User talk:Timtrent/Archive 46

Archive 40

←

Archive 44

Archive 45

Archive 46

Archive 47

About TPG

If you wanna know about the template, Terrible Posture Games is an independent game company founded in 2014 and known for making Tower of Guns, Mothergunship, 3 out of 10, and Invincible Presents: Atom Eve. Waxworker made a category page out of those games and I managed to fill in 3 out of 10 due to Story Kitchen making a TV series out of it. 107.77.198.6 (talk) 23:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Then link it in the header of the template. I am still unsure that it is required. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:10, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

DAVID WICHT

Thank you for your review on my DAVID WICHT article. I am not sure how to move the article into FILMMAKER from where it is. Could you guide me on how to do this? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 08:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag No. You are paid to understand everything here. This is a volunteer project where paid editors are tolerated, not tutored. Please learn your trade and read and understand what people say. Please also read WP:CIR 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Hi Tim

Would you be prepared to write these articles for Film Afrika and David Wicht then?

I have been trying to learn this system for 2 years so I clearly do not make the mark.

This is not a sarcastic question. I just think that Film Afrika and David Wicht are worth Wikipedia articles. I have a Wikipedia article which appeared without my knowledge and I have done much less than Film Afrika, the company and David Wicht the individual, so I am happy to hand these projects over to anyone at Wikipedia who deems them worthy enough to take on.

Kind Regards

Karin Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You are clearly having a laugh! You are getting paid to write these articles and you are seriously suggesting that someone else does the work for you! Theroadislong (talk) 09:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Theroadislong I asked Open AI to rephrase "They are taking the piss" somewhat more politely, bit it was too polite. I think I can do better with "They are misappropriating the micturatiion" 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

You do not deserve a response. I am trying to learn a skill. Clearly you enjoy trying to humiliate those asking for help. I do believe you don't know everything Mr The road is long and one day when you ask for help, I hope you will not be met with lousy puns and schoolboy humour. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

My request from Mr Trent was genuine.

I clearly do not know how to do this. I can admit what I do and don't know. I know what I am and am not good at. No skin off my nose. Perhaps you two could recommend a writer that I could recommend to people who would like a Wikipedia page or is that also a deadly secret? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

What i am asking by the way, Mr oh so important editor, is how an article gets written on wikipedia if not by one of you smug guys, because clearly getting paid is the last route to take... and even those who claim to be wikipedia writers on the web admit they need an insider. Is that this kabal? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag NO. I have never written and will never write any article for pay. And those I will not write free.

Please explain "I have a Wikipedia article which appeared without my knowledge " No need. I have found it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

How did this happen then Tim Trent? Who wrote my article? I don't appreciate the sarcasm. I am trying to learn a skill. Not an arch attitude. Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag THe article creator is list in the history tab. There is no sarcasm here, Instead there is bwidermebnt at ther fact that the article states that you have a degree in English and Drama, and you appear unable to understand written English.

I am humiliating no-one. You are now a huge time sink. You are paid to understand how wikipedia works. Please earn your pay. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

bewilderment is spelt like that Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I didn't sign up for a mud slinging match.

I am asking for your advice.

Do you have any advice on writers I could suggest or not? Karinvanderlaag (talk) 09:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag Please do not communicate with me on my talk page again. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

NIILM University

How fix that Issue? Wiki-CBO (talk) 17:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Wiki-CBO Find references as follows:

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

The article is vulnerable to deletion as it stands at present 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes,

I will update news on it Wiki-CBO (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Wiki-CBO Expanding this, assuming you can prove notability, will be a good exercise to do, an interesting one. Take the time you need and work carefully, please. There is no deadline. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Great,

This university is nearby from apartment. Wiki-CBO (talk) 17:49, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Karen Oppenheim Mason

Thank you for your comments on my article on Karen Oppenheim Mason. She was president of the Population Association of America in 1997, and therefore meets notability criterion #6 for academics. I can add a link to the PAA website showing this, and I can also add dois to her citations. What other documentation is required? Eklanche (talk) 20:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Eklanche Yes, she likely meets it, but you have to prove with references that she meets it. For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

@Timtrent I added some more information and references, and added DOIs for her citations. I have resubmitted it and hope it will pass review this time. Eklanche (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@Eklanche I hope it will too. Another reviewer will review it. I almost never review more than once 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Hello a gazillion years later

I saw your reverts on the Fairfax High School article and I realized it's been around 8 years since our paths last crossed. I have had that article on my watch list since I first figured out what a watch list is; it's in my neighborhood and it's legendary for its alumni. (I live in the the Fairfax District.) Anyway. Hello! I hope you are well. Julie JSFarman (talk) 01:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@JSFarman What a lovely blast from the past. I found the school when following the odd edits from an editor who was "careless" in their editing! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Careless! Lol. You have always been much nicer than me.  :) JSFarman (talk) 07:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@JSFarman I doubt it. But I express it with militant politeness. See below. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

I removed some turbocharged hype from the Will Tanous article and left an edit summary that said "...one should not throw up in one's mouth when reading Wikipedia articles." I win! JSFarman (talk) 07:43, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

@JSFarmann You have the Tao of snark 😈 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

That's the nicest thing anyone has ever said to me! I am honored. Thank you! JSFarman (talk) 16:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Karin van der Laag deletion of page

Hi Tim

I can send you my CV. I have been in many significant international films and television series, that the bot or whoever wrote my Wikipedia article did not include.

Again, I am asking who wrote it in the first place, before I had a chance to work on it and make it better? You have not answered this question.

It appeared one day out of nowhere as I have said before.

I have never paid any publicist to put any article of me anywhere. If you were familiar with what actors get paid in South Africa you would understand this.

I find the timing of the deletion of my page suspect.

I will be reporting this.

Why is my page suddenly attacked because you are angry at my "tone" or whatever has offended you about me and the David Wicht article.

Please be transparent.

I have looked at the deletion page and it looks like a bunch of vultures laughing up their sleeves enjoying putting someone down.

I contest this deletion.

Who put it up in the first place.

Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Karinvanderlaag: why does it matter who "put it up"? And why are you grilling Timtrent about this, as if he is somehow accountable for that article's provenance?

