User talk:Star Mississippi/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Tommy Bolack AfD review

Hi. Here before deletion review because, no surprise, I disagree with the AfD outcome.

• Did you give consideration to alternatives to deletion? If so, what?
• Could the article be better written? Certainly. Is the state of the article supposed to determine notability? Not to my knowledge. But it seems to be the case here.
• Before this, I had 3 of "my" new articles deleted, and one of those came back after appeal and improvement as an (stub) article. All three were related to "climate change" so I understand why they were suppressed for not supporting the desired wiki-narrative on climate. Of course it is interesting that climate change is involved in related ancient migrations long before major industrialization, but it's unrelated AFAIK.
• I don't understand why Tommy Bolack was deleted. There were 3 Delete votes, but IMO only one !vote, mine, to Keep. I feel the delete votes were based on casual reads, personal value judgments - "routine stuff", "trivial events", "a coin" - as well as errors or misunderstandings.
• This is not a standard WP:GNG type article, IMO. It doesn't fit well into the standard categories and overlaps with a few.
• Several new sources including books and academic papers were added during the deletion discussion. These were not seriously considered IMO.
• Nominator said "The museum he runs is likely more notable than he is as a person, we could perhaps redirect there, but that article would need to be created." He runs two museums, including one he personally started. He personally discovered at least one Ancestral_Puebloans community ruins, sponsors an annual field school for archaeologists, and has personally excavated at least a few sites.The work is used in published studies where he is credited or acknowledged. If this alone isn't enough to be "a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field" - archaeology of Ancestral_Puebloans ruins in the San Juan Basin, then I don't know what is.
• WP:ANYBIO comment was not addressed. ""Notable" in the sense of being famous or popular—although not irrelevant—is secondary."
• If not un-deleted, please put a copy of the article under my user space so I can more easily improve or use portions elsewhere, like an article on the museumS. I added a lot after the latest archived version.
• Thanks for consideration and any insights. -- Yae4 (talk) 17:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Yae4 and thanks for your note. Unfortunately, consensus was against your POV in terms of Bolard's notability. The delete votes were grounded in policy, as is your input here and there, but I would caution you away from arguments alleging your articles were deleted because they didn't fit a particular narrative. That does not happen. Articles are kept or deleted based on policy, which is what happened here. Bolack did not appear notable as a scholar or academic, even with the added sources, which was his primary route to notability. If you would like to go to DRV, I welcome it, as I have reread the discussion and don't see any other way I could have closed it, but happy for the community's input. If you're happy to have the info to merge it to his museum(s), I'm happy to do that and we don't need DRV. Let me know how you'd like to proceed. Star Mississippi 17:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Bolack (not Bolard) is not a formal scholar or academic, although he has done some scholarly work himself, and supports academic work by others. He is not a very famous radio personality, although he has hosted a radio program which was already mentioned in Wikipedia and maintains a KENN (AM) radio transmitter on his property IIUC. I don't know what wiki-criteria apply for notable collectors, but he is famous in collector circles and was already in wiki-articles for owning 16 of 19 2000_Sacagawea_dollar_–_Washington_quarter_mule known to exist - unique Mule_(coin)s. I don't know how many Cadillacs Elvis Presley had, but Bolack owns one of them. Anyway, I'm happy to have the draft article in my user space or wherever; a new museum article draft will need to be created. DRV is only more time spent for no progress (wasted), probably.

PS. Yeah, I should probably keep my opinions on Wiki-narrative-bias to myself, but wiki-policies are not very objective; they are fuzzy, and subject to manipulation and crowd behavior... 3 of 3 "contrarian" climate change wiki articles deleted looks like clear statistics to me. But sure, the sourcing was weak. :) -- Yae4 (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Here you go: Draft:Tommy Bolack

Collecting a number of gold coins or Elvis cadillacs is unfortunately not a route to notability. Academic notability does help non academics in some aspects, showing their contributions-but that wasn't the case here. Star Mississippi 18:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

16 of 19 of the first known authentic mule coins to be released into circulation by the United States Mint. Makes me wonder how many privately owned museums exist in New Mexico; he owns 2. How many privately owned Puebloan era archaeology sites are in New Mexico; he owns several. How many fathers' ashes were spread over their ranch or farm, with fireworks on July 4, anywhere; only one time there. Sounds unique and interesting... :) Thanks! -- Yae4 (talk) 18:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Yep and his work sounds fascinating, but unique and interesting isn't necessarily notable. Star Mississippi 19:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Ali Sahib Abushanan

Hello Star Mississippi, I am a new member of Wikipedia, but I have knowledge of sources and writing without prejudice to any party, but I made a problem a while ago, even though I read Wikipedia's policies, but I did not notice that I had to wait 3 months to review my article in the name Ali Sahib Abushanan, and that my article was converted to the draft space and I did By moving it to the main space because I did not know, however, I hope you advise me whether the article will be deleted or not, and I hope that it will not be deleted, but the laws remain constant, even though I was a center in it, and I apologize and sincerely thank you. Ali.saheb99 (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Ali.saheb99. Thank you for your note

Your article was moved to draft (cc @Onel5969) and because you moved it again rather than wait for AfC reviewers, the community will decide whether Abushanan is notable or not. In the future, please wait for AfC as there is no deadline by which articles need to be live Star Mississippi 20:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Beach too Sandy, Water too Wet

Hello, Star Mississippi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Beach too Sandy, Water too Wet, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Animal

Make Wikipedia on Animal 2A03:2880:FF:13:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

No, consensus is against it existing. Please wait until it's notable, and log into your account for future submissions. Star Mississippi 16:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

That IPv6 tho... - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 17:45, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

AfD Sion Jobbins

Hi, I am a little bemused by the close on the Sion Jobbins AfD and what happens next. There was only one !vote for merge, so the "merge" close looks a bit like a supervote. Redirect enjoyed greater support and would certainly have been a fair close. Now, as I understand it, you won't carry out the merge yourself, or do I have that wrong? But looking at the page, I would hesitate to carry out the merge either, because in my opinion, the mergeable content about Jobbins already exists on the YesCymru page. But if I simply redirect the page there, someone would be within their rights to suggest I have inappropriately ignored the merge close and redirected instead. Could you provide some guidance please? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:58, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

To be totally honest @Sirfurboy there is little distinction between merge and redirect closures. As you noted, the closer generally doesn't perform the merger and the editor(s) who do so, opt for how much information, if any to merge. This is why sometimes I will just redirect it in a close and say the history is under the redirect if folks want to merge any specific information. That said, while I read this as there was some desire for info about Jobbins to exist-the merge you referenced and Bearian's keep, I can also see how a redirect might be what's desired. I'll amend the close and reference this discussion. Let me know whether that works for you? Thanks for raising this. Star Mississippi 16:25, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, yes, that is very helpful. Take care. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 16:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

