User talk:Aafi/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Do not add incorrect views

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Moved to Talk:Adam in Islam § RfC about inclusion of Sayyid Mumtaz Ali's opinion removed by an IP editor

 – I've moved the discussion to Talk:Adam in Islam#RfC about inclusion of Sayyid Mumtaz Ali's opinion removed by an IP editor to get a wider response from other editors. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 12:40, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

The view of a single author Sayyid Mumtaz Ali who never conducted any relevant or accurate research regarding the matter rather than sitting hope and writing his own opinion cannot be reliable. Many such people claim many things, like mr Rajnish used to claim to be God, that doesnt make his claims accurate and so arent accepted by wiki policies. You cannot claim that Adam wasnt first just by his claim, it is mentioned in Quran and by many reliable WP:RS than Azraeil took soils from Earth and Adam was created by God first, and Indian scholar claiming something he never did research on after 10,000s of years is invalid. No other WP:RS gives such baseless argument that Eve was created before Adam either. This is pure feminist propaganda! Please cite only reliable established WP:RS. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 06:05, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

It is mentioned as a opinion of "him" with a reliable source. Saying that he never conducted any research is nothing but childish. He has himself been subject of various research papers including the one by Gail Minault. You may try raising the issue on the talk page. Feminist propaganda? Please see WP:NPOV. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:11, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

There are 1000s of scholars all over the world that have different opinions, only established WP:RS should use. If you want to add the opinion of just 1 out of millions of scholars that ever lived why not add the views of millions of Islamic scholars that have had varying opinions over the year. Please use only what is established in the main stream. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 06:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Things like This is pure feminist propaganda!, and assumptions like Not reliable invalid propaganda source. I suspect Shura9999 and TheAafi of sockpuppetry. definitely speak that "you are here for POV pushing". We go with neutral point of view and calling a "reliable source" as unreliable and propaganda source is proof of your POV pushing. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

The view of a single scholar isn't reliable, and like I said millions of scholars over 1000s of years gave millions of different opinions. That which is accepted by mainstream is WP:RS, you are just following the views of a single scholar whom you are disciple to, whose views are not main stream. This is not neutral. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 06:35, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Again and again' you are saying same thing. Views that aren't acceptable to you because you don't like them, and call them as "feminist propaganda", don't become unreliable. You are also not assuming good faith even after I warned you. you are just following the views of a single scholar whom you are disciple to - this? If you disagree with certain content in any Wikipedia article, rather than removing/edit warring/being bad with fellow editors, the best is to discuss the issue on article's talk where a consensus would take place between multiple editors that whether the content can be kept or not. Edit warring and attacking is not a solution. POV pushing definitely not! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

The Aafī You are the one trying to do pov push of a single scholar that is not accepted anywhere else also the fact that "Shura9999" was created today just to add back your unreliable source is highly suspicious. Find any other source regarding this claim except that unreliable book, I will accept it. This is just a one sided feminist pov push, feminism is never neutral, only main stream sources are WP:RS, the claim of a single book cannot be a WP:RS, there are countless books that claim many things, like some claim Adam was a primate [1], we cannot add millions of different views all over the world nor should we, we only add what is main stream and that is WP:RS. Your source doesn't fit that and is exclusively based on a single "south asian" non global view. We should stick to main stream and WP:RS and if you want create a new article "conspiracy theories regarding Adam", and add that unreliable source there. Since the article is not regarding conspiracy theories and is about the mainstream Adam, only mainstream accepted WP:RS belongs there. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 07:02, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

You have already missed the thing. Do you even know "fact" and "opinion" are two different things? In the WP:RS, there are guidelines like WP:RSOPINION. Some sources may be considered reliable for statements as to their author's opinion, but not for statements asserted as fact. For example, an inline qualifier might say "[Author XYZ] says....". A prime example of this is opinion pieces in sources recognized as reliable. When using them, it is best to clearly attribute the opinions in the text to the author and make it clear to the reader that they are reading an opinion. I hope that you would stop this childish behavior. In your edit you have malformed the entire infobox in article. If I would have been pushing POV, I would've reverted your edits again and again, but I just reverted your edits two times. Moreover, the article is in my watchlist like many others. Shura9999 reverted your edits before me and you're wrong in saying that they did it to re-add my content, remember that you malformed the infobox as well, there are numerous reasons for that revert. Anyways, if you are suspicious, try your part at WP:SPI which I guess would be closed as "vandalism". ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:14, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