But since you ask, it was created in November 2020 by Gihan Jayaweera, who has subsequently been blocked indefinitely. I don't know if other versions have been created before or since, but that is the one that was deleted following a recent Articles for Deletion discussion.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

It matters who put it up because it seems that putting an article up is impossible without the help of one of you guys but taking it down seems to happen in an instant is someone like Tim Trent gets angry with you meaning me. So spitefully removes my page because I called him out on his tone towards me about David's page. That, dear DoubleGrazing is why it matters Karinvanderlaag (talk) 12:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag No, thank you. Do not send me anything.

I saw it, I saw that, as presented, you do not pass any of our notability criteria, and I nominated if for deletion. Others discussed it and agreed. This it was deleted.

I am about to warn you formally against incivility on your user talk page.

Do not ever post on my talk page again. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Robert_W._Amler

Hi @Timtrent

I added information to the article based on the information requested. Would you be able to take a look? Draft:Robert W. Amler

Jrodriguezrentas (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

@Jrodriguezrentas I am mystified. I said I looked at it. I have seen that it has been rejected and thus will not proceed further. You may query this with the reviewer who rejected it. and you appear to have misunderstood that as encouragement to edit it further. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:52, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Sock

User:ChineseDognut is just another sock puppet of User:Tochi Clement, seeing the Johnel page history. The subject has prevented been vandalising the article. A checkuser tool should prove this! 102.89.23.163 (talk) 16:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

See here. A new user User:ChineseDognut, out of the blue, nominating an article he previously vandalising for speedy deletion. 102.89.23.223 (talk) 16:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I am sure you are correct 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:28, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TheChineseGroundnut where you may wish to comment. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:30, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you for understanding. Also, if you go to the sock puppet investigation page of User:Tochi Clement you'll also notice that this is the exact same claim User:ChineseDognut makes of the article. 102.89.23.223 (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

I have suggested that the two investigations be linked, as you will see. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

How am I a sockpuppet, I have edited only on one draft Draft:Muyeez, I've spent days learning about wikipedia policy and how to make new articles. I'm not the one that banned TheChineseGroundnut, I was editing Muyeez draft and learning from everywhere I could, then I found out that TheChineseGroundnut has been banned and Adambenji is a sockpuppet to the user and Johnel was created by Adambenji, review and approved by the same person TheChineseGroundnut. I'm only doing what every wikipedia editor would do. 中国人 狗坚果 (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Because you've used several scope like this (starting a total different topic to cover up and use it as a point to defend yourself) and later on, get caught. A checkuser will look Into it and most definitely, you would be blocked. It's so obvious that you're another sock! 102.89.23.215 (talk) 16:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

You're only angry because a newbie on wikipedia caught your act and reported you. 中国人 狗坚果 (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Either you are or you are not. That is what the investigation will determine. Me? I don't care either way. I think you are, so I started the investigation. Others will judge. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:56, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

---

Enough, now. This discussion is not relevant here. Discuss it, or not, at the sockpuppet investigation, not here 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:01, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Help to make my article better

Hello Fiddle,

Thank you so much for giving comments on my article. I was kindly requesting you to help me edit my article Draft: Nicholas Omonuk as I have received 3 past declines and I have always made edits but I dont know exactly which areas I go wrong. Could you assist me in this area. Clare Nassanga (talk) 23:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Nicholas Omonuk is the article Clare Nassanga (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@Clare Nassanga I will assist, but not in the way you expect. I will teach you to fish rather than give you some fish.

The article needs rewriting. The existing text is the wrong place to start.

Please start by reading this essay and pay special attention to the process. Start with references.Do not wrote a single word until you have looked at the references. Do they show that he passes WP:BIO? if they do, yhen create a storyboard from what you select from them to say. Then, using 100% of your own words, write the article.

If they do not show he passes, abandon the project until he does things that others write about with significant coverage in multi independent secondary sources and then write the article 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Maratha Confederacy

Thank you for calling our attention to the edit-warring report. I thought briefly of closing the DRN case, which is what is done if there is also a dispute at WP:ANI, but then I realized that sometimes at WP:ANEW the edit-warriors may be told to request mediation at DRN. So I will just wait and see what happens next, either another post by an involved editor, or an uninvolved admin action. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon I feel in my water that the ANEW report was filed maliciously as part of the dispute. I do not see much good faith exhibited by those in dispute. I think your approach to be sound, though DRN is an area I have never become involved in. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

The other editors have not replied, even though you told one of them that it would be polite to advise the DRN people whether they were going to participate. Now I will close the DRN report as ignored. Somebody may get blocked unless they go off and edit in other articles. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon Not that you need my agreement, but I agree. They are none of them well behaved, I think. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Psychomodulatory substances wikipage review

Hi Timtrent, thank you for your review of my draft wikipage Psychomodulatory subtances.

I now edited the text according to your suggestion - making it explicitly clear it is a potential (proopsed) legal category, and in the Czech Republic.

If there are any other inadequacies, welcome to notify me. Jiny333 (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Grangetown Boys Club F.C.

Morning, I’m quite unsure as to why Grangetown Boys Club F.C. has been moved to being a draft. Looks like the bulk of the article that was initially changed with something that was already a draft. My initial creation of the article certainly passes Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability. Cheers. NouveauSarfas (Talk page) 10:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@NouveauSarfas I was, and remain, of the opinion that the article, as presented, did not pass. Your opinion differs from mine, and I will not obstruct any further action by you.

Thank you for contacting me. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @NouveauSarfas: as I've also come across these drafts (why two, BTW?), and remember thinking after a quick glance that notability wasn't there, I'm curious on what basis you're so sure that this "certainly passes"? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: No idea what the second draft is about, however, Grangetown Boys Club were promoted to the Northern Football League Division Two - that certainly meets "England: Clubs that play or have played at step 6 of the National League System (level 10 of the English football league system), or in the FA Cup, FA Trophy, FA Amateur Cup or FA Vase generally meet WP:GNG criteria." as put out by WP:FOOTYN. NouveauSarfas (Talk page) 10:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@NouveauSarfas: oh okay, thanks for explaining. You'll note that FOOTYN is not a policy, but an essay. And it doesn't say that a club playing at step 6 is notable, only that for such a club sources are likely to exist which meet GNG. In other words, GNG is still the criteria that must be satisfied. I can't remember of the top of my head whether WP:NFOOTY said something about club notability, when it was still in force, but now that it no longer applies, WP:NTEAM clearly makes clubs subject to GNG.