You as well. Star Mississippi 17:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Crova6

You're fighting a losing battle. I would have blocked them indefinitely, but I consider myself WP:INVOLVED. However, if they keep it up, I may block them anyway ("In straightforward cases (e.g., blatant vandalism), the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion."). Just because they're a kid doesn't mean they should be given more leeway.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:32, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh without a doubt. At first I thought we were dealing with genuine misunderstanding, which is why I just protected the redirect. Actually, two fold: I wasn't sure how to pblock him from a redirect, and also I figured we'd have classmate friends with schools closed this week. But now we're at the name calling stage which is never going to end well. I really wish we could have WP:No one cares about your school if they live outside the district because it's so true, and those who do live there care way too much. I'm going to be offline shortly for the bulk of the day so feel free to step in at the next round. I'd have zero issue with you blocking. Star Mississippi 16:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Pblocking a redirect is no different from pblocking any page. Indefinite full protection was probably not best in my view; effectively, it is like salting the name of the page. I'm not a big fan of pblocking generally, but an indefinite pblock would probably have been more appropriate, at least if you're against a sitewide block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks re: pblock how to. I didn't see indef as an issue given there's almost no case where this school will merit an article, but if he gets blocked/bored, I'll undo the SALT. Feel free to ping me, or do it yourself if I forget. Star Mississippi 17:17, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

You might be watching the page, but in case you're not @Bbb23, I've unprotected it. I'll p-block (or greater) Crova if they return and resume the edits, but they appear to have stopped editing for the moment Star Mississippi 17:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I am still watching the page, although not permanently. After you removed the protection, for some reason you changed the pp template instead of removing it. I removed it, although a bot would have come along and done it.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:09, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix. For some reason, Twinkle page (un)protect glitches on me but not predictably enough that I can see what I'm doing wrong. Star Mississippi 17:24, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

I've used Twinkle to protect a page and add the icon, but I've never done the opposite. Not surprising as I don't remember ever unprotecting a page.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Turns out I'm wrong. I've unprotected 42 pages over the years, the last one being a year ago. Next time I do it (a year from now?) I'll use Twinkle. As if I'll remember...--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

With the caveat that I really don't understand this, I get this dialog box, and hit OK - but the lock remains on User:Star Mississippi/Protection Test. That definitely seems like a bug or at least not desired behavior. @Novem Linguae any ideas? I can post at WT:Twinkle, but I'm not sure what I'm asking you/others to do. For context, @Bbb23's note at 17:09 explains the issue.

Show and tell for protection lock

Star Mississippi 18:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Howdy! Yes, feel free to use WT:TWINKLE in the future, I think it'd be more organized, and would also allow crowdsourcing to kick in since there are some other Twinkle devs (although I am the most active at the moment). I was unable to reproduce this in my testwiki sandbox. What are exact steps to reproduce please? Example: 1) create page named X with content Y. 2) open TW->PP module. 3) select preset Full Protection->Generic (full), 4) click "Submit query". 5) open TW->PP module. 6) select preset "Unprotection". 6) click "Submit query". What happened? Page still contains template pp-protected. What should have happened instead? Page should not contain template pp-protected. –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:54, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Just posted on WT:Twinkle with (hopefully) info on what I did. Star Mississippi 20:13, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Star Mississippi. 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.

Netherzone (talk) 16:22, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

post-AFD aspersions

Hello Star. This is about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/APMEX which you recently closed.

I'd hoped that one could !vote at an AFD without having bad-faith accusations afterwards, but here we have this comment from Lightburst saying that someone "turned up just to take a dump at the AfD" (which is probably directed at either me or scope_creep). I don't think this is consistent with WP:5P4, and the user has previously served a topic ban for battleground behaviour.

Due to various heated discussions between me and Lighburst in the past, it probably won't go down well if I send them a message. So I was wondering if you would consider raising this with them please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:ARS posted it for update a couple of days ago per WP:HEYMANN and 7&6 started to work on it but stopped, probably because there was nothing there. 70% of the reference were direct reference to the company website. Lightburst has been pretty bitter since he came back, in conversations I've had with him. He is probably peeved that they never had a chance to work on it. But he is a really nice guy. scope_creep^Talk 10:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, scope_creep. If he is keen to keep working on the article, can he request that it is restored to Draftspace?

Hopefully he can avoid throwing aspersions around about other volunteers in future. I appreciate that the timing of this AfD was frustrating for him. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

No. I would rather not see it restored to draftspace. It is a private company with no coverage. WP is not an advertising platform, although the WMF really doesn't care about it, and its one of the things that will eventually sink the place. If we were to move the platform tommorrow, we would leave this trash behind. There seems to be a kind of laissez-faire approach where we are slowly becoming a directory of private american companies. But is an advertisement plain and simple. Written as an advertisement to advertise. But even if it wasn't an advertisement, and there was a genuine attempt to present it as encyclopedic article with some vision of history or aspect incorporated into it, it would be still be a private company There is dozens to hundreds of precious metal dealers in every country on the planet. It is very common to see them is particularly places. One of thousands.There is nothing unique nor special about this company. scope_creep^Talk 11:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Not just American companies nor only companies. scope_creep^Talk 11:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay in responding to you both @MrsSnoozyTurtle @Scope creep.

Oddly, I agree with lightburst solely in that when I first loaded it to close, I expected to relist since there didn't appear to be a consensus. But when I read the discussion, I realized Dream's was a delete in spirit and no one was arguing to keep. Scope, I think even beyond your TNT comment, which I agree with, the reason I also disagree with draftification in this case is Dream's point that if they were legit what the article claimed, there would be sources and there aren't. Another week at AfD or six months in draft space isn't going to fix that. That's the other challenge with companies in general. If you stub back to pre spam versions, you're essentially an A7. We really need a better process for dealing with companies.