So we both agree what is main stream and established WP:RS can be added. if there was a single other source other than that unreliable book it could be considered, but there is non, and all established mainstream and WP:RS says Adam came first, a single conspiracy theory book means nothing and there are countless other scholars who gave countless theories (like the Adam = primate example), they do not belong to the main stream article "Adam in Islam" but I suggest you to create a new article "Conspiracy Theories Relating to Adam in Islam" and add the unaccepted conspiracy theory there, goodbye but keep in mind if you re add the unreliable source in the main article I will remove it keeping in mind WP:RS. Take care. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 07:31, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I've already told you that it is a reliable book written by a known scholar, and a subject to research articles, and thus important work on the subject. Just because you disagree with the opinion (not fact) it doesn't become "conspiracy theory". ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Nope it is feminist and can't be considered neutral and reliable is that which is accepted main stream. you cannot even find a single other source that shares the same view as this or calls it a reliable source. It is "not recognized as reliable" anywhere. Unreliable, dismissed.. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 07:50, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Still, you are doing hocus-pocus with fact and opinion. I would've removed it myself it was added as a fact, since it is added as opinion, and meets WP:RSOPINION, there's no way out to object its inclusion. Take some time and distinguish "fact" and "opinion". Unreliable? Author and book being subject of a research paper published by University of Cambridge Press are "unreliable". Wow! Just because you differ with a reliable opinion, it doesn't become unreliable or non-neutral. You may see articles with Criticism sections? Most of criticism is non-neutral (but it is included in the article in a neutral way, does that become unreliable? No, never. But if such things are added as facts, and not opinions - I would be first one to object their inclusion on the Wikipedia. But the opinion statement of Sayyid Mumtaz Ali is added as "opinion" hence meets WP:RSOPINION, and is from a reliable book as I said above. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 08:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

For the last time I repeat countless scholars gave countless opinions, it is not possible nor necessary to include them all, what should just be included is opinions accepted by mainstream, and also you fail to provide a single source other than that one which shares the same opinion making it a totally unreliable source failing WP:V. It cannot be considered a reliable source just because you say so, it fails WP:RS guidelines, it is a feminist book and violates neutrality, no other source support Sayyid Mumtaz Alis book. If there are any other source beside this book that do, provide it, but they do not. This alone among many other factors shows "It is not recognized as reliable" anywhere. As there are no other source supporting the views other than this non mainstream unreliable source, this does not deserve inclusion as it is unreliable. Hope you understand now. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 08:10, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Cambridge University Press Publishers they never claimed they exclusively publish reliable sources, they also publish fairy tales among other things. Regardless not a single source besides this book shares the opinion and countless scholars published many opinions, that do not make them eligible for entry. "It is not recognized as reliable." Thus this book fails WP:RS guildiness, lacks neutrality and cannot be used as a source on Wikipedia. I am done explaining now and will just revert if you add it back. Take care. 43.245.121.219 (talk) 08:18, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Don't be like someone who thinks they own Wikipedia articles. I've requested for a RfC and asked for comments from other editors, let's see what is the consensus. Sayyid Mumtaz Ali is not a non-notable figure like rest of your "thousands scholars" who are unknown. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 09:28, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Name Change

Asalam o Alikum hope you're great it looks like you are familiar with Pakistan and India, I have asked an editor a question but he doesn't understand what I'm saying The name of the artist is ok but along with it should be pop singer and not his date of birth as he is from classical singer family, can you help? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk#13:31:49,_8_October_2020_review_of_submission_by_103.12.120.194 --103.12.120.194 (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

103.12.120.194 Dear friend, you need not to worry. Once this draft is accepted by any AfC volunteer, they'll fix its name for the mainspace. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:36, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks, there are 4 Amanat Ali actually so that is why but thank you so much :)

--103.12.120.194 (talk) 15:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I get it. I've left you a message on AfC Help desk. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:45, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks hope this article approve and they remove date of birth from his name. --CGOV (talk) 15:31, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Host

Dear TheAafi,

Thank you for volunteering as a Host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users to get started here at Wikipedia, and aiding more experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:

• Useful scripts you can install to make responding easier,
• templates to use and, of course:
• the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.

Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:35, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

On 10 October 2020, Mamunul Haque was elected Secretary General of Bangladesh Khelafat Majlish and I added some Reliable sources. See 👉 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mamunul Haque Owais Al Qarni (talk) 08:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Thanks for maintaining the integrity of the Wikipedia. Zakaria1978 ښه راغلاست (talk) 02:41, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Zakaria1978 Thanks a lot. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 11:43, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:People from Stamboliyski

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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:44, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Liz, I had received earlier a notification that someone removed this category from a certain article and I forgot to G7 it lol. Since you are an admin, you may delete in G7 and add a link to this diff as G7 request. Thanks a lot! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 19:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Muhammad Adil Khan

On 15 October 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Muhammad Adil Khan, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:47, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

@MSGJ:, This has been a great admiration for me. I've been writing similar biographies since more than a year, which can be seen here. Never thought about nominating them for ITN or related things. Anyways, thanks a lot to you and all those who supported its inclusion. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Precious

Islamic scholars

Thank you for quality articles about Islamic scholars in India and Pakistan beginning with Majid Ali Jaunpuri, then Abdur Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera, Azhar Shah Qaiser, Muhammad Adil Khan and many others, for help at The Teahouse, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2456 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for article work! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:03, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, Thank you, dear friend! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 21:04, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Request

Please, Correct the composition style and spelling : Mahfuzul Haque -- Owais Al Qarni (talk) 12:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Majid Ali Jaunpuri for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Majid Ali Jaunpuri until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Syed Mehboob Rizwi for deletion

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

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Syed Mehboob Rizwi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Redirects to a deleted page

I am not sure that it makes sense leaving Syed Adnan Kakakhail and Talk:Syed Adnan Kakakhail as redirects that lead to deleted pages. Clearly it defeats the object of moving page Adnan Kakakhail to Draft:Adnan Kakakhail without leaving a redirect ‎if we had Syed Adnan Kakakhail redirecting to Draft:Adnan Kakakhail. So maybe it would be better to delete Syed Adnan Kakakhail and its talk page.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:32, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Toddy1, Human error lol. I was thiinking that I would patrol this article, after I moved it to Adnan Kakakhail with leaving a redirect at Syed Adnan Kakakhail. Later, I wasn't satisfied and draftified it without leaving a redirect at Adnan Kakakhail, because I guess Kakakhail is a bit known and notable in Indian subcontinent. I've added a CSD G8 tag on Syed Adnan Kakakhail. Thanks a lot for letting me know this! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:40, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. When a page is deleted, it stays on your watch list.-- Toddy1 (talk) 05:59, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Review page

Hi, can you review this page brother

-> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Abdulmanap_Nurmagomedov

Gmnabeel (talk) 09:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Gmnabeel, The draft is already gone G12. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 20:44, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Heyy there

Can you please give me your Social media account links i want to chat with you about wikipedia please . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asangog (talk • contribs) 15:16, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Dear friend Asangog, Wikipedia is not a social network. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 11:14, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

yes bro i know but please try to understand i want to chat with you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asangog (talk • contribs) 11:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Pontian Eagles SC

Hi,

I noticed you reviewed this page a couple weeks ago. I have gone back and added reliable references and cited them appropriately.

If you had time to review it again, it would be greatly appreciated.

Kind regards Pontos92 (talk) 07:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Pontos92, I would rather like to get it re-reviewed by any other AfC volunteer. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 11:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Request to review

I am requesting you to review the Draft:Logi Boitha Movement article. 45.125.220.162 (talk) 12:22, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

45.125.220.162, Thank you for contributing to the Wikipedia but I do not review drafts on request. Sorry. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 20:46, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Please reconsider your AfD close

Hi, I note you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anveshi Jain (2nd nomination); as per my comment G4 was not the way to go, I have spoken to the admin in question. Please reconsider at least changing the reason to procedural close, then referring to the draft deletion discussion at MfD; or better still leave an admin close this tomorrow. Also noting the AfD isn't SNOW worthy either. Many thanks Nightfury 20:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done, Nightfury, Dear friend, thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 20:33, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Chintya Candranaya

Hi,

I have this very famous YouTube/social media influencer that I would like to make an entry for. She has made extraordinary claims of superhuman ability which were called into question by the MMA community.

Most of my references are videos. All told these videos have millions and millions of views. I also have online articles and Indonesian articles.

How might I make it more objective? I just had a couple of lines of text. What might I do to the site?

She is big news in the world presently.