Sorry, I thought you were working together with the author of the other draft, given the similar contents and timing. My bad, shouldn't make assumptions. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: No worries, appreciate the explanation. NouveauSarfas (Talk page) 10:54, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Bilkis Bano

Hello, Timtrent. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bilkis Bano, 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) 11:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

User talk:BrownHairedGirl

Just so you know, any automated Twinkle messages placed on that talk page usually gets reverted by plenty of other users. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan I kind of knew that. But thank you. I had not even noticed that she was the creator. She is someone I miss. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I have now realised that users who are about to start discussions about page creations don't know who the page creator is until you make the edit on their talk page. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 07:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Iggy the Swan to be fair, we do (it may be an option in prefs), but we have to check, then we have to know, etc, etc. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, you re leaving an impression of witch hunting. Can you just stop.

Hello, you re leaving an impression of witch hunting. Can you just stop please. Are you the only reviewer on Wikipedia? Frankincense Diala (talk) 20:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala: complete nonsense, and very much bordering on a personal attack. Please do not pursue this line any further.

And no, Timtrent is not the only reviewer on Wikipedia (even if he is one of the best); there are quite a few of us. Would you, perhaps, like me to review this draft next? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

If you think you are better of and of good conscience then go ahead please. Frankincense Diala (talk) 20:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala: I am most definitely not "better of" (sic), but I am a different reviewer, which is what you implicitly asked for. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala I would say that DoubleGrazing has skills at least as good as my own. They and I know what will, and what will not, be acceptable here. There are nuances of difference between us because we are individuals. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala The only reason you trip over me so often is that you transgress so often. You will find that Wikipedians follow things through. An example is that when I find breaches of copyright I try hard to find them all.

@DoubleGrazing You are very kind with the "one of the best" comment. Thank you. I don't feel I deserve it. Please do review this editor's draft next. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:50, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Breaches of Wiki Commons? Frankincense Diala (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala Commons matters are dealt with on Wikimedia Commons, where you are blocked for a week currently for copyright violations. That seemed to be the only way to get your attention there. However, I will not deal with this on Wikipedia, only on Commons. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:55, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala I expect you are complaining about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Growth Africa, too. Please offer policy based comments there if you wish. You are entitled to comment 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:53, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

It's okay. I don't have a problem with you or that. I only feel you the Wiki administrators should help us grow in the Wiki Space, especially passionate editors like myself. Frankincense Diala (talk) 05:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala I am not an administrator. I am an ordinary editor, as you are. Even if I were an administrator there are no special privileges that role would grant me when reviewing drafts. Reviewers are simply experienced volunteers. Our duty is twofold:

• we have a primary duty to Wikipedia to accept only drafts which meet the needs of Wikipedia. This does not mean we have to like, nor to approve, of the topic, We apply the rules of WP:N and WP:V. We also look for good prose (subjective).
• we have a secondary duty to editors using the process to review openly, transparently, clearly, and honestly so that they may learn, if they choose to.

We are subject to community scrutiny and must be able to justify any review, any acceptance, any rejection.

You suggest you need to be helped to grow. I agree. And that is why I helped you with a substantial review of a draft. You then ignored this review and moved that draft to mainspace at 23:27, 4 July 2024. Then you moved it back to Draft on 06:34, 5 July 2024. I reinstated the review history. You removed the review history, which I reinstated with a request not do so again. You removed it again.

And still you disregarded the review and resubmitted it for further review.

Helping you seems to be like a game of whack a mole. You ask for advice, then you ignore it and do something else, or the same again. If you are going to learn to grow please take notice of the review and help you ask for.

Please put your energy and enthusiasm to good use and do the work required.

(@DoubleGrazing, do you have any advice or comments you wish to add?) 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:39, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Nothing to add, that seems a very good summary, and advice, and I certainly couldn't have put it so well myself; but thanks for asking. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I see. I didn't ignore the corrections. I went back to work and haven done the needed corrections to the best of my knowledge, I implore you to take a careful look at the draft and its citations. I specifically asked if you are conversant with Nigerian Authority Sites, because you will see the draft has got citations coming from reliable sources (with presence on Wikipedia even). I am willing to do more. Frankincense Diala (talk) 17:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala I disagree completely. You chose the action of resubmitting for review without dealing with the existing review. Ergo, you ignored the review. I may yet choose to give you further help, but will wait until you have handled the existing help first. The manner of your handling of it will inform my decision to help you further. This includes answering your questions. I am offended by your behaviour, both towards me and towards Wikipedia. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I can't agree with you either that I resubmitted without dealing with the existing to the best of my knowledge; gor instance, I was asked to remove "Research Gate" as s source and I did. And for the offense, I apologise. Frankincense Diala (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala You do not need to agree. Please see the evidence for all to see at the revision history where you will find it all set out in black and white.

I will consult with DoubleGrazing, and, if they have the time, interest and inclination, the will be able to confirm that your impression of the reality is not the reality. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

I can't comment on whether Frankincense Diala felt that they had adequately addressed the reasons for the earlier decline, or for that matter whether they genuinely even understood those reasons (ie., the concept and interpretation of notability, in the Wikipedia context), but I can say that the resubmitted draft certainly still failed on the key decline grounds of notability: I don't think a single one of the sources cited counts towards the WP:GNG standard, and certainly not many enough to satisfy it. That's what this seems to me to essentially boil down to, and that's why the latest decline was ultimately correct. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 19:23, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Then you are not a Reviewer Frankincense Diala (talk) 20:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Then you are not experienced enough to be a reviewer to Bio of a Living Person Frankincense Diala (talk) 20:49, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala Forgive me for pointing out the blindingly obvious. You wish to learn and grow. However, when offered advice you resist, you insult. The advice @DoubleGrazing has given you is correct. The advice that I have given you is correct.

Comparing this with your expressed desire to learn and grow I find a serious disconnect.