Given light's "closed as FUBAR", I'll drop a note. It probably won't end well, but I'm willing to try. ARS could be good if we had more folks like Cunard and CT55555 who do the work to back up their input and less GRAR, but that's a larger issue. Star Mississippi 14:29, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I just saw the discussion about me here. I respect the close, but thank you for reaching out. It is entirely editor frustration on my part. If you read the Mrs. Snoozy Turtle thread at ANI you will see that she has been following the ARS to ivote angularly. I felt it was fubar for them to come and crap on another AfD that I posted as an improvement project. For more proof of their angular ivoting see another one I posted at ARS last night Henry Payne. So my fubar reference and taking a dump statement had nothing to do with your close. The MST has been an absolutely terrible follower - never once improving any article at ARS. Multiple times needling and provoking. And occasionally going to an article that made it through ARS/AfD as keep and eviscerating it. Lightburst (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

@Scope creep: I want to also make a correction, I have not been bitter in conversations with you. The first day I came back to editing this was your message to me and my response. Other than that I do not communicate with you - I did mention this AfD at ANI when you someone took you there for "revenge afDs". I am writing articles and improving articles. Occasionally participating in AfD. I mostly avoid your many AfDs like the restaurant ones. I was familiar with this company and was going to take a stab at improving it. unfortunately I was busy with the Henry Payne article. Maybe I would have failed, but I never just driveby ivote the way MST does. Lightburst (talk) 01:44, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your response and the link to the background @Lightburst. Editor frustration is understandable. While I do share @Scope creep's reservations about private companies in draft space, but if you find sources when you have time, I'm happy to provide the history if it's helpful for attribution. Star Mississippi 15:39, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

I have seen you around and you do good work. Thanks for being a great volunteer. I see MST rescinded their delete on the Henry Payne article - perhaps a small miracles which arose from this discussion? Maybe someday I will recreate APMEX from scratch - the deleted article would be no help. For now I agree with SC that the RS is not there. Lightburst (talk) 16:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Insinuations of COI editing

and we're done here
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hi! If you, as an administrator, want to accuse me of a COI on Art and Language I am sure there is a way to do it correctly. I find it extremely offensive when it is made as an unpleasant insinuation and strongly refute it. I believe that you owe me an apology, especially since you refused me an apology and claimed that I don't understand policy. I have checked, and I think you are supposed to " raise the issue in a civil manner on the editor's talk page, which is the first step in resolving user-conduct issues, per the DR policy, " WP:COICOIN ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ♥ Talk ♥ 18:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC) Sorry if that seems rude or unpleasant, but you upset me.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ♥ Talk ♥ 18:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC) I don't owe you an apology. I showed you the courtesy of not templating you due to your long tenure, which is why it wasn't on your talk. Let's leave the discussion on the article talk so it's all in one place and so all interested editors can participate? Star Mississippi 14:49, 5 March 2023 (UTC) You have been rude, and unpleasant, and owe me an apology. You do not have the right to repeatedly make vague accusations in article space. I have clearly linked you to the relevant policy and you should reply here or on my talk page, rather than making further accusations on the article talk page. Either apologise or report me you rude and unpleasant editor. If you want to make unfounded accusations of COI editing please do it in the correct place, and listen to my replies. I am pretty f*cking sure that if you ask me if I am COI editing and I say I am not have to either accept my reply or make a formal complaint. As far as I can see you are just being rude and unpleasant, refusing to answer my questions on Art and Language talk page, after distorting my reply. Generally I have a very bad impression of you. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ♥ Talk ♥ 23:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC) Admin notice board Started this discussion about your behaviour, [[1]] ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ♥ Talk ♥ 00:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Heads up

Hi SM. Just FYI: at least according to my nav popup, LOM uses she/her pronouns. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 01:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for flagging, I have fixed that. Which popup does that, do you know off hand? No worries if not. Star Mississippi 01:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:NAVPOPS in your preferences under gadgets shows users' pronouns when you hover over their names. User:BrandonXLF/ShowUserGender does the same beside usernames without having to hover. ––FormalDude (talk) 01:29, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh wow, I love the look of the little box. Also useful to know which rights someone holds. Thanks @FormalDude Star Mississippi 01:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Would you mind having a look at something?

Hello Star, hope all is well in your world. Would you mind having a look at a situation I'm trying to manage with an editor who keeps removing maintenance tags without resolving the underlying issues, COI tag removed four times, and other tags removed repeatedly. See User talk:L'Origine du monde beginning with the February 2023 section (I suggest reading through their talk page for insight); and at Talk:Art & Language starting with this section: Maintenance tag removal without fixing the underlying issues, and continuing on to these sections: Original research, COI tag (February 2023) and COI tag (March 2023). I know you are very busing here and in real life, so I hate to trouble you with a problem, however I am not one to report others to drama boards and always try to resolve issues through discussion instead. However I'm at my wits end, and am reaching out to get your take on the matter. Thank you in advance. Netherzone (talk) 21:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry for the delay. Took advantage of some unseasonable weather and enjoyed a run. Going to review this now. Feel free to flag anything for me, always happy to help if I can. Star Mississippi 01:22, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into this Star Mississippi, and Cullen328, I will continue to clean up the remainder of the article. Netherzone (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Note regarding revdel

Hi! I noticed that you recently deleted seven revisions on Christian influences on the Islamic world as violations of copyright. Thank you for taking the time to patrol copyright violations. Jst as a quick note, the violations were still present in the then-live version of the page when the revdel occurred. I understand that this was an easy mistake to make; I've removed the copyvio and added a tag to request revdel. When you get the change, would you be willing to give that a look? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Just passing by, but  Done. Primefac (talk) 11:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

thanks for flagging @Red-tailed hawk and handling @Primefac. That was entirely human error/editing too late. Star Mississippi 12:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Moza Gudsen

I know it was 4+ months ago, but do you happen to remember where the copyvio for this was located? Tool isn't showing a violation, but it does look like it's matching something. Primefac (talk) 11:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

It's copy pasted out of the manuals, which are mostly on here mixed with some product descriptions. Since it's not from one source, I knew the G12 could go either way. Hoping G13 will take care of it since the creator didn't return. Let me know if that's helpful. Star Mississippi 12:48, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

It is, thanks. Sometimes a bit hard to do a revdel/G12 check when nothing's showing as a copyvio! Primefac (talk) 12:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The CV tools are amazing, but they get stymied by the more inside and fancy website designs, unfortunately. Star Mississippi 13:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Looks like @Nthep sorted it out. Star Mississippi 02:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Hi there, You recently reverted my edit to 'Annapolis County, Nova Scotia' and I was wondering if you could provide and explanation as to why? Many thanks, ProfAuthor ProfAuthor (talk) 15:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ProfAuthor. Unfortunately you used copyrighted text, mostly from here. This isn't allowed due to Wikipedia's licensing. Please be sure to avoid that going forward. Does this help? Star Mississippi 16:06, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Understood, thanks :) ProfAuthor (talk) 16:07, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Great. Enjoy your day Star Mississippi 16:24, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Hannah Corbin

Hello, Star Mississippi. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Hannah Corbin".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