Thanks Merthyr matchstick (talk) 17:48, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Merthyr matchstick, Please have a look at WP:42, WP:NPOV, WP:BLP and improve the draft accordingly. Thanks ─ The Aafī (^talk) 17:56, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Ono Rikka

Hello, TheAafi. I find you have moved article Ono Rikka because you said its sources were not enough to publish. I don't think so. The article is just 6,000+ in length. But it has 12 sources. Its sources are enough sufficient. I really think its reference is reliable...FANZA is the most important adult award of JAV. Because of the AV industry's special feature (Some people think it is not elegant and ashamed), we can't expect some strict media, such as BBC, New York Times and Asahi Shimbun, would report it.

Best wishes to you!--波斯波莉斯 (talk) 00:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

波斯波莉斯, The references need to have significant coverage about the subject and should be independent of the subject. I reviewed the available sources and unfortunately none of them are inline with WP:SIGCOV. Some sources aren't even reliable. A friendly note, whenever you add any journal/book name in native language, please try adding, |trans-title=Translation of name in English. This helps a lot. I agree with you that mainstream media might not report it, but post the deprecation of the WP:PORNBIO criteria, such BLP articles need to meet the WP:ENT criteria at least, which is currently lacking in the article and it does not meet any of the three points mentioned in the ENT guideline. The subjective criteria is not everything, it just gives an assumption that the subject might be notable, otherwise The answer to life, the universe, and everything? Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 03:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your constructive suggestions and reviews, TheAafi.I translate this article from the Japanese article "小野六花". I can't see those sources because they block my proxy's IP (I have to edit Wikipedia with proxies because of my country's restriction). So I don't know whether they are related. LMAO, please pardon me. Your review is essentially right...Ono Rikka currently doesn't meet anyone of the three points. But I strongly believe she will meet the criteria you suggested. I also will revise it. In zh-wikipedia, we don't have those policies. We are encouraged to write an article about pornstars. I am a freshman in en-wiki. TBH, I have really joined it for less than one month. If I make some mistakes, plead let me know and teach me. I am appreciated for your teach, help, review and advice.--波斯波莉斯 (talk) 13:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

波斯波莉斯, Every Wikipedia has its own notability guidelines and they differ from each other. A subject passing notability guideline on zh Wikipedia may not possibly pass notability criteria on English Wikipedia. Please let me know whenever you need any sort of help. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:04, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

波斯波莉斯, You need to add the names of films and their release dates in English, and not in the native language. It looks weird on the English Wikipedi. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019–20 Bangalore A Division

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Govvy (talk) 20:16, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Please revert this close. It's hardly Snow, and there's WP:NORUSH. Nfitz (talk) 20:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

As an uninvolved administrator, I've reverted your inappropriate close. WP:SNOW does not apply. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:36, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:PROF

I think the advice you gave at [2] was not really correct. Professors and other researchers are judged by WP:PROF, which requires evaluating their influence in the field (usually as measured by citations, though the guideline provides alternatives). This is entirely separate from WP:BIO. There is need only of RS forthe career and the publications, not " third party references which have significant coverage about the subject." (though if there is, WP:GNG can apply even if WP:PROF does not--they're alternatives. DGG ( talk ) 07:26, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you DGG, That's a month old and I've already taken a note of the advise you gave just below my message there. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:57, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

Dylan Lombardo

Hello TheAafi I hope your doing well. What problems occurred for the created page entitled Dylan Lombardo? Thanks for the quick response.

Best,

The artdealerscout — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artdealerscout (talk • contribs) 04:25, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for reverting the Jegan Rajshekar as its already in AfD, which was missed !

— Amkgp 💬 16:06, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Amkgp, The kitten is so beautiful! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:08, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

TheAafi, 😊 — Amkgp 💬 16:09, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Please review

Hello Sir, Please review Draft:Ashish Chanchlani (YouTuber). I did not want to come to you with this request but no reviewer is paying attention to this draft. Please Review. 27.63.84.198 (talk) 02:59, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Without review, how did you notice the speedy deletion on the draft? 27.63.69.246 (talk) 03:41, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

27.63.69.246, As a part of the AfC reviewing, I reviewed your draft and I've sadly declined it, based on the fact that it is recreation of an article and a draft which are both deleted/create protected per deletion discussions, which can be found at Ashish Chanchlani and Draft:Ashish Chanchlani; noting that you may not be able to open these links on mobile. This draft meets the G4 criteria of CSD and I've thus tagged it for G4. If you want to work on this article please get the original title unprotected, and I would be happy to assist you. Thanks ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 20:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Please review this !

