User talk:Missvain/Archive 55
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Missvain. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 50 | ← | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 |
September 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hello, Missvain,
An editor tagged this article for CSD G4 deletion based on your Delete decision in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tiffany Houghton (2nd nomination) but the next day you restored and userfied the article. It was then improved and moved back into main space. So, is this AFD no longer setting a precedence for deletion? Thank you for any insight you can provide. Liz Read! Talk! 05:32, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- Liz - If the article meets general notability guidelines it is fine. Sometimes articles get deleted, people rewrite them with proper sourcing, and they get kept. If you feel the subject still does not meet general notability guidelines, feel free to renominate. Missvain (talk) 23:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
- The page creator asked me if there was a template to place on the article or talk page saying that it shouldn't be tagged for CSD G4 but I'm not aware of anything like that, are you? Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Liz - No there isn't. It can totally be renominated for AfD or speedy.
Missvain (talk) 14:59, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
- Well, that's what the editor was worried about, that an eager page reviewer would just tag it for CSD G4 again and we'd be going through this all in another week. Liz Read! Talk! 02:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
- Liz - No there isn't. It can totally be renominated for AfD or speedy.
- The page creator asked me if there was a template to place on the article or talk page saying that it shouldn't be tagged for CSD G4 but I'm not aware of anything like that, are you? Liz Read! Talk! 02:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
- Liz - If the article meets general notability guidelines it is fine. Sometimes articles get deleted, people rewrite them with proper sourcing, and they get kept. If you feel the subject still does not meet general notability guidelines, feel free to renominate. Missvain (talk) 23:03, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: August 2021
| ||||||
Userfy
Can you please userfy this article for me that was AFD'd?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Herve_Damas
Protected edit request on 16 September 2021
 | This edit request to User:Missvain has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Naive to this process. Miss Vain redirected my draft submission from Draft: Charles Williams to Charles Williams movie director. I am an Admiral in the navy and former government official. what does that do to my article status? Flagship1 (talk) 14:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Not done (as to the edit request) this has nothing to do with the page User:Missvain. — xaosflux Talk 14:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Miriam Benjamin for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miriam Benjamin 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.
October 2021 at Women in Red
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:36, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Userfy
Can you please userfy this article for me that was AFD'd?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Herve_Damas
BlackAmerican (talk) 07:05, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
- User:BlackAmerican - Thank you for your patience! I've been a bit busy in real life and not able to check in on Wikipedia as much as I have in the past. I have userfied it here: User:BlackAmerican/Herves Damas. Cheers! Missvain (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Black-owned restaurants
Hello! I've created a couple new entries about Black-owned restaurants as part of this ongoing collaboration. I know you write about restaurants often and wanted to invite you to participate if you have time and interest. Either way, happy editing! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:28, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Deletion review for Marcia Pally
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Marcia Pally. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Sdrqaz (talk) 10:02, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Charles Williams has a new comment
AfC notification: Draft:Charles Williams has a new comment
This Month in GLAM: September 2021
| ||||||
November 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Proposed new entry for "Marcia Pally"
Dear Missvain, I have created a new page for the subject "Marcia Pally" (below). The previous page was deleted due to various objections. I would appreciate it if you would review the proposed new entry and consider it for publication. I believe it is on a duly notable personality, objective, factual, and properly supported by reliable, third-party sources, that it is substantially different from the deleted article and does not suffer from the defects of that article. I would add that the entry relies in part on the subject's German Wikipedia entry, which was vetted by German Wiki administrators in conjucntion with the subject's representative, who also contributed to the editing, but unlike the German entry, it places greater focus on the subject's American career. Thank you.AlexaVamos (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Boo!