I have run out of any ability to help you. Your actions are diametrically opposed to your words. I will spend no more time advising you. I will, however, insist on quality in the work you produce. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:55, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

You want to insist on qualities yet you see my opinion as insult when one of the qualities of sn editor in your position (reviewer) is to be patient and tolerant. Frankincense Diala (talk) 21:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

@Frankincense Diala If you take a pace back from the fact that you are involved with some of my actions, and examine them dispassionately, you will find that they are calm, patient, and tolerant. I have worked hard to advise you patiently and with tolerance.

Once you stop fighting advice and reviews and start working collegially you will find things go far more smoothly for you.

While you have explained on your user talk page that you are not paid to edit here, and that you receive no reward, broadly construed, from your edits, this conversation is very similar to any with a WP:COI editor striving to force their opinion on Wikipedia, striving to force their draft, their way, into mainspace.

Please put your considerable efforts into correcting the draft and then resubmitting it. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you Frankincense Diala (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Timtrent, I put a stop to the draft (your good advice went unheeded) and this section makes me think that the editor needs to be stopped as well. Hey, I appreciated the enormous amount of time and energy you put into draft review. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I smell fish with this editor. Good call. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

@Drmies: Forgot to ping 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:UBPC Crescencio Valdés

Hi, I believe that the Draft:UBPC Crescencio Valdés article “stands apart” from the other UBPC because it is one of few only settlements that is also a UBPC and built around the UBPC. Thanks! CubanoBoi (talk) 10:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

@CubanoBoi You need to do work in the draft to prove that your opinion is fact.

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

NIILM University

The Accurate WP:RS is already shown then why you delete the article? Wiki-CBO (talk) 10:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

https://indianexpress.com/article/education/management-of-niilm-university-booked-for-submitting-bogus-papers-to-get-scholarship-5330156/lite Wiki-CBO (talk) 10:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you not see that some of them were used for revenge?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DoubleGrazing#/editor/11 Wiki-CBO (talk) 10:58, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wiki-CBO: why are you going around badgering others over this? The article has been deleted, there is no need to re-litigate it through user talk pages. Yes, there was some dodgy editing involved, but that's beside the point; the AfD outcome was clear. Can you please drop this now? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not dropped because the article already have WP:RS and somebody done revenge to this article.

I would be share the links to Wikipedia administrations. Wiki-CBO (talk) 11:16, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@Wiki-CBO: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents is thataway. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:18, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

FYI, significant sockfarm found and tagged at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-CBO. --Yamla (talk) 12:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing, @Yamla, I seem to have missed all the fun. If someone can create a valid, properly referenced draft showing true notability I think we will all be very pleased. Until then, wikipedia has been improved by the deletion.

Isn't it lovely when we can nuke a sock farm, the more so when one has become a pest here? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Good thing you moved that AfD, it brought them all out to play. :) DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:12, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing I love a good party! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:20, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Meh. I just stand in the corner and growl, mostly. In fact, if there's such a thing as hell, it's almost certainly a never-ending cocktail party. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing 🐅 are really sweet, but beware one who offers their tummy to be tickled! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Rejected draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Afsheen_(musician)

Hi! I had discussions with others editors about this draft on the help page. Nobody additional left their opinion, so I wanted to ask you, because I remember you reviewer another article I created. Draft:Afsheen (musician) J2009j (talk) 18:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@J2009j I do not feel confident to review this draft I am afraid. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:36, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

Do you know where else I can ask? I added a lot of additional sources I could find on google for the general notability. J2009j (talk) 20:06, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@J2009j WP:TEAHOUSE or WP:AFCHD (choose one!) should both bear fruit. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:17, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

we had a discussion on WP:AFCHD 😂 , but nobody additional was there. So i am asking in places, if we can apply to this article category musicians or general notability perhaps, if there are enough for that. I think it is article number 4 I created. I never made articles about a musicians. J2009j (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

@J2009j I think WP:BIO meets the need. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Reports

Hi, thanks for making reports to AIV. Please ensure that you're reporting to the right noticeboard though; your latest report didn't include vandalism but would have been perfect for UAA and CSD. Thanks again, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:58, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe I always wondered why "Promotion Only Account" existed at AIV, though. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

A bit weird I agree. You're not going to get a report like that declined if you post it to AIV, but it will probably be more quickly actioned at UAA. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe Ah, light dawns. If Jo Foo advertises Bar industries, then UAA will not work, whereas if he advertises Foo Corporation UAA will 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:08, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Marylee Fairbanks

Thanks. I will take it when I get home and am at my real computer. McClenon mobile (talk) 21:23, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

@McClenon mobile Seems unlikely to be a candidate for DRN 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

It isn't a candidate for DRN, but I will be glad to repeat the advice that they have already been given. When a DRN request comes in that is a dispute but belongs somewhere else, I try to advise the filer where to look. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:53, 6 August 2024 (UTC)

Alice Bhandhukravi Entry

Hi Tim,

Just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to review the submission. I take on board all of your feedback and will work to locate or establish sources that meet the criteria specified. Truly appreciate all the work you and all the Wikipedia editors do to ensure the integrity and quality of the content here. Themichellepenny (talk) 10:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Themichellepenny There is the possibility that good sources may not be available. That means that she is not currently able to have an article about her here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:44, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Totally appreciate that. If I can't find any then will pause on this for the time being and return to it if / when she has the public interest / credentials to warrant it. Thanks again! Themichellepenny (talk) 10:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

Please don't notify him about content stuff

Even AfD notifications. It's not helping anybody, since he's indefinitely blocked by community consensus which essentially means community-banned, and isn't really allowed to participate in such discussions anyways. Left guide (talk) 23:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide The difficulty is that our procedures insist on notification. I could nominate without using Twinkle, of course, but, despite the seeming idiocy of notifying a forcibly absent editor, surely we have to do it? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:30, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not required, but it's good practice and courtesy for active good-standing users who are able to participate in the editorial process. WP:COMMONSENSE rules the day, and in this particular case we have evidence that notifying this now-banned user of "bad" news on pages he created has potential for a lot of needless negativity and drama and no positives. From his point of view, it probably feels like WP:GRAVEDANCING. Left guide (talk) 07:39, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