JRRobinson

Greetings. Was kind of curious as to why this discussion Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1121#Problematic editor, darts articles was not acted upon? They are still continuing their problematic behavior.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Weekend attrition at ANI, I suppose. But yes, I agree with you I wish something had happened. I got caught up in another mess this weekend and hadn't had a chance to look at their edits, but would support something if you re-file at ANI citing their refusal to accept the redirects. I haven't seen more yet but also haven't had coffee Star Mississippi 13:16, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I just realized, should I have put that on the "incidents" board? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

I think given how intractable his conduct is, it doesn't matter which. AN gets less traffic so won't die an archive death this time, hopefully. Star Mississippi 02:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

So passion for darts = lack of manners, apparently @Onel5969? I guess I'm in good company being an "idiot". Star Mississippi 17:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Did I miss something? Don't know how many folks would consider themselves in good company if equated with me. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Penepi is calling one of us an idiot. It's apparently endemic. Star Mississippi 18:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, saw that and commented on it when I sent it to AfD (where he added another personal attack). Was unaware that there was this much vehemence and vitriol involved in darts. I thought that was only confined to FOOTY and ROADS articles. Penepi has the same philosophy as JRRobinson (who still doesn't get it, based upon their latest comment on their talk page). Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I just saw the latter. Wow. But I'm sure they'll be blocked again soon due to the lack of getting it.

If I never touch another NFOOTY AfD, it would be lovely. I see I might need to add darts to that list Star Mississippi 00:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Closure request?

We could do with someone uninvolved to close this one, in case you are willing?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kartiki Gonsalves (3rd nomination) CT55555(talk) 03:26, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I would have, but I was sleeping. Thanks for flagging and have a great day @CT55555 Star Mississippi 11:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Minor thing

Your close at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#33_AfDs_in_3_minutes. It wasn't the OP who apologized, was it? Or can it mean "Offending Party"? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

I assume in your close you intended the 33 AfDs OP, not a big deal but as the actual OP of the thread I would appreciate it if you could slighty rephrase the closing statement and remove the ambiguity. --Cavarrone 08:16, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

@Cavarrone @Gråbergs Gråa Sångapologies. I have amended. Editing too late/poor phrasing. Thanks so much for flagging Star Mississippi 13:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

At least you know people are listening when you speak! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

A Barn Star Mississippi

		The Women in Red Barnstar
		For your efforts to create and improve biographical articles about women, especially women artists. It is greatly appreciated by me. Thanks for doing your bit to counter systemic inequity on Wikipedia CT55555(talk) 18:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

THank you! Always fun to collaborate with you Star Mississippi 12:28, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Garbage Bowl

Editor User talk:BeanieFan11#Garbage Bowl just knocked off the Proposed Deletion you nom'd so I set him a challenge there to add some sources from the multitude... Best, Plutonium27 (talk) 20:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC) PS. Long time since, ay? (see me user page!)

Oh wow, you're definitely a wonderful blast from the past. Hope you're well. Glad to see you around again.

I'm pinging @Rorshacma: as a heads up too as they originally PRODded it. I just restored it following a clean up of copyrighted text. Will look into this at the weekend. Star Mississippi 01:03, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Who Knows Where the Time Goes? best, Plutonium27 (talk) 18:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Anyway I've been checking out this Garbage Bowl bacchanalia and it seems like it was a big deal - up until about 25 years ago. I've messaged User: Rorshacma about finding/adding more recent coverage and will keep my eye on it. Plutonium27 (talk) 22:13, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

This is when I miss Possibly (prior incarnation, ThatMontrealIP). They'd have found some good offline/paywalled sources, which may well be what's needed. PS: look down, it's a reunion Star Mississippi 01:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

So tis! Nice one. Plutonium27 (talk) 13:13, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi!

just popping by, 3 years later. I had lost my pw and didn't have a way to recover it. Found it recently in an old file. Good to see you editing a bit here and there! I don't know that I'll be back around much, but at least now I can be :-) Hope you're well. I'm f-ing DONE with snow. I can't even fathom how I haven't moved away from this tundra yet. Keeper | 76 01:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

oh, wow. Welcome back my friend. Some things and faces have changed, but others very much not. Hope you stay. I was referencing ANK somewhere not too long ago. Hope you have been well, snow aside. We're the land that snow forgot this season and it's surreal.

Will 2023 be the first year of NYY/Twinkies and NYG/Vikes playoffs in the same year? Star Mississippi 01:45, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Twinks (yeah yeah, I know double meaning...) seem to have made some decent moves. I'm hopeful! Without injuries late last year, it would've been a much different story, they were solid. Lots of my more skeptical friends despise the Correa keep but I was ecstatic. I'm a keeper, through and through LOL. But hey - if you want to play ball with the big boys you need to sign the big boys! Fun side note - I somehow conned everyone into getting hired and I actually work for the club now, so no more editing anything for them ;-) Keeper | 76 01:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

And don't talk to me about the f-ing Vikings. The f-ing Vikings. Keeper | 76 01:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations on the relatively new role - if it's new since we've chatted, it's new. I imagine that's chaotic but interesting.

Vikings got Danny Dimes a new contract. That and INY, because there's certainlyno D there.

Look forward to KEEPing you around-pun absolutely intended Star Mississippi 02:04, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Question

I see you closed this AfD as delete and redirect. [2] Is Atd an abbreviation or a typo? I got the impression that the redirect was created because the article has existed since the mid 2000s... is this assumption correct? If so, when does a page become old enough to qualify for this? Or is that a line that gets blurry? I'm just curious. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Clovermoss. That would be alternative to deletion, which I should have capitalized since the shortcut doesn't go where I anticipated. It's not limited to age but when would you (general, not you specifically) be likely to look for this information/an article under this name, of which age could be one factor. So rather than a deletion (or in this case in conjunction with), it's helpful to leave a pointer to where the editor will find the information if an article is linked somewhere, etc. It's also helpful for athletes, if an athlete is deemed non notable, but they're discussed on a team, that's also helpful. Star Mississippi 01:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I've seen AfDs end with redirects before but what intrigued me is that the outcome was delete and redirect. I'd never seen that before yesterday. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 11:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) - it's not done as frequently as it should be (imho), but it does occur. I'll see it a few times a month. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Onel5969 for stepping in as I was offline. @Clovermoss yep, it's rare. Generally the content is worth preserving if there's an attribution issue or it might become notable/article worthy down the road but given the issues raised about the quality and lack of sourcing, it didn't seem to be the best solution here. Apparently WP:ATD-R is what I was looking for, which seems unintuitive to me. Star Mississippi 00:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Pblock of Maine Lobster