Hello Missvain:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
—usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 22:20, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello Missvain
Are you available to help edit an article? teach me or help me? either way...can you help? I like your page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TherealWellpath (talk • contribs) 17:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: October 2021
| ||||||
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Hi – you closed this AfD as keep on the grounds that "AfD is not a place to discuss redirects". However, WP:ATD-R says that if a redirect is disputed, AfD is a suitable venue for discussion, and the footnote there links to a 2018 RfC that says: "There is a clear numerical and policy-weighed consensus that AfD is a right venue to seek for redirect(s), which have been challenged". Would you consider reversing your close? Dan from A.P. (talk) 15:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Dan from A.P. - I don't see a "redirect was disputed" or challenged because it wasn't discussed on the talk page of The Miracle Worker prior to last resorting to Articles for Deletion. I also don't see that it was discussed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment (maybe even Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories), as this could be a controversial redirect given the subject. Please consider taking it to the talk page of the Miracle Worker, followed by RfC before last resorting to AfD. Not everyone who participates in AfD is skilled or knowledgeable about the redirect or DAB world and the fame of the subject that you want to redirect could be controversial (many American kids grow up being required to read that book and watch that movie in school). And if all else fails, you're welcome to take my decision to Wikipedia:Deletion review (I don't take it personal and won't participate). I'm happy to welcome to the Miracle Worker back to AfD once it has been discussed in the appropriate venues (and let other AfD volunteers handle it). Honestly, I think you'll get the most valuable and quality review on the talk page followed by RfC. Happy holidays. Missvain (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry I wasn't clear – I called it a disputed redirect because I attempted to redirect the page myself and was reverted (cf. WP:ATD-R: "If the change is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a consensus ... Suitable venues for doing so include the article's talk page and Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion"). Given it's not a highly-watched article, I didn't think posting on the talk page would do much good. I don't see anywhere that says AfD should be a last resort only; personally, I'd consider RfC a much more drastic step. Bear in mind the article under discussion is just a duplicated dab page, not the main article on the play or the movie. Dan from A.P. (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Dan from A.P. - Got it. How about this, I'll reopen it and we'll let it play out for another week and see what happens! Thanks for the further clarification. I'll also let another reviewer...review it. Thanks for assuming good faith!! Happy holidays. Missvain (talk) 17:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Dan from A.P. - Got it. How about this, I'll reopen it and we'll let it play out for another week and see what happens! Thanks for the further clarification. I'll also let another reviewer...review it.
- Sorry I wasn't clear – I called it a disputed redirect because I attempted to redirect the page myself and was reverted (cf. WP:ATD-R: "If the change is disputed via a reversion, an attempt should be made to reach a consensus ... Suitable venues for doing so include the article's talk page and Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion"). Given it's not a highly-watched article, I didn't think posting on the talk page would do much good. I don't see anywhere that says AfD should be a last resort only; personally, I'd consider RfC a much more drastic step. Bear in mind the article under discussion is just a duplicated dab page, not the main article on the play or the movie. Dan from A.P. (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Dan from A.P. - I don't see a "redirect was disputed" or challenged because it wasn't discussed on the talk page of The Miracle Worker prior to last resorting to Articles for Deletion. I also don't see that it was discussed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment (maybe even Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories), as this could be a controversial redirect given the subject. Please consider taking it to the talk page of the Miracle Worker, followed by RfC before last resorting to AfD. Not everyone who participates in AfD is skilled or knowledgeable about the redirect or DAB world and the fame of the subject that you want to redirect could be controversial (many American kids grow up being required to read that book and watch that movie in school). And if all else fails, you're welcome to take my decision to Wikipedia:Deletion review (I don't take it personal and won't participate). I'm happy to welcome to the Miracle Worker back to AfD once it has been discussed in the appropriate venues (and let other AfD volunteers handle it). Honestly, I think you'll get the most valuable and quality review on the talk page followed by RfC. Happy holidays. Missvain (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
December 2021 at Women in Red
|
--Innisfree987 (talk) 00:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Page restore request
Happy holidays!