If you're using tools that automatically notify him, maybe it would be a good idea to just self-revert on his talk page. Left guide (talk) 07:43, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide I was considering that. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:46, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Left guide I have left this suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle. I think a comment would be valuable if you agree. Or if not! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Clean up

There is a lot of clean up to do, but I think it may be a good idea to wait to jump into new AfDs or PRODs for a while until things settle down. The AfDs that are currently open can of course proceed as usual. Thank you for your level headedness and for your kind and compassionate voice, Tim. It is very much appreciated. All the best, Netherzone (talk) 23:48, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone He is hurting a lot at the moment. any time anyone sends one of his articles for deletion will remind him of the hurt. He has already appealed the block and been declined a hearing, for example. I think quietly and peacefully the community will sort this out. It does need to be done, there is no deadline, but will leaving an arbitrary pause help? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

@Netherzone Please see my comment in the section directly above 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Decline Draft:Afsheen (musician)

Hi! You just declined my article, and I was having a discussion with another editor. I do not agree. Here is the category that applies to it. I tried to find sources I could. I am also adding this here. Does it look like I am "forcing my opinion"? These are rules written here on Wikipedia, and I contacted you because I saw you are objective reviewer:

Criteria for composers and lyricists

• WP:COMPOSER

For the WikiProject, see Wikipedia:Composers.

Composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists, may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria:

1. Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition. - "there are over 20 notable composition that even have their own WIKIPEDIA articles." Mentioned in over 23 sources I added to the article.
2. Has written musical theatre of some sort (e.g., musicals, operas) that was performed in a notable theatre that had a reasonable run, as such things are judged in their particular situation, context, and time.
3. Has had a work used as the basis for a later composition by a songwriter, composer, or lyricist who meets the above criteria.
4. Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers.
5. Has been listed as a major influence or teacher of a composer, songwriter, or lyricist that meets the above criteria.
6. Appears at reasonable length in standard reference books on their genre of music.

J2009j (talk) 18:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@J2009j You have your wish. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I posted my comment on the delete page with the note about the CDs as source and WP composer. J2009j (talk) 18:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I wish you success. It is very unlikely that I will comment further at the deletion discussion. The community is bigger than all of us and consensus aways rules, whether we agree with it or not. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@J2009j forgot to ping 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hi there! A over a year ago you declined by Sandbox submission, and recently I have been working on it am almost finished with it. The problem is, I don’t see where the submit button is, so I don’t know where to submit it when I’m done. Xuppu (talk) 20:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

@Xuppu added it for you 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Xuppu (talk) 21:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft article

Hi. You messaged me regarding the draft article Kalin Stefanov. As someone just now again rejected it based on "has been rejected before", could I ask you to review it yourself? I am sure you will notice that their rejection is not according to wikipedia rules. Thanks in advance Kalinators (talk) 10:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Did you read the message when you posted this? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

It is of little import. You have been blocked. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:05, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Self-promotional vanity image

Hi, Tim. I've read your message at User talk:Kalinators about speedy deletion of the image. As far as I'm concerned, I have always thought the image should be deleted, as you probably realise from what I have said before; it's just a matter of whether to delete it immediately or wait until Wednesday. I don't feel very strongly about which we do, but to me, there is slightly less of a case for deleting it immediately than there was, for two reasons: (1) Since the page where the image was used is gone, and the editor who was using it is gone, it isn't going to do any harm any time soon. (2) Now that the ex-editor has started throwing tantrums and demanding that the image be deleted, I don't particularly wish to give him the feeling that he's getting his way. Is that a rationally justifiable reason for holding on to the image? Probably not, but it influences how I feel. To look at it from a more policy-based point of view, I still don't see the copyright infringement as "unambiguous", so that deleting it now would be contrary to policy. If I felt there was a pressing need for it to be deleted sooner rather than later, I would be willing to trump that policy with the Master Policy, IAR, but I really don't see any such pressing need. My inclination therefore is to leave it until the F4 deletion comes into play. However, if you wish to nominate it for immediate deletion rather than waiting for a few days, feel free to go ahead; I will neither accept nor decline the nomination, and if another administrator takes a different view than I do I won't get upset and throw a tantrum. JBW (talk) 23:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)

@JBW Fair.

I think it would be tendentious for me to renominate in precisely the same manner, so it can wither on the vine.

Seems churlish to make such a short reply to your well considered rationale, though 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 05:58, 17 August 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Karin van der Laag

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Karin van der Laag. 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. (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Endorsed close. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your actions on User:Manuj Laskar/sandbox!

Thank you for your actions on the referenced page! It's quite funny... as you were declining the article, then nominating it for a CSD, I was doing the exact things. Good minds think alike :) OnlyNano^talk 15:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@OnlyNano Snap! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Your opinion

It may be valid, but let us allow them their say. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:55, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip

Cltr (talk) 15:07, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

William Knighton author is not the same person as Sir William K

I an trying to create a new page for the author William Knighton - as my draft says, he should not be confused with Sir William Knighton, the physician who became private secretary of King George IV and was created a baronet, who was a cousin of his father according to Debrett's. RCS sharpshooter (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@RCS sharpshooter thank you for that information. I will revoke my review. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

Richard Swetenham — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCS sharpshooter (talk • contribs) 16:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Review request

Hello Timtrent I Carefully Added Sources This Time Please Review It And It's My First Time Editing In Wikipedia. Imperial Enjoyer (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Imperial Enjoyer Thank you for taking the time to do that. We get better and better as time passes. The issue I noted was that individual facts (rather than swathes of text) are the elements which need references. As long as you are certain that you have done that to the best of your ability then I see no issue, and have no need to revisit the drafts/articles.

My objective, as ever, is to create a smooth path for drafts to become articles, and to create a decent learning experience for new editors. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:51, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Safavid Capture of Mesopotamia (1623-1624)

I think this might be headed to AfD if it gets moved again. As best I can tell, there's nothing notable about this particular event, coverage about it even in the sources linked in the article only demonstrate passing mentions. I would be curious about your thoughts, but I was ready to hit send on Twinkle before I got the edit conflict error message. Cheers, Bobby Cohn (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn I am sure you are right. It just seemed worth giving the creating editor a further chance to think. I send disputed draftifications to AfD regularly; I'm sure you do too. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Actually, this raises a question I didn’t realize I had; I hope you don't mind my asking here. Does a move to mainspace of an article count as a disputed draftification, if the article had been previously declined? And then now that I write it out, I realize you could get even more nuanced than that. Let's say a draft gets declined, and then without making any improvements someone moves it to mainspace. That scenario versus one where the author improves it over a previous decline and then moves it.

