User talk:asilvering

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11;

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thank you so much for single-handedly cleaning up the mess created by WhiteReaperPM's sock. Your efforts are highly appreciated. Ratnahastin (talk) 10:59, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and sorry you've been having to deal with it. I'm going to try to retreat back into my "blissfully unaware of Maratha history" cave for now. -- asilvering (talk) 21:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Guideline and policy news

Administrator elections are a proposed new process for selecting administrators, offering an alternative to requests for adminship (RfA). The first trial election will take place in October 2024, with candidate sign-up from October 8 to 14, a discussion phase from October 22 to 24, and SecurePoll voting from October 25 to 31. For questions or to help out, please visit the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Administrator elections.
Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
A request for comment is open to discuss whether there is a consensus to have an administrator recall process.

Arbitration

The arbitration case Historical elections has been closed.
An arbitration case regarding Backlash to diversity and inclusion has been opened.
Editors are invited to nominate themselves to serve on the 2024 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission until 23:59 October 8, 2024 (UTC).

Miscellaneous

If you are interested in stopping spammers, please put MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist and MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist on your watchlist, and help out when you can.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	Thanks for emailing me that source for the Barrett Watten article, and your help in maintaining the civility in the discussion surrounding it. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 21:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thank you for your tireless work there too. It may not have been appreciated (alas), but it made the wiki a better place. -- asilvering (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do i fix this

Talk:German Instrument of Surrender i sent the same thing twice due to confusion from slow internet,the "Date of signing"topic UnsungHistory (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine to leave the duplicate, but you can also just edit the page and remove one of them, or revert one of your edits. -- asilvering (talk) 22:11, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A WikiLove-cookie for you!

BrandenburgBlue has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. ^†

BrandenburgBlue _{Talk with me!} 13:25, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from King Rith on Shipunov 2A42 (06:58, 11 October 2024)

The King --King Rith (talk) 06:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Sayful Ialam (11:18, 13 October 2024)

'XFD Participation tool' how can i use. --Sayful Ialam (talk) 11:18, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First you have to install the script, which you can do here: User:Awesome Aasim/xfdvote. -- asilvering (talk) 16:14, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how to install. Sayful Ialam (talk) 02:59, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You simply need to press the blue "install" button on the linked page. You can also do it the "hard" way: go to User:Sayful_Ialam/common.js, create the page, and add:

importScript("User:Awesome Aasim/xfdvote.js");

to it, then hit "publish". asilvering (talk) 03:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you helping me. I always ask for your advice. Sayful Ialam (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Polygon (blockchain)

Can you please explain the Polygon (blockchain) deletion? G4 does fit, but it was my understanding that it was permissible to remove the tag despite a criterion being satisfied and that a different process should then be used.

I was in the process of compiling sources in an attempt to demonstrate notability. My intention with removing the tag was to give myself more time.

If you're willing to provide a copy of the article (i.e. the pre-AfD version since that was the substantial one), that would be appreciated as well - it would help whether this is undeleted or needs to be recreated. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 04:11, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Polygon (blockchain). If you are able to find sources that show a pass of WP:NCORP that were not addressed in that discussion, I can restore the original version to draftspace for you, so you can improve it. You're not going to want the version that was just deleted via G4, since the one that was deleted following the deletion discussion was much longer. -- asilvering (talk) 04:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please restore the original to draftspace for me, thanks! — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 16:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you found new sources that show notability? -- asilvering (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't gotten very far, I'd rather see what the article covered and didn't cover before searching more. Isn't userfication generally uncontroversial? I can use a different venue if you prefer though. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 20:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, mostly I didn't want you to waste your time if there isn't any coverage that came out in month since the deletion. If you'd rather go content-first, fair enough; I'll send it to User:XDanielx/Polygon momentarily. -- asilvering (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Sayful Islam (09:55, 14 October 2024)

Draft:Mizanur Rahman Azhari Articles are protected from multiple deletions. Article creation is protected from spamming without unique user references. Please check the registration how to main.Registration is available in other languages including Bengali. --Sayful Islam (talk) 09:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, that draft has been rejected, which means it will not be considered further because the subject does not meet our notability guidelines. -- asilvering (talk) 14:30, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Rachsharma27 (12:23, 15 October 2024)

hello, i have recently added a page but it shows draft has it gone for approval?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Graphisads

this is the link for your reference --Rachsharma27 (talk) 12:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and it looks like you already received a review in the time it took me to answer this question. -- asilvering (talk) 13:11, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review for Ivy Wolk

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ivy Wolk. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Hi asilvering, I've started a draft that includes sources published since the AfD. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 21:33, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another question