Hello Star! Would it be alright if you considered unblocking Maine Lobster from just WP:TEA? I feel that it would be beneficial for them to be able to ask questions there, as long as they don't attempt to answer any. If not that's perfectly fine (i'm not closely following the discussion that led to this pblock), just a thought I had when I saw the pblock. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:16, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Blaze Wolf. Unfortunately I'm not aware of a way to allow an exception to a namespace partial block, but if someone knows how and consensus is they'd be a productive contributor there, I'd be happy to. If not, they should be able to use {{helpme}} on their Talk or a relevant article talk. Star Mississippi 18:20, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah ok, fair enough. An alternative would be to simply just block them from the project pages they've been most problematic on, however that might quickly become very numerous. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:32, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

that is what I was afraid of, the conduct doesn't change despite repeat requests to step back at AN/I and they were targeting an Arb Comm request which was an unnecessary escalation based on a poor understanding of valid complaint from a different user. Star Mississippi 18:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense. Maybe with the next community wishlist survey (if there is one) we should propose the ability to add exceptions to namespace blocks for cases like these. But maybe there are more issues with doing that than what I think of. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Beyond my tech skills, but absolutely makes sense as a proposal Star Mississippi 18:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Crowley (Survivor contestant)

So in a couple of minutes you read all of this, completely studied all of the arguments and lines-of-thought presented, wrapped your head around the discussion long enough to see both points of view, researched the links provided, wrote up the delete (or merge, same thing) by deciding that the Delete arguments had a better case even though they cited BLP1E which doesn't apply to this situation (which was, if you recall from your reading, their only argument in favor). And thus deleted the article about the iconic oldest winner in Survivor history. Can you, please, take another look at the discussion and research the use of WP:BLP1E and WP:LPI, its linked back-up which must be met to apply, and consider a reversal of the close, a 'Keep' verdict, or even a "no consensus" verdict which may be most applicable here, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

You're not reconsidering the closure, are you? I thought your result was the right decision. Even when Crowley is the oldest winner at the time to this date, I still have a hard time believing a stand-alone article needs re-salvage. The "delete/redirect" votes were more convincing to me than "keep" ones. --George Ho (talk) 09:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

@George Ho @Randy Kryn thank you for your notes. No, I'm not reconsidering my close. It took me more than a couple of minutes last night and this morning when I reread it after your notes and I hae come to the same conclusion. Randy, I understand that you feel strongly, but consensus was not with you in this case. My read of those citing BLP1E is that the reason he was in other coverage is because he won Survivor, which brought us right back to not meeting Entertainer/Actor. You'll note I did not close the other Survivor articles as in those cases I had an opinion, but didn't cast a !vote. In this particular case I could read the AfD as a neutral admin and I believe I closed it within policy. If you believe I am wrong-and I'm certainly not infallible-you have my support in filing a DRV since I know we both agree we want the discussion closed correctly. Star Mississippi 10:52, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your extended answer. But...the fact that he signed up for, and then agreed to go on Survivor when chosen (regardless if he won or was set to sea the first week), and then wrote a book and agreed to be interviewed about the camp that he opened, upends WP:LPI which, linked to WP:BLP1E, is essential. I never riddled that out before either, but it seems true! Randy Kryn (talk) 12:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

While not as problematic as athletes or wrestlers (thankfully), I think reality show contestants are complex. They garner attention, but it's an open question of whether it reaches the level of biographical notability. Below is my assessment of the !votes, while not a headcount. Note, those of you who weighed in with back and forth are considered collectively as your overall input, not one specific piece of it. Does that help you with where I landed on this? Going to be offline for a bit but happy to continue the discussion. Star Mississippi 16:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't have to remove BLP1E from the equation, as WP:LPI only requires that a person seek publicity to move them from low-profile to high-profile-individal status. This separates people caught up in a news event, low-profile, from those who seek public attention (or at least allow it and encourage it to continue), high-profile. Those who used BLP1E as their reasoning for delete or merge should be disregarded because they were using it incorrectly. By the way, someone posted a note after you put the box up but it seems to be lost in the coding here, just mentioning it so it doesn't get lost within this discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:06, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on the eaten post. I really need to quit trying to use templates. I think it's fixed but if not I'll remove the box and just link to the diff since you or any other interested editor can see it that way. I'll come back to you tomorrow on the meat of your question as I want to read a little more into the history of LPI. Apologies for the delay but want to give you the full answer your query merits. Star Mississippi 00:39, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to come back to this sooner. I've read back through LPI and the discussion and I still don't see enough to overturn my conclusion @Randy Kryn. But if you do think I erred, I'll support like DRV as with the discussion below. Star Mississippi 18:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, haven't looked at these discussions in a few day and they've grown! Will catch up on them later, thanks for the ping. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

No worries, and no rush. Enjoy your weekend. Star Mississippi 01:54, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

My only additional point is that close calls should be labeled what they are, "no consensus". A true consensus would not be close but obvious. When consensus isn't obvious, it's not a consensus. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

I think that's more the difference between a clear consensus, and a consensus. You can have a consensus to delete that isn't necessarily a strong one. But I think we're in agree to disagree territory now. I hope you're having a good weekend! Star Mississippi 20:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Extended content

Delete with weight: Nom Xxanthippe Jeppiz, although I feel a trout is unnecessary as you're collectively arguing in good faith JoelleJay hroest Redirect with weight: Frank Anchor Ghost of Dan fuzzy510, although could be stronger Oaktreeb Keep, with weight: your own input, Randy Kryn Lightburst Suriname0 Pershkoviski, although same issue as below basing on winnig Delete, lesser weight: Keep,lesser weight: KatoKungLee /Thecheeseistalking/DavidLeeLambert - since winning = keep isn't policy, these don't add much Just noting I know Kato was sock blocked, but that doesn't weigh into my factoring. Star Mississippi 14:14, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Namiba/Redpatch - source hand waves do nothing Star Mississippi 16:43, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Lisa Mahood

Hi! Can I ask for the recreation of the Lisa Mahood article per WP:REFUND? (deletion discussion) Many thanks in advance! NoonIcarus (talk) 14:26, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done

Have a great day Star Mississippi 15:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks! --NoonIcarus (talk) 15:37, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Beach too Sandy, Water too Wet has been accepted

Beach too Sandy, Water too Wet, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

TipsyElephant (talk) 11:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhodhayam

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhodhayam. 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. — MY, OH, MY! 12:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Unconstructive edtis