Thanks for your wish on AfD. Happy holidays to you too. Be safe. Venkat TL (talk) 16:05, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Meelick GAA
I noticed that you recently removed Meelick GAA after an AfD. Is it possible to restore this article on my page User:The Banner/Workpage6, so I can try to rescue it by improving it? Yours sincerely, The Banner talk 09:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- User:The Banner - Done! Happy holidays! Missvain (talk) 15:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you! Same to you! The Banner talk 17:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- User:The Banner - Done! Happy holidays! Missvain (talk) 15:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Just a friendly heads up. If any accident article connected to on this list is either deleted or redirected, its mention is removed entirely not just unlinked. The list's guidelines require that accidents have a WP article in order for it to be listed at the page....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
This kitten thanks you for accepting my first article!
Hello, Missvain, What a pleasure to discover my first article ("Christian Palustran") on the wikipedia! Lots of thanks to you and a friendly greeting to the whole team! PS Before it was on line, I tried to put the following additional information under the photo, but I didn't know how to do it. If you think it's useful and you can help me ...
Born 1947 Saint-Cloud, France. Occupation Playwright, storyteller Nationality French Notable works A Yellow butterfly called Sphinx Escapade Story of an egg Diary of a were-wolf Metamorphoses, My Love
Se'Quette Clark photo by Kamala Harris
Hi,
I saw you uploaded and added this photo to Shooting of Stephon Clark.
The photo was published by Kamala Harris on Twitter (@SenKamalaHarris, later renamed to @VP) in 2018. Did you assume that the photographer was working for the Congress or was your conclusion that the image is in public domain based on more sophisticated analysis?
On Wikipedia, Harris is marked as an author, but Harris is in the picture back against the camera, so it would seem logical that Harris published a photo by someone else. If so, I don't know who shot the photo and which kind of contract they had with the author, i.e. were they specifically working for the government or did Harris license the photo. I guess the photographer should have a moral right to the work even if the work is not copyrighted.
I checked three reverse image services, and looked like this photo has only been published on Twitter, Wikipedia, and Wikipedia derivatives. Politrukki (talk) 12:32, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
- This is a conversation for Wikiimedia Commons, but, you'll be nominating thousands of photographs uploaded the government representatives if you're concerned about "moral right" regarding photographers and the federal government - and that's from the past 20 years of Wikimedia's existence and art, photographs and images going back over a century. I recommend you read this thread as to why 95% of photographs uploaded from federal accounts over the past decades have been kept, specifically my "comments for reviewers": [1]. I worked for the federal government, including for the Library of Congress working with public domain work owned by the federal government and as Wikipedian in Residence there and at the Smithsonian (and worked at many Smithsonian museums), and I'm considered a bit of a subject matter expert around the law around it. I also say this as someone who lost my "moral right" when I contributed countless writing and photographs I took to the federal government during my tenure as an employee. If you have an issue with the Harris photograph, you can take it to Commons and nominate it for deletion. If you want to know who the photographer is, I suggest reaching out to Harris' office. Not sure if they'll respond, but, perhaps. Cheers and happy holidays. Missvain (talk) 15:57, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for the comment. I don't consider doing anything. This just confirmed that we're in a grey area. A foot in the door, not knee-deep. I consider it very unlikely that a photographer would feel violated, though it would not be unprecedented. For example, there was some kind of kerfuffle with the official photo of your president few years back when the photographer said Wikipedia didn't have a permission to publish the portrait, IIRC. Cheers, and happy holidays to you too. Politrukki (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Fereydoon Shahbazyan
Hi. Thank you for visiting Fereydoon Shahbazyan's article. I expanded the article further and added other sources. Please check again and remove the tag if the problem is resolved. I am waiting for your review and guidance. Sincerely.Musiban (talk) 21:41, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Deletion review for Cushitic peoples (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cushitic peoples)
I have asked for a deletion review of Cushitic peoples (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cushitic peoples). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.