Hi TheAafi, I'm a newbie user and I submitted an article through AfC which is located at Draft: Karamjeet Madonna. As I can see in the history of draft, you've helped me a lot, I would request you to review it again and let me know what kind of modifications need to be made. Thank you. Sheetalkumari8101995 (talk) 18:19, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Sheetalkumari8101995, I've already mentioned the the answer to life, the universe, and everything in the AfC comment. Please go through it and try to understand how a subject is notable generally. A subject may not be notable per WP:GNG, but might be notable within their own field, and that's called subjective notability. Please read the subjective guidelines like WP:NACTOR, WP:NSINGER and WP:CREATIVE. Once the related issues are sorted out, please let me know. I would be watching this draft. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:31, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I wish to improve this draft in my personal userspace. Please can you userfy it? Sheetalkumari8101995 (talk) 05:37, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Sheetalkumari8101995,  Done; Please see User:Sheetalkumari8101995/Karamjeet Madonna. Thank you. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:42, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Unreviewed

Hi TheAafi, I hope you're having a great week

I noticed you left a message on my talk page and then retracted. Just wanted to confirm if you have marked this page as unreviewed?. Thanks.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 04:46, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

@Umakant Bhalerao:, Yes I marked this as unreviewed but didn't wanted to post a talk message to you because you wouldn't feel good in marking it as patrolled either, but the script automatically posted this message, and I removed it, keeping in mind that you've already AfDed it. While you nominate new articles for deletion, both the Twinkle CSD/Xfd menu and Page curation tool give a checkbox saying "Mark this page as patrolled", just try to uncheck it. Have a great day. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 04:51, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your response but as per NPP guidelines, we are supposed to mark AFDed pages as reviewed after tagging them? CSDed articles do not automatically get marked reviewed anyway.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 05:03, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Alright Umakant Bhalerao. That's something I missed. Thank you for the update. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 05:07, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome. see this [3]. And i noticed an IP user was trying to remove AFC decline notices from Draft:Ashish Chanchlani (YouTuber) which i have reverted to your last version.--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 05:14, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

I had a quick look already. Thank you Umakant Bhalerao. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 05:15, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Have you posted the unreviewed message again on my talk page?--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 05:19, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Umakant Bhalerao, I reverted my edit, and left the message again. Learning new things is great. 🥺 The guideline says that we can mark these articles as patrolled, but it doesn't make it necessary either. Unlike CSDs & PRODs, you can mark AfDed pages as 'reviewed' after tagging them. That makes a sense where we both are right. 😃 Thanks a lot to you friend. ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 05:26, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, the pleasure is all mine :).--Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 06:12, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Raghu Shastry

On Nov 5 you declined Draft:Raghu Shastry at AfC as "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources". The draft's creator since complained WP:Teahouse#Submission error. At the time you declined the draft, it had 15 citations, all which seem to be to mainstream newspapers in India. The citations all appear to be WP:RS and they pretty evenly distributed through the article. That's way more reliable sources than most articles on Wikipedia get. Could you explain why you declined the draft? Thanks, Nsk92 (talk) 20:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

@Nsk92:; Thanks for getting to me. I would be reviewing this issue in morning (as it is late night here), and would contact the concerned editor. Thank you ─ ─ The Aafī on Mobile (^talk) 21:07, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

?

Do i know you? And do you have any problems with me? I see you trying to get my requests declined about 2 times, and i haven't even met you a single time in my life. Don't you think knowing the context of a situation is better before jumping on the bandwagon for no reason? What about this edit? I like how you don't know about the matter, never check the talk page of the article, and try to blame me as a "vandal" or something to get my requests declined. When i actually did not do anything wrong there, just a valid argument. I think you need to learn what's WP:VANDALISM first.

Funniest matter here, you're on me for some weird reason, but you're not even an Admin or something. You're a very shady guy overall, and this was clearly a clear cut case of harassment. Mind your own business, and know your place, it would be better for you. But thanks for the notice on my talk page, i'd try. Again, it's clear that we have completely different interests on Wikipedia, i'd not like to see you anywhere near me again. Danloud (talk) 10:59, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

There is nothing like harassment. It was a genuine concern with your contributions & I thought it should be addressed. Nothing else. Keep your good works up and don't miss to use edit summaries. Thanks., ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:22, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Strange talk page move

Hi there. I noticed you moved Talk:Age/sex/location to Talk:Age (Disambiguation)/sex/location and couldn't work out why. Was this a mistake, perhaps? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:39, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, Actually there was a request at RMT and I had to swap the two articles. Didn't noticed this thing. Let me fix it. Thank you. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:49, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Cordless Larry (talk) 18:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do help edit Aditi Rao page.