Majority of the votes were to retain the article. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subhodhayam. Without reaching any consensus, you marked as consensus reached and closed it, this is sheer manipulation. Please dont resort to unconstructive edits going forward. Your personal opinions dont have weight on whether to keep or dont keep articles. Fostera12 (talk) 10:04, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry you're not happy with the close. You're welcome to participate in the deletion review, but please remember we don't operate on a majority headcount and you need to explain the weight of sourcing. I have no personal opinion on the film or its notability so could not have used it in closing the discussion Star Mississippi 11:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with your nonsense, and manipulation, why should i go for deletion review, when the closure has not reached consensus, and when the closure was not done democratically, so open new afd on Subhodayam. Fostera12 (talk) 14:12, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

As you have been advised multiple times, deletion review is the procedure when you think it was closed incorrectly. In this case, you don't even need to file it as @Mushy Yank has done so on your behalf. Please contribute to the discussion. Star Mississippi 00:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Red Links

Hello, Star Mississippi,

Since you replied to a discussion on my talk page, I thought I'd check in with you about this subject. When I was a neophyte administrator, I received a talk page message, I can't remember from who, who instructed me in no uncertain terms that I should unlink any mentions of an article subject after I deleted an article. The message was focused on PROD deletions but I took this friendly "advice" as pertaining to any main space article deletion. I never received any pushback about this practice until recently and these instances all involve removing links from articles that are deleted as copyright violations reported at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Some of these articles are on obscure subjects written years ago and I thought it was unlikely that they would be recreated any time soon.

Do you unlink mentions of a subject when you delete a page? I told one editor that XFDcloser does this so that editing tool would have to be reprogramed to eliminate this step. Just curious about where you came down on this subject. Thanks! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:20, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I'd have to look at my exact logs, which I'm a little too tired for tonight, but where I think I come down is on merit. So for example if it's a copyvio, but the subject is notable I'd leave the redlink so you (in the general sense, not you personally) might stumble on it and say "oh, I'm familiar with Subject X, let me see if there's enough for an article" as I personally feel it's easier on the eyes to see a redlink as a potentially missing item than plain text. Similar too for a PROD (although I don't really work in that log) or poorly attended AfD. If on the other hand there's a clear consensus that we don't need an article on Subject Y because they're not notable, I will delete the redlinks. There is a setting in XfD closer that facilitates this. Please remind me on that if I don't come back to you as I'm happy to find it. I don't think there are any hard and fast rules. That might have been that admin's personal preference or what s/he learned from another admin, I don't think it was ever policy. Is that helpful? Star Mississippi 02:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Urgently make way for a small cat

Deploying an emergency kitten just in case you are feeling bludgeoned at AFD or deletion review and to say thanks for doing the closes, I hope you feel appreciated for what seems like a necessary, important, and mostly thankless task.

CT55555(talk) 03:27, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Yay kitties, they solve everything. Thanks friend, for always being a partner in article improvememnt. Star Mississippi 13:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Category needs renaming

Would you be able to move Category:WWF/WWE King Crown's Champions/King of the Ring winners to Category:WWF/WWE King's Crown Champions/King of the Ring winners. I am unable to find the move button and can't do it myself. I am also the creator of this category. Davidgoodheart

• @Davidgoodheart: I'm not super familiar with categories. Would WP:CFD be the smoothest way to handle it, specifically Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#Speedy_renaming_and_merging? Star Mississippi 17:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Why was the list of emergency workers killed on 9/11 deleted?

I often read that article to honor their legacy, but the article was deleted and I’d like to know why and preferably have it reinstated 108.31.227.41 (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your note IP108. It was deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of emergency workers killed in the September 11 attacks where consensus determined that the list didn't meet the relevant guidelines. Star Mississippi 00:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

IP108, since I've been having a discussion above I saw your note, and my sincere apologies that I missed that deletion nomination. I would have fought for keeping that page. It was such a close discussion, relisted twice, and, respectfully to Star Mississippi, seems an easy keep (although I'm biased towards keeping a page, especially a page of honor and sadness such as that one. Please see my essay WP:SHADOW). Too many good pages are put up for deletion here, and a select number of editors edit deletion attempts when, especially on that kind of page, it should be hundreds of editors commenting. Should have been an RfC and not a AfD. AfD is the worse place on Wikipedia, in my opinion, and I only show up there when a page on my watchlist is listed so gladly miss most discussions. But sorry I missed this one. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

That was a hard one @Randy Kryn. I'm honestly surprised it didn't land at DRV since everyone has such strong and valid feelings about 9/11. Speaking as an editor, I wish we could have that article. I wish there were better coverage of the whole group, vs. specific units or people. BUt the consensus wasn't there. Star Mississippi 00:53, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

When something is relisted once with no clear consensus, let alone twice, then my essay WP:SHADOWOFKEEP seems valid. There should be no close in RfC, that's the definition of "no consensus". If many experienced editors see value in a page then many readers, such as user 108, would want it kept as well. Please consider that WP:IAR exists as a major and stated policy, and policy "trumps" guidelines. Removing adequate pages, even if some find fault in them, does not maintain Wikipedia but hands it over to deletionists (many of whom actually keep joyful score of the pages they "nuke"). Thanks for wading in the murky waters of AfD, I certainly wouldn't want to on a daily basis. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Is there no chance that the article can be reinstated or is the contents lost forever and it would have to be re-compiled? 108.31.227.41 (talk) 15:32, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

IP 108, if you feel I closed the discussion incorrectly, you can file at Deletion Review. At least I believe IPs can since the day's log is auto created and therefore doesn't involve you creating a page the way AfD would. If you can't, I'm happy to file it on your behalf. If you had an account, it could be restored to userspace at WP:REFUND, but that doesn't work for an IP address as far as I'm aware. @Randy Kryn I think the issue I see with "triple jeopardy" as you phrase it is consensus changes, sometimes drastically. There's an article at AfD right now (not linking so I don't get flagged for canvassing) where it was appropriately Kept semi speedily, it just didn't get actioned for a few days and now, consensus appears to be that it isn't notable. On the other hand, I try not to close museum AfDs because I know I'm not neutral and love WP:ITSAMUSEUM. I feel like there should be ORG level coverage on every museum, but am unfortunately all too aware there often isn't, especially when it's not a place where English is dominant. Star Mississippi 00:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, never saw that essay. Museums are bread and butter. IP108, you seem interested enough in saving a page that you care for and think has quality content, so maybe consider taking on a user name, coming on board the main ship (ahoy!), and maybe the page can be saved if you give it a go. At the very minimum a copy could then be given to you to keep on a user sub-page where it can be worked on and improved. I've never seen that page, and would like to, so please let me know if you get a copy. Thanks. Star Mississippi, of course consensus changes as time goes by on some pages which young people have no knowledge of or respect for. That's one of my long-term concerns for Wikipedia, that in a generation (or even now) events and pages which are certainly worthy of an article will be dumped by kids who have no idea what something even is. I can't recall off-hand but it's happened already, at least attempts have. There really should be a policy that "once a page survives two good deletion discussions then it is off limits for any further attempts." That, to me, would be a commonsense policy. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:37, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

p.s. I've never looked at the entire deletion discussion log here, and wanted to find the page you mention above that was saved but then may be lost because it wasn't completed (if it was saved wouldn't it be saved no matter what other comments showed up), but found that every day 50, 60, 70 pages are listed. Horrible. Your work in wading into that swamp is commendable, thanks for doing it. Whenever I enter one of those discussions it feels like the worse place on Wikipedia, people who have a consistent near 100% record of nominating pages which are then deleted should, in my opinion, be the only ones allowed to nominate. Making it an open process allows so many good pages to be lost, and one reason is that many editors won't even go into the den let alone go into it over and over. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