Or am I making this too complicated on myself, for a draftification to be disputed, does it need to be the actual move from mainspace to draftspace and to mainspace again? Bobby Cohn (talk) 13:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn Decent question, but you may be overthinking.

My simplistic view is that if the draft is moved after a prior draftification, and my instinct is to draftily for more work, that is a disputed draftification.

WP:DRAFTIFY tells me that I may nor re-draftify in that event.

There is another call to make which is intellectual gymnastics. WP:Draftify says in "Reasons not to move an article to draftspace" number 6, Another editor has asserted that the page belongs in mainspace, e.g. it has previously been moved there, or there is a clear statement to that effect in the edit history or on the talk page whcih can be interpreted as "If anyone at all has moved it to mainspace then they are asserting ....." My call on that is that I then make a judgement of "Is it likely that this article can ever be made acceptable?" Good luck with that one! I will take those straight to AFD rather than re-draftify.

I bet you're glad you asked, now! 😇 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 13:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

I was definitely overthinking it, but it isn't a perfect black and white picture as you point out. Thanks for taking the time to explain it! I am glad I asked, haha. Cheers, Bobby Cohn (talk) 15:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn Now I know why you seem familiar. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Hopefully in a good way. Bobby Cohn (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bobby Cohn Oh yes. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:12, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

Cynthia F. Moss

This is about Cynthia F. Moss entry comments: the entry is student work. Please note that those same students had an editor reject an entry about another AAAS Fellow on the basis of them "feeling" that AAAS not being very selective in their awards of that title (Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science), so they did an "overkill" on trying to prove notability. Thank you for pinging, I will clean up the references Minuette Macon (talk) 18:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon I saw it was a student work, but it appears to have been abandoned, yet of sufficient quality to be accepted. I think the students did well enough here.

Please link me to the other article? No promises. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:29, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Alison Barth "The person has been an elected member of a scholarly society or association, but I do not see enough evidence to suggest that AAAS is highly selective or prestigious enough to pass this guideline."

I will go through again to see if I can get more notable sources on Barth, but generally AAAS distinction is sufficient to pass the professor test as it's an incredibly prestigious title (not Oscars, for sure, but science vs art, etc). I am the instructor for this course-after the class ends, the students rarely, if ever, check on submissions. I get to them whenever I can, but that's not very often unfortunately. Thanks so much for your help with this Minuette Macon (talk) 19:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Accepted @Minuette Macon all it has to do is to have a >50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. The reviewer appears to be new to the task, and is still bedding in

Any others that you believe to be worth looking at? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:20, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this totally made my day! I agree about the other ones, even when female profs are professionally notable, for example Sarah Kucenas, there just aren't sufficient notable sources, but that's a whole other can of worms. If you have the time, please check Draft:Elva Diaz It was rejected, but I'd love a 2nd opinion on whether I should redo the whole entry. NIH New Innovator award recipients are also generally notable in Wiki terms, but I am not an editor Minuette Macon (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon I'm on the brink with Diaz, and too tired to check now. It's past 10:30pm here. I'm busy tomorrow. If you can find one additional thing for me to hang my hat on between now and Sunday (and tell me so) it will be an easy acceptance.

Kudos to the students, too, who tried to fold wikipedia notability for the ones who do not yet have it. I don't think we need to open the worm can about female vs male profs and coverage in reliable source. It's true in any field of work, from top to bottom. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I found a few more:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bethany_A._Teachman

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jill_Viles

Draft:Cynthia Chestek

They all have overkill citations on a few lines that I can fix tomorrow Minuette Macon (talk) 02:17, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Of these, I can see Teachmen and Chester as likely to stick in Mainspace if I accept. Chestek and Teachman are Accepted

Viles ought to but seems relatively uncited. I'm willing to take a gamble om her, but she feels below the threshold 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon Looking at Files again, I think she is close, but maybe too early in her career?

The others are connected to their Wikidata items 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon Viles is Accepted but this one is debatable. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 11:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I actually thought she was the closest one! She is not a scientist, but a book author who rose to fame as a "DIY Scientist"-so much about my judgement as an editor 😀 Minuette Macon (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon The probl,e is that the draft did not show her as passing WP:NAUTHOR. She is interesting, but is she notable? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Ah now that's tricky in this case-she is known for uncovering a new rare mutation that causes muscular dystrophy. She did this outside of the scientific establishment. I think she is notable for that, but not as an author-does that makes sense? Minuette Macon (talk) 12:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@Minuette Macon It does. See my comment on the talk page there: Talk:Jill Viles 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes exactly, she is not known in her profession, but outside of it. For science, that's very uncommon. Very few people discover something new outside of a research institution nowadays Minuette Macon (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Your comment on Draft:Murder of Abrar Fahad

You recently commented on the draft saying, we should edit the article rather than developing the draft. But, i think we should change the article Murder of Abrar Fahad to Abrar Fahad as it's primarily based around his biography rather than the murder. Also, He's one of the most influential 'activist' and centerpoint of so many other movement in Bangladesh, including the recent 2024 Bangladesh quota reform movement and Non-cooperation movement (2024) Bruno pnm ars (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

@Bruno pnm ars Then please edit the article. That article has been under scrutiny and has changed substantially for the better.

Your sentence starting "Also..." suggests that you feel an article on Fahad, the man, may be appropriate. Please make Sure the "murder of" article only contains details about the murder. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Orphan article P.G. O'Dea

Greetings, Today I de-orphaned this article by adding a link at List of Irish people article, Writing section.

Help to de-orphan articles.

1. WikiProject Orphanage - working to reduce the article backlog.

2. Wikipedia:Orphan - the complete How-to Guide for Orphaned articles.

» De-orphaning articles is an important aspect of building the web.

Cheers, JoeNMLC (talk) 15:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@JoeNMLC Sounds good to me. Good place to start. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Draft: Film Afrika

Good Day Tim

Would it be better to remove references that are not reliable? I am not sure if I should keep them in. I need a few of them as inline citations. Otherwise I can't prove that what is being said is true.