If asking this kind of question here is annoying or otherwise the wrong venue, please say so and I'll switch to a more appropriate venue. In a few AfD discussions I've come to the conclusion that either we should have an article on X, or X should be a redirect to Y but that I don't know if X is notable, perhaps because I've found a lot of sources, but I can't tell if they're wp:aboutself or I don't understand the relevant notability guideline. What is the appropriate !vote to bold in this case? Redirect Seems wrong because I don't have any reason to oppose Keep. McYeee (talk) 22:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're unsure, you can always make a "comment" instead of arguing for keep/redirect specifically, or you can say something like "Keep, but would not oppose redirect to articlename". There's no need to make a firm vote if you don't feel like you ought to make one for whatever reason. As a participant, I appreciate it when people offer their opinions, sources they've found, and so on - honestly, I often think these are more helpful than bolded !votes. And closers will find hesitant comments like "I found these sources, but I'm not sure about them" or "I'm not sure, and here are my reasons" useful too. It says "there's room for more discussion here" and "not everyone (presently) agrees with deletion", at the very least. -- asilvering (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I'll lead with comment next time. McYeee (talk) 23:29, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and the question was not annoying at all. :) -- asilvering (talk) 23:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pottel (Draft)

Hi,

When i started writing the draft of Pottel - Film, as its a telugu language film. I wanted to keep the title as Pottel(film), As pottel is an colloquial word for Ram, ( Male goat). Once the review happened. The title has been just Pottel and I am unable to edit it to "Pottel (film). to avoid confusion.

Can you please guide me in that.

Meanwhile i have added resources, album section, and citations. If time permits, have a glance and review.

Thank you - Herodyswaroop (talk) 08:52, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Herodyswaroop, Draft:Pottel is the right location for this film title, since we don't have any article at Pottel. We only add the bracketed disambiguators if we have multiple articles that would otherwise have the same title. -- asilvering (talk) 01:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh got it, I thought all the films should be mentioned in brackets. Meanwhile, if time permits. Can you review the article - Herodyswaroop (talk) 07:54, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've already declined it once, so I'll be leaving further reviews for other editors, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okie Herodyswaroop (talk) 07:23, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Draft

Hi @Asilvering You some time ago added a comment in my draft of Draft:Kingdom of Mewar - Delhi Sultanate Conflict (1326 to 1518) saying that I was involved in Sockpuppetry. Now, when that spi has been closed and I am not founded guilty. Hence, I think you should visit my draft again and remove that comment.

Regards Rawn3012 (talk) 01:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rawn3012, I'm not going to remove that comment, since it is true: what I said was submitter is currently in an spi filing, not that you are a sockpuppet. But I can make a second comment noting that the SPI is completed and you were not blocked as a sockpuppet. -- asilvering (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Please also do that to Draft:Ahmad Shah II's invasion of Mewar, You have also added a comment in it.

Regards Rawn3012 (talk) 01:35, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done! -- asilvering (talk) 01:38, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanks Rawn3012 (talk) 01:56, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1]

Yes, I didn't bother reporting them, but 27.34.72.47 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) is obviously also Anup Rajbanshi|. 2400:1A00:BD20:B07B:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), who wrote the majority of the article 15 minutes after it was created, was actually blocked. Note that they are both using the Visual Editor on mobile. If it makes you feel better you could always block the IP and then delete the article. C F A 💬 02:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it makes you feel better you could always block the IP and then delete the article. lol. Fair enough, that does look really ducky. I should have checked the IPv6 editor against the SPI before declining. -- asilvering (talk) 02:24, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Clockworst (12:00, 20 October 2024)

How do i edit --Clockworst (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You just did! It really is as simple as clicking "edit". See WP:NEWBIE for a getting-started guide. Welcome to wikipedia! -- asilvering (talk) 14:05, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

questions about some AfD comments

Recently, I have come across a couple of your comments at AfD discussions that I didn't understand and I'm hoping you can explain them to me. I defer to your WP knowledge as an administrator, but I occasionally ask questions so that I understand WP better. You just commented at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamidreza Sadri about not wanting to close the discussion as a soft delete. I have no problems with asking for more input, but my experience is that usually a discussion with a nomination and two supporting delete votes (and no votes to keep) isn't closed as a soft delete. Also, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John-Paul Tran you "confirmed" an article was significant coverage when it was local coverage consisting mainly of an interview with the subject and his father. What did you see that I didn't? Not trying to offend, just want to understand. Thanks. Papaursa (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken! Regarding the first, I take the nominator and one other delete !vote as a soft delete. When there are two delete !votes, whether I am happy closing that as delete or not depends on the arguments of the votes. In this case we have a "strong delete" that says only "not notable"; that's an almost information-free !vote, so we're basically back down to a single delete vote and the nominator. The nominator isn't sure either; we've really only got one totally firm !vote (yours). So I wouldn't normally like to soft delete there if it's likely that an editor would try to recreate it. But looking at it again, there's also this not-really-a-vote stuff by the article creator, which is close enough to an objection that I ought to count it as one, so I've reworded the relist comment to avoid mentioning soft deletion entirely.