AfD is hard. I really wish there were a way to enforce BEFORE because in probably at least 15% of noms, the community's time is wasted when there's no chance an article will be deleted and the existence of sources is plainly obvious. That's time spent that could have been used for more borderline articles that need research to be salvaged. I lean inclusionist on many matters of history, culture but do believe we don't necessarily need to be a directory of every company, school, event, some of which barely even garnered local attention and certainly not anything broader. If all we can say is X existed/happened, there might not be enough for an article. The daily 60 or so is hard and then that's when we as closers get fried with mass noms like the football and TV (not the Survivor ones we're discussing above, but there was a run on TV shows at one point). The volume is such than editors can't research all and we end up with a lot with no input, which just kicks the can down the road. I think the issue with two good discussions is timing. If they happened in early years - say when schools were "automatically notable" they might merit new eyes now,But I agree that more than 2 in a 3 year plan is probably too much. Star Mississippi 12:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

As I got pinged at the deletion review, I saw this chat and wanted to say I appreciate the points made by @Star Mississippi and @Randy Kryn. I kinda hate AFD and the culture of people nominating when clearly they did not invest much in WP:BEFORE searches (that is not a comment about this particular article, but just a wider comment) and it seems unavoidable to notice that editors are (I assume subconsciously) quicker to delete articles if the subject is from the global south or north. Anyway, rant aside, I appreciate both your efforts to keep notable things on Wikipedia. Peace. CT55555(talk) 16:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Right back at you @CT55555. You and I have had many good discussions about articles that need improvement, not deletion, especially in our shared art interest. While I may not always agree with your opinion on a topic, I know if I see you've contributed to a discussion that it's well reasoned and something I'll want to read. (Speaking as non closer, of course closers read all input). And as you know (and @Randy Kryn sees here, I hope), I'm always happy to have a discussion about a close. None of us is perfect. Few closes are easy. Or maybe I just look at the logs end of day after folks have closed the easier ones. Star Mississippi 17:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to both for the pings. I'd like to answer more in-depth at some point soon, so won't go into that now. I like Star Mississippi's comment about coming in after people have closed the easier ones. Ha! Standard Operating Procedure in many corporations (leave the hard ones for the next person). Will be back eventually, and this discussion has inspired me to refine my essay, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

I got a copy and formatted it into a Google Document, here's the link if you're still interested https://docs.google.com/document/d/11_-lzsXE3o5pk67a_kXcnljWRZUkpCs8VP4TicH-G2U/edit?usp=sharing Parzival1780 (talk) 15:58, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

IP 108 here, found the password for my account. I'm not entirely sure if I did the deletion review right but I tried, if I did it wrong please fix it for me. Thanks. Parzival1780 (talk) 02:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Update: The page for the article (I had it bookmarked) no longer even says it was deleted, it just says it doesn't exist and redirects me to the new user landing page. Parzival1780 (talk) 02:31, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

caffeinated and I still broke the template. Discussion is here Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 March 21 @Randy Kryn I still owe you an answer above too. No worries. Thanks both and have a good day. Star Mississippi 13:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, not trying to rush anything, just checking to see if a decision has been made in reference to this. If the article is not restored, could I have a copy of the full article sent to me please? Thank you. Parzival1780 (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Parzival1780, generally the discussion runs about seven days and discussion is ongoing to determine a consensus on the outcome. Star Mississippi 14:14, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@Parzival1780 the discussion closed with a consensus not to restore the text. If you would like a copy for your own use, I think WP:REFUND will provide it for your own use as @Martinp also indicated in the discussion. Star Mississippi 14:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Parzival1780. Glad you found it as this makes communicating easier. It doesn't look like the DRV went through, and I'm about to log off for the night. If @Randy Kryn or any one watching my page (reiterating that I'm fine with this DRV) can't help, I'll try to fix it in the morning. Templates and I don't get along at the best of times, and definitely not when tired. Star Mississippi 02:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Star Mississippi, I was going to wait until morning to answer your above long post, some good thinking points in there. On the DRV, I'm not very functional in code and logging up new reviews either. If nobody else comes in to help, best to wait until Star Mississippi can do it when next on Wikipedia. Glad you have a user name now, start up a user page and you're on your way to an addiction (it actually is, and daily breaks are a good idea if you get addicted, and another one is never do Wikipedia over the phone unless you want to carry the addiction around with you). But a good addiction. I look forward to seeing the page you've written about and are dedicated to saving. Thanks for that. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Hamilton E. James updates

Hi Star Mississippi, I work for Hamilton E. James and have a declared COI. I recently posted an edit request on his Talk page. As you have previously edited Mr. James' page, I would appreciate you checking out the request. Thank you! KWray (talk) 17:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for your note @KWray. I'm pinging (alerting) editors who made more significant changes than I did as I just made one small edit. @Edwardx @Leiwang7 please see above and the article's Talk. Star Mississippi 01:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Star Mississippi, thank you for looking into this! I appreciate any input from impartial editors. Thank you! KWray (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Brookhaven High School

I was trying to shape this draft up for mainspace and was wondering about Mississippi Parent Choice? Parents can choose their teachers? I found this fascinating. Do we have an entry on it? Is it covered somewhere? Mississippi educational system? Have a great weekend. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

• Apparently it's only this district. See here. I saw a district in Virginia was considering letting students choose their teachers.. FloridaArmy (talk) 04:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for flagging. Will look into it as well as the parent draft. It might be until early next week when I'm fully back online. Thanks for the housekeeping on "my" drafts to keep them out of G13 as well. Star Mississippi 01:57, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:20, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

thank you for being the keeper of the milestones. Star Mississippi 01:56, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Suicide by argument