I understand that you are not happy with the type of reference, but just wanted your advice on this.

There are some references whether other companies and journalists speak about Film Afrika. They are not all promotional.

For example: How do I say they won Emmy Awards without linking the citation to the Emmy Award cite?

Are the Emmy Awards considered a reliable reference or not?

Kind Regards

Karin Karinvanderlaag (talk) 11:50, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Karinvanderlaag Please ask another reviewer. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:53, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	You know why, thank you so much. I hope that those two would enrich the encyclopaedia from their end. Best regards! Reading Beans 07:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I would love your counsel on…

Hello. I hope you’re doing great?

I created a draft Nelly Agbogu which was submitted for approval. A reviewer Vanderwaalforces rejected it claiming ‘it utterly fails GNG’ and tagged a ‘COI’ to it. Respectfully, I went to his talk page and asked for clarification on why and how it fails GNG utterly, is it terms of the referencing or…? As regards the COI tag, I mentioned that I would love to be clarified on how that article attracted a ‘COI’. I also added that I will be willing to take the issue to AN/I if he persists with his accusation. He gave no clarification at least to my questions but went ahead to give a ‘go-ahead’ if I choose to. Given that the AfC stated that it could not be resubmitted, I then moved it to the mainspace and informed him on his talk page. I stated that while I had significantly worked on the page, he is free to nominate it for a deletion so it goes through a consensus instead (since he’s not willing to give clarifications). I have created over 60 articles all of which are done in good faith. While I am aware that I am prone to mistakes and imperfections, it is disheartening when editors throw the ‘COI’ tags at one another without proper finding. I am discouraged and may withdraw from Wikipedia all the same. A ‘COI’ tag is something I do not take lightly especially with my past experiences and deliberate efforts to avoid any form or appearance of it. I thought to reach out here because I wanted to weigh in on the counsel of a more experienced editor. I’m sorry for the long text but I’m unable to link to the talkpage conversations myself.

Best regards. Mevoelo (talk) 11:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mevoelo Thank you for your message. Why do you feel I am able to assist you, please? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your reply. I seldom get involved in conversations or disputes neither do I have any editor with whom I can really relate with. Going through all this alone has prompted me to at least ‘seek counsel’. Do you think I have a pattern of editing that goes against Wikipedia guidelines? Or is there something I’m doing wrong all the same? I also feel like I’m being bullied probably because I do not have badges, rights or technical legacies like some others — despite I’ve been here for quite some time (I may be wrong with this).

I’ve seen your input severally with other editors, and I’ve also noticed your efforts here on Wikipedia. Honestly, I had no one else in mind so I thought to reach out. Mevoelo (talk) 12:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mevoelo I am not able to make a comment on the COI suggestion. I can tell you that all of us may expect to be asked about COI at come point in our time here, and that, unless proven otherwise, our clear statement to the contrary, our denial, must be taken at face value. If yours has not been then ANI is the worst place to visit. Drama boards scrutinise all parties to a report, not just the editor who makes the report.

WP:AFCHD may be a more gentle place to as why this draft was handled (in your opinion) unfairly. I suggest, though, that you set your emotions and feelings aside, realise that Wikipedia is not a gentle place, and move forwards with confidence.

I have left an opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nelly Agbogu whch I am sure you will not agree with at first. Please put any distaste aside, and realise that the article, as it stands, is likely (but not certain) to face deletion. There is much work do do in cutting material from it. All you have to do, all, is to prove that Nelly Agbogu passes WP:BIO. prove that and it will not be deleted. It doesn't take much to prove it, if it is provable. The current references come close, but there are far too many interviews with her, her opinions, passing mentions, and far too little commentary about her.

Thank you for expressing your trust in me. I do not think you will have liked everything I have said and done after your first message. My first duty is to Wikipedia, as I am sure you understand. By doing that duty as well as I am able I can help you as well. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your honesty and for taking your time to explain things better to me. I was previously utterly discouraged but I think speaking out really does work. I’ll work on the aspects you’ve pointed out. Mevoelo (talk) 12:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Mevoelo Thank you. I feared you would resent my opinion at AfD. I am glad you have "taken yourself and your feelings" out if the equation, and are now looking only at how Wikipedia can be improved.

I have created a reasonable number of articles. Most are never challenged. Of those which receive a challenge, some were deleted correctly. Others survived. AT the time of nomination I feel a slight feeling of hurt, but I make sure I let that pass. Then I look at the rationale and decide whether I can improve the article to allow it to be kept. Only then do I choose to do the work.

What I try hard not to do is to take any of Wikipedia personally. We are passengers on a runaway train, after all! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

What more can I say? Thank you so much. I actually laughed because I am at that point of deciding whether I should improve the article to be kept or not. I’m actually playing a game here to see if it falls on ‘DO’ or ‘DO NOT’. I guess I’ll attempt to improve it to my best capacity. Whatever the outcome, I’ll be satisfied. Most of all, I’m happy I could come out of my shell, and reach out to you.

Thank you loads! Mevoelo (talk) 12:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I am very sorry concerning my statement. Please accept my apology

Hello Timtrent, I am very sorry concerning my statement. Please accept my apology Eecogru (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Eecogru please express your apology directly to the editor you spoke about. For my part I accept your apology. I am sure this was a behaviour you will not exhibit again. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Eecogru Indeed, I see that you have done so. Thank you. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Timtrent.I won't exhibit it again.

And l have tender my apology indeed.