The information is old and needs updating. Please refer to her website aditirao.net Regards Amitnomad (talk) 12:47, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

PetsHoods Wiki Page

Hi there Aafi,

I want to create this page on wikipedia. I know you are busy but can you help me?

Tonnysins589 (talk) 13:18, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Request on 15:59:31, 22 November 2020 for assistance on AfC submission by Sriramnivas6121

• Sriramnivas6121 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Educate Bhaarath (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sir I need certain help from you regarding the article ,please helpme. Sir I am writing an article about an educational institution and primarily it is having website and it is having a students weekly published.The organization is having appreciations from government of the country and basically it is a social organization. The organization has certain secondary sources like "the vaccination camps done by it are covered in various news papers and the same was also published by lions club international too. Sir shall i add them to this information.One more question is sir whether the information part of the article is ok ,i will certainlyremove those peacock terms. if it is ok then i will find the adequate secondary sources so that it willmeet the guidelnes of wikipedia. Please help me writing this article. Guide me so that i will be able to publish my article.Sriramnivas6121 (talk) 15:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Sriramnivas6121 (talk) 15:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

November

November

Thank you for article work in November! Look today at BB music, a little crusade of mine ;) - his birthday on St Cecilia's day, patron saint of music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for pinging me at Draft:Priyanka Chincholi (Actress). This all appears to be related to the Vijayclicker93 sock farm, which I didn't know about at the time I filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AjKa180. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:03, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, It just came in my new AfC feed and I was remembering that I declined a similar draft few days back. I tried searching but I failed lol and had to search for Priyanka Chincholi in User talk space, and it gave me a link to the draft I had declined. Thanks for "thanking me". ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 18:10, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Explain revert

The rollback you did here violates WP:ROLLBACK and looks like a misuse of your user right. Can you describe why you made this revert? Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 12:38, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear friend, I would surely explain why I reverted your edit but allow me sometime. I'm in a journey, and hopefully would be free by tomorrow. I did nothing in violation of ROLLBACK & I would be soon explaining it. Requesting you to be patient. Thank you. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 12:47, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Georgethedragonslayer, as a way forward, please could you use the article talk page to explain what your edit was, and why you think it is the right thing to do. (I note that you have made 1,191 edits to articles and only 12 to article talk pages.[4] Normally people make a lot more use of article talk pages than that.)-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I am fine if you would like to take time before explaining.

As for Toddy1, at least half of my message above is about the user's WP:CONDUCT - such discussion does not belong on article's talk page per WP:TPG. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 13:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Well we all make mistakes. It is misuse to use rollback to reverse good-faith edits in situations where an explanatory edit summary would normally be expected. TheAafi leaves an edit summary in 83.2% of his/her edits; so he/she is very good like that. You only use an edit summary in 28.3% of edits.-- Toddy1 (talk) 14:09, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Re: November 2020

Honestly, I wanted to change the name for the "Stadion im. Edmunda Szyca", as all the Polish stadium articles have the Polish name included in the title. And then in the text there is the English meaning given. For example: Stadion Miejski (Poznań) oraz Stadion Miejski (Wrocław) (as there are both transleted as Municipal Stadiums). Coming back to Edmund Szyc Stadium, I was not able to change its name as I wanted to do (because of the redirect that existed in my proposed name). In connection with the above, I would like to apologize for the really fast title-change and ask you to change Edmund Szyc Stadium name for the Stadion im. Edmunda Szyca (it is no sense to change it for the "Stadion Miejski Warty (Poznań)", because Warta Poznań team plays on the another peach – Edmund Szyc Stadium is their historical ground). Greetings! Najgorszakomediaromantyczna (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Look, also Wikimedia redirects to the Polish stadium name. -> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stadion_Edmunda_Szyca Greetings again. Najgorszakomediaromantyczna (talk) 21:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

@Najgorszakomediaromantyczna:, Dear friend, it would be best to initiate a requested move on the article's talk page. Thank you. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 21:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Okey, but this article is not popular and no one will answer this in public! I can try to do it, but - firstly, before I will take that steps - don't you see my explanation clear? The ground doesn't link to many links, there are really changable and it is nothing crushial in just changing the English title name for the Polish one, following the rule that all the grounds are called in their native name; see all the category please: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Football_venues_in_Poland. Najgorszakomediaromantyczna (talk) 21:32, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Your excellency, I saw your contributions andworks you made. I thank you what you served as a editor in Wikipedia. 🇮🇳DRCNSINDIA (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