Hi, could you take a look at my page restore request, I've outlined my thoughts. Thanks Wadamarow (talk) 01:44, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
This Month in GLAM: November 2021
| ||||||
Cleanup Suggestions (Performance Portability)
Hello Missvain,
Recently you tagged an article titled "Performance Portability" with the "Paid contributions" template. Not having a neutral point of view seems to be the primary concern with the article and I'd like to resolve that issue to the best of my ability. If you have any suggestions for how I can make the article in line with Wikipedia's standards/expectations I'd greatly appreciate it. Really any suggestions, whatever they may be, would be great. I'm rather new to Wikipedia editing, so all feedback is useful.
Please respond at your convenience. Thanks! Blempe (talk) 02:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
| Hi I'm new in en.wikipedia.org
So Your Articles are great Subashshamis (talk) 12:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC) |
A cookie for you!
|
Thanks for helping out at AfC! S0091 (talk) 21:53, 11 December 2021 (UTC) |
Draft:Takaku Fuke
Hello, I'm here to talk about Draft:Takaku Fuke. You've declined the 2nd submission set by the original author - the now blocked User:Jacee215 (if you're having stress about ubiquitos things, thank God you're not dealing with him on this, trust me) - on December 9th. There are some vague factors that need to be clarification on.
One MMA Wikiproject member User:RafaelHP has informed me that - according to WP:MMABIO - Takaku Fuke should qualify as notable MMA fighter on Wikipedia. Fuke has been ranked in the world top 10 in their division by Fight Matrix (FightMatrix.com) - with FightMatrix records provided on November 28th (in the draft).
Was the review of 2nd submission based on some older draft by Jacee215 or is it based on revisions I proved circa November 28th? Or is there something else that's wrong? -- TrickShotFinn (talk) 12:28, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- TrickShotFinn - I reviewed the draft that you linked to. I don't know anything about the revisions, etc. I just reviewed the draft and noticed it was submitted by a blocked user, but, most importantly the citation were terrible. All primary sources except the SB Nation article. If you think it should be accepted, go for it. I just took a look at it and the sourcing was not up to snuff. Cheers - Missvain (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Invitation to take part in a survey about medical topics on Wikipedia
Dear fellow editor,
I am Piotr Konieczny, a sociologist of new media at Hanyang University (and User:Piotrus on Wikipedia). I would like to better understand Wikipedia's volunteers who edit medical topics, many associated with the WikiProject Medicine, and known to create some of the highest quality content on Wikipedia. I hope that the lessons I can learn from you that I will present to the academic audience will benefit both the WikiProject Medicine (improving your understanding of yourself and helping to promote it and attract new volunteers) and the wider world of medical volunteering and academia. Open access copy of the resulting research will be made available at WikiProject's Medicine upon the completion of the project.
All questions are optional. The survey is divided into 4 parts: 1 - Brief description of yourself; 2 - Questions about your volunteering; 3 - Questions about WikiProject Medicine and 4 - Questions about Wikipedia's coverage of medical topics.
Please note that by filling out this questionnaire, you consent to participate in this research. The survey is anonymous and all personal details relevant to your experience will be kept private and will not be transferred to any third party.
I appreciate your support of this research and thank you in advance for taking the time to participate and share your experiences! If you have any questions at all, please feel free to contact me at my Wikipedia user page or through my email listed on the survey page (or by Wikipedia email this user function).
The survey is accessible through the LINK HERE.
Piotr Konieczny
Associate Professor
Hanyang University
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Seems pretty run-of-the-mill to me, and the coverage consists of announcements of clergy coming and going. I will pass. Cullen328 (talk) 01:29, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Your recent contributions to Talk:Margot Adler/Archive 1
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Margot Adler/Archive 1. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Chilling out and relaxing (talk) 22:11, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Your recent contributions to Talk:Margot Adler/Archive 1
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Margot Adler/Archive 1. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Chilling out and relaxing (talk) 22:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Your recent contributions to Talk:Margot Adler
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Margot Adler. Chilling out and relaxing (talk) 22:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Transparent Language Online
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Transparent Language Online, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Onel5969 TT me 19:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Nomination of Transparent Language Online for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transparent Language Online 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.