Thank you and God bless you. Eecogru (talk) 12:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

@Eecogru Please now put this behind you and enjoy editing. By the way, not everyone enjoys the offer of a blessing, even if it something you use because of your faith. People here are of many faiths and of no faith at all. Your deity will approve of restraint in words whatever you believe inside. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Cercle d'Études Scientifiques Pierre Rayer

Hello, Timtrent,

This is an article written by an alternate account of InspiringFlow. I'm hoping since you have so much experience reviewing articles, if you could glance at this one and see if any action is called for. Thank you for your expertise. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Liz Some action is called for, since the creator has a COI (the talk page for User:Inspiringflow shows that they wrote an autobiography about themself, Thierry Rayer) and that might mean that the you consider moving the article to draftspace to be accepted by AfC since the creator has a COI (WP:DRAFTREASON) and maybe warn the creator against using multiple accounts with something like {{uw-agf-sock}}? The original account has been warned multiple times already to not use Wikipedia to promote their own work. The article itself has some content written like an advertisement and it might at least be be tagged accordingly. But a third opinion would be good at least, my knowledge with reviewing articles isn't amazing. Fathoms Below (talk) 04:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liz and Fathoms Below: both named accounts agf sock warned. Article moved to draft, declined as an advert and for UPE. About to warn each "account" for UPE. This is neither inspiring nor flowing. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:17, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liz, Fathoms Below, and Primefac: and, of course, Tim. Apart from the problems already mentioned, the references don't establish notability. Only the piece in Arab News could even be considered as relevant: the others are 2 interviews with Thierry Rayer (founder and president of Cercle d'Études Scientifiques Pierre Rayer, aka Inspiringflow, aka Inspiringflow1); a page which merely includes Thierry Rayer in a list of participants in an event; a page on the website of the organisation itself; and a page which, if I have correctly construed it, is merely a record of the registration of a trade mark by the organisation, in any case it is not substantial coverage. Both for that reason and because of the somewhat promotional tone of the article, I don't think there can be any justification for putting it into mainspace in its current form. JBW (talk) 16:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I can't make up my mind. I suppose I should not be a naughty child and just play nice and G11 nominate it. The total brat in me wants to play.

I'll leave it to any of you who want to stop me from being naughty, @Liz, Fathoms Below, and Primefac:. It's that naughty time of day for me, you see 😈😇🤡, and inspiration has started to flow. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I clearly came to the right editor to ask for a second opinion. I definitely see COI issues but I don't think it is UPE since they are writing about their own organization. At least that is not how I understand PE which I see as a third party who is being compensated for writing about a client or an editor whose job entails polishing up an article about their boss, professor or company. But I know that through AFC and patrolling, Tim has reviewed tens of thousands of articles at this point and would be able to spot whether the article's issues are ones that can be corrected through editing or whether draftification or deletion is called for. Thank you for spending some time to review it and, JBW, for reviewing the sources. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:48, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liz Thank you for your confidence in me. Have I really reviewed tens of thousands? Wow! Who knew? I also follow pictures to Commons, and do my best to seek to make sure that only the correctly licenced ones are retained. Yes, I'm that kind of sad nerd! 🥷🏾

I am very happy with good paid editors, ones that trouble no-one, get it right, may need one decline/pushback for better work, and then submit an excellent draft. I value those highly. I think that may even be what WP:PAID was intended for, and to encourage (with transparency).

The ones which annoy me do so by insulting my intelligence, by wheedling, whining, bamboozling, deceiving, dissembling, and creating a timesink. I'll work with them until I find them intractable. Among that bunch are those pushing the corporation that pays them, or makes their reputation. PE is a "reward, broadly construed" and that applies to Bert Foo of Foo Enterprises, his mom and pop shop business as much as it would to a captain of industry like #SpaceKaren.

I think this one is best in Draft space for now. We have a great team of very experienced reviewers who will allow it through once it meets policy. Unless it's submitted in the same state, of course, when I reckon someone will hit the G11 button 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:05, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

On the subject of paid editing, I don't see editing about one's own company as paid editing within the meaning of either the Wikipedia policy on paid editing or the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use. If I have understood correctly, that is in agreement with what Liz has said, but different from what Tim has implied. However, I regard it as, for most purposes, a distinction without a difference, because in both cases there's a conflict of interest, and if the one deserves a warning/block/deletion/whatever then so does the other. I find paid editing warnings on talk pages really unhelpful, because all too often they lead to a good faith editor making the mistake of thinking that because they are not paid the warning doesn't apply to them, which leads to various problems, such as putting time and effort into arguing about whether they are paid or not, instead of putting the same time and effort into learning how to deal with the conflict of interest related issues. Why not just give them a friendly message about conflict of interest, since that covers the situation whether it's paid or not? I am reasonably happy with a warning which puts the main emphasis on COI, but also briefly mentions paid editing (as is the case, for example, with the standard prefabricated {{uw-coi}} message) but even that can be problematic, as an astonishing number of new editors can read that message, and come away with the impression that it doesn't apply to them because it's only about paid editing. JBW (talk) 21:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree about the scope for misunderstanding. I disagree that creating articles about the company that pays "my" bills, were I to own one, would be simple COI 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm with Timtrent on this. If an editor stands to gain financially from promoting a subject, then to my mind it's paid editing, whether in the course of employment, for a paying client, or by way of ownership of a business (etc.). Admittedly, the rules aren't entirely clear: WP:PAID talks about 'compensation', which suggests money or other rewards exchanging hands, and could perhaps be seen to exclude gains in business value, reputation, and other indirect and/or longer-term benefits to business owners and the like. Whereas {{uw-paid}} words it as "financial stake in promoting a topic" which seems more readily to take in such benefits. To me, the latter reflects better (what I believe to be) the spirit of this type of COI. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Liz Since you loaded my magazine with a cannon shell, aimed me and pulled my trigger (🥷🏾)I felt you would wish to read the correspondence at User talk:Inspiringflow1 § Wikipedia is not for self promotion.

I have suggested that they ask for one or other of the accounts to be blocked. AGF suggests to me an honest error, but perpetuated by flip-flopping between accounts.

I have done my best to set my distaste for self aggrandising editors aside and to offer them substantial useful advice to seek to enable them to succeed. I think I should now step away and watch, leaving my trusty talk page stalkers to look hard at this 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, I still think that (1) arguing about ehether writing about one's own business is paid editing or not is pointless, because it doesn't matter whether it is or not, as it's covered by conflict of interest anyway, and (2) very often "paid editing" warnings do more harm than good. JBW (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@JBW I don't think I am going to argue with you. That we hold different views is absolutely acceptable. Most important, we hold them and disagree collegially. I doubt either would convince the other if we discussed the point for a lifetime. I also doubt the fine nuances either way really matter on the 'own corp' front.

My jury is out on the templates. They need to be used well or not used. I am certain I have made some errors here. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:57, 18 September 2024 (UTC)