Hi, Star! Thanks for closing this futile discussion after it had reached its inevitable conclusion. The user is still brandishing the same stick/digging in the same hole on his/her talk-page – including something that looks as least superficially like a legal threat. May I suggest putting a stop to that? (obviously that's not something I should even consider doing myself at this point). Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, please ignore, it looks as if Yamla has wasted no time there. Regards again, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging, and apologies for missing your ping to address it. I'd have done same as @Yamla and @Jayron32 did had I been on line in time. I hope you feel completely vindicated in your original action. That editor was clearly not here to be productive. Star Mississippi 20:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Star! But no, I'm actually not completely pleased with the outcome. I'm not sorry that an ill-informed and belligerent paid editor ended up indeffed, but I learnt something too. I surely should have made sure that my block summary reflected my actual thinking/reasons for the block, and that was a mistake on my part; but mostly I'm frustrated that we don't have the ability to simply remove page-move rights from a user. The pattern of repeated moves of a non-viable draft to mainspace is a very common one, and we don't really have any useful way (that I know of) of preventing it. So I was a little surprised and a little chastened to see the extent of the criticism of my partial block – I foolishly thought that I had been rather moderate in the circumstances. If you or anyone else watching this page has any suggestions on how this type of situation can better be handled, I'm all ears. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you @Justlettersandnumbers that we need a way to keep editors from accidental move warring and ensuing frustration. Speaking in this case of good faith ones where they're not trying to evade drafts. In the case of our UCLA editor, I'm not sure anything would have been more helpful as they were hell bent on being right, and now @Deepfriedokra will get to deal with it in the UTRS queue. I think with your block you handled as I might have, a p-block in hope of getting them to understand the project. In this case, I don't know that it would have helped since this editor arrived/returned with an axe to grind.

In better circumstances, this comes up a lot, as you well know, with drafts that are moved to mainspace too early and that's where I wish we had an answer. The newer editor either doesn't understand the distinction between draft/main, hasn't found the feedback as to why it was moved and/or draft was declined or maybe doesn't understand that it was moved and thinks there was a technical issue and their edit didn't save. Will think more on this. Star Mississippi 21:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nadeem_Omar_(footballer)

I wanted to point out that @Timothy says he did access the paywalled sources, through a free trial, and assessed them as promo/interviews/trivial. JoelleJay (talk) 00:05, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging @JoelleJay. I'm not sure it makes enough of a difference, but as I don't have time to look further into it tonight, leaving it for another set of eyes. Have a good evening. Star Mississippi 00:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! JoelleJay (talk) 00:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Any time! Star Mississippi 01:13, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

@Star Mississippi:, Timothy claims he accessed the paywalled sources through a free trial, but I looked at the paywalled sources like [3] and there doesnt seem to be an option for a free trial... Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 07:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

As there are many ways to get around paywalls, I'm not going to wade into whether or not they did as it's impossible to verify on either side and I have no reason to doubt either you or @TimothyBlue. Star Mississippi 13:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Krystofia/sandbox

Hello, Star Mississippi,

I hope you are well. I was doing one of my regular CSD G13 deletions of an expiring drafts and ran into a problem with Twinkle because there was a redirect to the draft from this page. But apparently, this user sandbox had received indefinite full protection. I had never seen an administrator impose that kind of protection on a user page of any kind because it prevents the editor from editing their own user pages. Is there a fuller explanation for doing this? Thanks for any insight you can offer (or remember). Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Liz. From what I can tell from looking at their contribs as well as Kaprysky's, it was repeated re-creation of the same draft under different titles. The sandbox, first last, last first, User:Krystofia/Alexandre Lessertisseur, User:Krystofia/Lessertisseur Alexandre, User:Krystofia/Lessertisseur in an effort to get it to stick. I don't recall why I SALTed that version and not the others, unfortunately. I was close to an indef on both accounts as promotional SPAs, but they stopped editing which resolved the issue. I'll unprotect it now as moot. Thanks for flagging and apologies for making your work complicated. Have a great day. Star Mississippi 16:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Could you please have a look at User:DGG/Eleazar (painter)?

Hello! Whenever you find a chance (no rush), could you please look over this draft User:DGG/Eleazar (painter) and let me know what the next steps would be for David's drafts?

This one was a rescued autobiography from 2009. The artist has had enough coverage in reviews & articles to meet GNG. I've cut all of the original research, and trimmed it back to a short article, with everything sourced now. Was able to use some of the sources from the article on Spanish WP, supplemented with what I could find online. Hard to search for him because he uses a mononym, so many hits were not the same Eleazar. Please advise if you think it's ready for mainspace, or if I should keep plugging away at it, either way is fine by me. Thank you, and hope you enjoy the weekend. It got up to 88 degrees today....weird for mid-April, but it sure was gorgeous and the lilacs in my garden look like they are going to pop open soon! Netherzone (talk) 01:37, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry for the delay, I had apparently just logged off. This weather is bananas. Did you see the article about brush fires just northwest? I can't recall that ever happening. So glad your flowers are enjoying it. My nose might have a bone to pick with the flowers though, as much as my eyes love them. I think I mentioned before that I run commute some days, and the utter explosion of color is just gorgeous. Going to look at Eleazar right now. Thanks for all you did on it. I'm really optimistic we can finish some of his work. Star Mississippi 15:47, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Lilacs starting to bloom in an urban garden

Kablammo! They opened overnight! Here come the lilacs with their thoroughly intoxicating scent....(sorry if this photo makes you sneeze.) Glad to hear you are enjoying the flowers on your runs, but ugh, allergies. Yes, the fires just NW are strange, nor can I remember this sort of thing happening in the region, but there has been drought. What's happening with the Colorado river is freaking me out. Re: David's drafts, I too am hopeful about improving his unfinished projects. I'm very sad we lost such an important editor, rock solid integrity. So knowledgeable and patient and brilliant. Netherzone (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Wow. What a great photo. Love how most are slightly pink and the one bottom center is "nope, I am a proudly fully purple bloom". The Colorado is (rightfully) getting the national attention, but the difference in the Rio Grande between visits is just stark. We grow up hearing of a mighty river but then to see it so sparse... I know we've both spoken about our national parks, have you done Alaska? I went to Exit Glacier in the Kenai Fjords last summer and if someone can walk away from there and not understand the impact of humans on the natural environment? I feel like it's mandatory viewing, similarly to when I went to Hiroshima. Hope you can enjoy a relaxing weekend in your garden. Nearly a week after I heard about I'm still thinking about David. Such a welcoming and encouraging person. Star Mississippi 17:55, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Malus floribunda in bloom, mid April 2023

Kablammo, back at you says the malus floribunda whose name absolutely makes me think of the ninja turtles. Star Mississippi 02:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)