Happy Winter Solstice!!!
I hope your year ahead shines brightly like a twinkling star on a clear night. Take care. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- FloridaArmy - Thank you! You too! Merry merry.... Missvain (talk) 17:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
As an editor I respect please will you offer an unbiased opinion here:
At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AJDaGuru the creating editor feels very strongly that the article should not be deleted. Others feel it should be. You have a facility for seeing what is and is not notable. Please will you bring your unbiased eyes to the discussion and the article and offer whatever opinion you feel appropriate or no opinion at all. I will not rehash any arguments here. I wish you to draw your own conclusion should you choose to do so, please. I will learn something either way. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 00:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
- User:Timtrent - Wow, I can't believe that article was nominated today there's already been that much activity. I'll take a more detailed look. Missvain (talk) 00:53, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
- I am certain you will not be influenced by anyone else's thoughts. The creating editor feels attacked and I wish that were not the case. There is IRC background I am not party to FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 00:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
|
Merry Christmas, Missvain! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 20:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC) |
|
Keep
I have gone through the article and the supporting references. I honestly think this article should be given a chance. Its notable enough to be on Wikipedia. The subject appears young but seem to have a sense of direction. If other notable media platforms are interested in his journey, then we should except other motives not known to me. Ohanwe Emmanuel .I. (talk) 21:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Greetings
Nice to make your acquaintance and a pleasure to meet you :) I love crossing paths with great editors and you appear that and then some! Here's to a wonderful 2022! MaskedSinger (talk) 09:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Happy holidays!
Forgiveness
My local spiritual advisor would totally recommend I grant forgiveness, and of course I do so. However per your talk page reconciliation can normally be made on the great white phone to God. Djm-leighpark (talk) 00:11, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
deadurl
vHI Missvain
Just a quick reminder that {{deadurl}} is a redirect to {{dead link}} ... so if you use {{deadurl}}, then it should go inside the <ref>..</ref> tags. In this edit[2] you put it after the </ref>, which is wrong.
I moved it[3] inside the <ref>..</ref> tags, but then I spotted that you had added it[4] to replace the |deadurl=y parameter to a cite template which had been wrongly filled by WP:reFill. Sadly, reFll is using old cite syntax, and the correct fix to that is actually to replace the outdated cite parameter |deadurl=y with |url-status=dead, which I did in a further edit[5] after I checked the history.
Keeping the deadness parameter inside the {{cite web}} template is important, because it confirms that the URL has been verified as dead, and that the template should link the title to the archived copy: "Drawing Down the Moon Spotlight in The Wiccan Pagan Times". Archived from the original on May 9, 2008.
See how the new version with |url-status=dead links the title to the archived copy. The dead link is thereby fixed, and needs no separate {{Dead link}} tag.
Hope this helps. Beannachtaí na Nollag! BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:28, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Missvain, did you read my message above?
- You have again done the wrong thing, in this edit[6] to Mike Quigley (politician).
- I have fixed[7] that one ... but in future, please use the cite parameter
|url-status=deadto replace the|deadurl=ywhich WP:REFILL uses. Thanks. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)- User:BrownHairedGirl - Sorry, I thought I did it correctly per your statement above - "f you use {{deadurl}}, then it should go inside the
<ref>..</ref>tags." - I guess I still did it wrong. I looked at my edit and the deadurl template is IN the references... sorry. I thought I was doing the right thing. Missvain (talk) 17:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)- Yes, but it's better again to not use the {{deadurl}} template as a replacement for a cite parameter. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 18:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- User:BrownHairedGirl - Sorry, I thought I did it correctly per your statement above - "f you use {{deadurl}}, then it should go inside the
AfD Drama
Hi Missvain, I hope you're enjoying the holiday period!