The Islamic Barnstar

		The Islamic Barnstar
		Assalamu'alaikum brother Aafi. Great work on articles concerning Islamic communities and personalities from the subcontinent. I really appreciate your work on creating articles concerning Islamic scholars. Zakaria1978 ښه راغلاست (talk) 05:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Zakaria1978: I'm happy to know this. Thank you. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 10:47, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for your contribution in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing of Zohra Shah.Lustead (talk) 15:15, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Lustead: Glad to know that my participation in the AfD was helpful. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 10:48, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Contested technical requests

Regarding a contested technical request, there is no way in WP:RM to request a RM discussion to move a page from the draft space to the mainspace, so there cannot be an open discussion about whether or not a move should be made. An editor involved with WP:AFC should not be granted unilateral power to control what happens to a page, like preventing it from being in the mainspace in spite of WP:CONSENSUS. How can a consensus even be formed to show that the declining editor was erroneous in their decline and will not admit so? Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

@Erik:, True. But there's not a single "AfC reviewer" throughout the project? If any AfC reviewer is acting in bad faith, the best would be to make a complain in the AfC WikiProject. The second possibility would be to just create an article either in sandbox/draftspace and without getting it through AfC; moved to mainspace and directly patrolled by an NPR reviewer. I reverted the move because RMT was no better place for the request to be made. I would be pleased to help in this if there is any. Thank you. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 15:51, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

If there's anything stopping the move then G6 is better option and not the RMT. This is what I understand. The deleting admin would themselves move the draft/userspace article to the mainspace title after they've deleted the article stopping move. Isn't it? I moved the article back to draftspace without leaving a redirect, there was an option either to "cut and paste the content" in the new article (as nothing there was stopping move) and then requesting an histmerge from the draft? I guess so & I may be wrong though. Regards ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 15:56, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Moreover, I do not know that if I asked for a RM discussion to be initiated. What I meant by the edit summary is that since RMT is off the table, the article should come through AfC and an AfC volunteer would make a way out through G6/or anything related (I had cleared the place for AfC reviewer, by not leaving a redirect behind, and it was thus easy) for the move. Thank you again. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 15:59, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Request

Hi TheAafi,

Greetings!! I ran into your page while I was going through some draft articles. I recently wrote an article about a social entrepreneur and have submitted it for a second review. I would be so grateful if you take out a few minutes of your precious time to review Draft:Pratik Gauri. TYSM.ShaiksKings (talk) 13:19, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

ShaiksKings, The draft is already reviewed and has been declined. The references have not been enough to meet the WP:GNG criteria. Pinging GSS for the same who reviewed your draft. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:20, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Apologies about the delayed response to you, was out of the town. Just saw the draft being rejected through user GSS. I know the draft has not been reviewed by you but would like to get your insights on this. I beg to differ with GSS as I have cited some of the best sources I could possibly found about this subject online. This was my second submission and I have significantly improved the page to the point where I feel it may meet the criteria. Just check out the references, they provide significant coverage. Also read the first paragraph, pratik is the youngest entrepreneur to have found 8 startups. He has been accorded numerous national and international awards and was also named among the youngest entrepreneur by a magazine. He was one of only five people in India to receive a global funding from one youngworld. Which I think suffices to prove notability. The subject meets general notability guidelins according to the sources I have provided in the article. If not WP:GNG, then WP:ANYBIO or WP:BASIC is being met by him.ShaiksKings (talk) 11:38, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sir, did you get a chance to have a glance at it. I would appreciate any suggestions from you on this. Thank youShaiksKings (talk) 10:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

ShaiksKings, Please ask the deleting declining reviewers for any assistance or post a query at the AfC help desk. I see that Hatchens has also declined your draft earlier. I am bad at evaluating such articles because my field is completely different. Get in touch with declining reviewers. Thank you. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 05:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Salaam!

Hello Aafi bhai!

I ran into your page by accident and love the work that you are doing. Would love to meet you if you are in Delhi and discuss some projects on Muslim personalities that I am trying to work on.

