hello, according to what you said on my discussion page for Nima Bavardi's article I drafted it on September 23rd but it What should I do now to create it? --Juror134 (talk) 03:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Juror134,

It looks like the draft has been submitted to review to AFC which is the next step to take. I noticed that AFC reviewer KylieTastic contributed to Draft:Nima Bavardi, you might ask them for their opinion of your draft. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Recent G13 deletions

Hi, the drafts you're currently deleting are scheduled for November 1, not today. ✗plicit 00:22, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Explicit,

You know, I knew that but when the clock changed days, I just went to the next list. Thanks for the reminder. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:26, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina people of Israeli descent

A tag has been placed on Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina people of Israeli descent 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. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:47, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

• From the editor: Different stories, same place

• News and notes: The sockpuppet who ran for adminship and almost succeeded

• In the media: China bans, and is there intelligent life on this planet?

• Opinion: A photo on Wikipedia can ruin your life

• Discussion report: Editors brainstorm and propose changes to the Requests for adminship process

• Recent research: Welcome messages fail to improve newbie retention

• Community view: Reflections on the Chinese Wikipedia

• Traffic report: James Bond and the Giant Squid Game

• Technology report: Wikimedia Toolhub, winners of the Coolest Tool Award, and more

• Serendipity: How Wikipedia helped create a Serbian stamp

• Book review: Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality

• WikiProject report: Redirection

• Humour: A very Wiki crossword

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 31 October 2021 (UTC)