I don't know if you've seen it, but some ominous comments have been posted on a certain AfD you recently relisted, along with a link which seems to contain some veiled threats about you. I'm sorry to share this with you now, but I thought you should probably get a heads up. Cheers! JonnyDKeen (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you User:JonnyDKeen. Very unfortunate. It's been a few years since I've experienced harassment like this. I'll reach out to another administrator to let them know and perhaps they can at least block the editor. Thank you. Missvain (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- Also a brief note to apologize if I did the wrong thing by posting on your talk page about this. MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- What a twit. I'm real, therefore I clearly need a Wikipedia article about me. Um...
- Sorry you're dealing with that BS. —valereee (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- Just to let you know that I have indeffed ArcticFox55. Cullen328 (talk) 01:13, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you User:JonnyDKeen. Very unfortunate. It's been a few years since I've experienced harassment like this. I'll reach out to another administrator to let them know and perhaps they can at least block the editor. Thank you. Missvain (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
January 2022 with Women in Red
|
--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
question about author-link
In the page on Alicia Dickerson Montemayor, you removed my links to Cynthia Orozco. I am a little confused and have two questions. First, can you please point me to the page on Wikipedia where the authors listed in 'Further reading' are not to be linked? And, for the author-links I added, why would author-link be an option in {{cite web}} if it is not meant to be used? Thanks in advance for answering my questions, this is the first time I have come across this guideline. --DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- DaffodilOcean - Hi. Yup. We only use authorlink if the author is notable and has a Wikipedia article. I noticed you linked three times to Orozco and they do not have a Wikipedia article (and I haven't done my due diligence to know if they are notable or not for inclusion). If they do pass general notability or WP:NACADEMIC then you're welcome to red link them in the article space, but, please don't do it in the citations. See Help:Citation_Style_1#Authors. If folks were red linking citation we'd have so many red links, particularly of non-notable journalists, academic, and writers - it'd be a red link mess in footnotes and reference sections!
. Anyway, I've been editing for almost 16 years and I still learn something new almost every day about Wikipedia policy and procedures. Have a good one. Missvain (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I have submitted the page on her for review. Thanks for getting back to me. DaffodilOcean (talk) 16:54, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
Hope you're getting some time to recharge during the holidays. This kitten is here to remind you that your Wikipedia community cares about you and wants you to be well. Happy holidays!
Question about relisting
Hi there, hope you're doing well. I have a question about your choice to relist Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Racial misrepresentation instead of just closing it. After 8 days and 9 people weighing in, I think we have consensus. The Nom plus five others all agree to delete and redirect to Passing (racial identity). Only the article creator and IP who have compiled it, plus just one other want it kept. Personally, I think the 6 in exact agreement out of that number is sufficient. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 19:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- User:CorbieVreccan - I just wanted to see additional conversation. Reviewers have the right to relist twice (and more if they really feel the need) as they see fit. Either we'll get more contributions, or we won't. No harm, no foul. Missvain (talk) 21:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Merchandise giveaway nomination
|
A token of thanks
Hi Missvain! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
|
 |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Safari West logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Safari West logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Garfield Park (Indianapolis)
I'm wondering why you decided to rename the Garfield Park (Indianapolis) article as Garfield Park Conservatory and Gardens. The conservatory and sunken gardens are only a part of the entire park. The city itself calls it Garfield Park, as seen on the city's web page for it. The new name is therefore misleading. Indyguy (talk) 01:44, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Indyguy. I see. Sorry about that. I'll fix it. Happy New Year! Missvain (talk) 02:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Missvain. BTW, your talk header says you may respond less quickly than normal, but it's still quicker than I do normally. Maybe you're doing a good job of handling your stress levels. Indyguy (talk) 02:55, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Indyguy. I see. Sorry about that. I'll fix it. Happy New Year! Missvain (talk) 02:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)