Gratitude, DilliKiShaam (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

@DilliKiShaam: Wa Alykumus salām. I'm not able to see any good contributions which you have made. Anyways, please find the better option of contacting me at Special:EmailUser/TheAafi. Regards, ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 17:10, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Houri

Hello, TheAafi. I want to ask you a Islamic question… Do you know the word,"houri"? I found that Britannica describes it as "virgin", but en-Wikipedia says some scholars have found it also can be used to men. Some en-zh dictionaries even translate hori to "beauty" instead of "virgin". I can't understand Arabic. Can you help me? Happy editing to you.--波斯波莉斯 (talk) 01:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

波斯波莉斯 I do not know Arabic language that much either. And never did I went too deep in this thing and thus I'm sorry. My field is completely different. However, I guess Ibrahim.ID, who is an admin at the Arabic Wikipedia may be able to help you? For the thing some scholars take its meaning different from what the majority and mainstream has been believing since ages. There's no denial to that. Regards, ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 20:39, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

波斯波莉斯: "Houri" in Arabic means (beautiful) not (virgin), usually this adjective used to describe women and rarely for men --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 15:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings

Assalamu aliekum Rajueagle (talk) 11:51, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@Rajueagle: Wa alykumus salām wa Rahmatullāhi wa Barakatuhu. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 11:53, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Ayaz Rasool Nazki

Hi @AafiOnMobile: I don't want to take it to Afd, that is the whole point of keeping in draft until its done. Could you add them in please? I don't know enough about him. scope_creep^Talk 13:14, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@Scope creep:, I do not think it is right to push up an article for AfC again and again and I think the best due action after an AfC draft has been accepted and moved in to the mainspace, and then editors find that the subject is hard to meet notability guidelines, then the best practice is to take the article to AfD. I would've agreed to keep it in draft if it was directly published in the mainspace, but since it is valid accepted AfC submission, the due and correct way is the AfD, not re-draftifying it. I've a wide range of interests but I won't utilise my time for each and everything that someone else things "should be developed upon only in draft", AfD end up as keep, why? Because there are participants who look here and there and improve the article or end as delete because of due reasons. I don't see draftifying here as valid. Thanks but I won't be reverting your move again, and I hope you'll yourself revert the move and give this sometime in mainspace with perhaps some curation tags? Or directly AfD it. I don't care. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 13:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't plan to promote until it is ready. That is the whole point of Draft. I'll end up doing the work if I can find the stuff, as I value writers, artist, poets, playwrights highly. scope_creep^Talk 13:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

scope_creep, If you take the commitment to improve it, then that's fine. Regards, ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 13:32, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Dear TheAafi

As-Salamu Alaikum. how are you? im Safi Mahfouz. You doing best work in wikipedia. Thank you. Safi Mahfouz (talk) 06:28, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Need your help

I want to add some link in the discussion at bhumihar talk pages please guide how can I do so. Shakib khan1985 (talk) 04:38, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Note

Their removal of the block notice is allowed under policy. Thanks for the quick reversion and happy editing, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 15:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Dreamy Jazz, That's a new lesson for me. Thank you. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 15:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter

Hello Aafi,

Year in review

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

Rank	Username	Num reviews	Log
1	DannyS712 bot III (talk)	67,552	Patrol Page Curation
2	Rosguill (talk)	63,821	Patrol Page Curation
3	John B123 (talk)	21,697	Patrol Page Curation
4	Onel5969 (talk)	19,879	Patrol Page Curation
5	JTtheOG (talk)	12,901	Patrol Page Curation
6	Mcampany (talk)	9,103	Patrol Page Curation
7	DragonflySixtyseven (talk)	6,401	Patrol Page Curation
8	Mccapra (talk)	4,918	Patrol Page Curation
9	Hughesdarren (talk)	4,520	Patrol Page Curation
10	Utopes (talk)	3,958	Patrol Page Curation

Reviewer of the Year

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

NPP Technical Achievement Award

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

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

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

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	For your warm works and your best contributions. in.DITTO.gpr (SEALED) (ask.d-contributes) 09:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Regarding article

have edited the content to neutral point of view & have resubmitted it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerpufgirl (talk • contribs) 08:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Well that's nice of this editor to not bother communicating with complete information so that you have to go through their edit history and figure out what they're talking about. Anyhow, they've been indeffed as a sock of Vijayclicker93. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

oh wow. What a game. Thanks Cyphoidbomb. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 11:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Afc submission

I had submitted a draft page (Draft:SP Cinemas) 2 months before. The page is still in review pending. Could you please make look into it? Thank You SidhardhRamesh ^💬 13:24, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

SidhardhRamesh Thanks for getting to me but I really dislike reviewing drafts related to movies, films and anything so. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 11:31, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Hope for 2021

take courage

Thank you for improving article quality in December, and good wishes for a time of transition. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)