Regarding the second, whether coverage is significant or not doesn't have anything to do with whether it's local. Here's WP:SIGCOV: Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. In this case, the subject actually is the main topic, and is even in the headline: that's significant coverage! Also, coverage is significant even when it isn't independent. This is, however, also independent - the article has a byline and isn't an interview. (Having a lot of quotes doesn't make it "an interview". It's probably not great journalism, but that, too, is another question.) When something is discarded as irrelevant for notability purposes because it's an interview, that means something that looks a lot more like a basic Q&A. -- asilvering (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the prompt response. On the first one, I was thinking that might have been your reasoning. One the second, it's always been my impression that when all the info is from the subject (or his father) and not independent research by the interviewer, it's hard for me to see how it's independent coverage. Not sure how that differs from your "basic Q&A". Papaursa (talk) 03:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, missed this reply earlier. To be clear, if you think there are WP:V concerns about a particular "fact" because it's from the subject's mouth alone, you're perfectly entitled to hold that opinion when it comes to writing an article. It's also fine to say in an AfD discussion that you don't think a particular article is very solid coverage for notability purposes for that reason - eg, if you were making a source table, you might call that one "partially independent" and note that it's a news article but is over-reliant on quotes from the subject. In a basic Q&A, all the information (except maybe a paragraph at the top, which many Q&A-type interviews include) is directly coming from the subject and is obviously completely not independent. -- asilvering (talk) 22:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Except for the one youth championship, which was never factually in dispute, I can't recall any facts in the interview that had an independent source (though it's been a while and I could be mistaken). It didn't impact the decision so I think we can amicably say we disagree. I do appreciate your insight, but I think it was your certainty that surprised me. Thank you for explaining your thought processes in these cases. Papaursa (talk) 22:39, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pager attack close

For the Lebanon vs Hezbollah debate, I think you’ve mis-assessed which side NPOV falls on - NPOV means reflecting reliable sources, even if we as editors are concerned that reliable sources are collectively reflecting one sides POV.

In this case, reliable sources overwhelmingly classify this as an attack against Hezbollah. Given this, can you please re-evaluate your close? BilledMammal (talk) 05:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too late. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:35, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that changes anything - errors with those close should still be resolved, if only to give the closer of that RM proper context. BilledMammal (talk) 08:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don’t have an opinion on the RM, I just wanted to point the new RM that should be procedurally closed. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 08:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why should the new one be procedurally closed? It's the outcome I recommended in my close. It's not my intent to send everyone back for a fresh discussion - just a quick affirmation of the outcome, or a decision that the most important thing is to have "Hezbollah" in the title, and thus to go with "device explosions". -- asilvering (talk) 18:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t think that a new RM should be opened few hours after the old RM was closed. It’s just like renominating an article for deletion few hours after it closed as no consensus. Ofcourse, I could be blatantly wrong. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 18:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, in this case it isn't at all like that, as closing an AfD as no consensus usually means a clear outcome is not possible at this time. My close of the previous RM clearly indicated that an outcome is now very possible, and gave suggestions for how to bring it about. -- asilvering (talk) 18:22, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very well then. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 18:25, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've reworded it for clarity. What I intended was more "I'm concerned that this was brought up by a minority of participants and not precisely rebutted by the other side" than "I am concerned that they are correct", which is how my original close worded it. I don't actually have a position on whether it's an npov issue in either direction in this case. I can also affirm that even if I thought there was an npov issue that favoured "Lebanon" over "Hezbollah", I would have closed that section in the same way - namely, that "Hezbollah" was preferred by more participants, but that "Lebanon" is not far behind and has strong reasons to remain "in the running", so to speak, for the final close, owing to the potential to mislead that many participants were concerned about. -- asilvering (talk) 17:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A brief note...

Just a brief note to say that it seems that we see certain issues differently and perhaps it would be better if we were to stay out of each other's way in future. I have no doubt that you do a great deal of excellent work here, and I personally try to be as useful as I can in areas where I can be of use (mostly COI edit requests).

Ultimately I'm sure that we are both trying to bring about the same kind of results and that further disagreements are probably counterproductive. Best wishes, Axad12 (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Er, happily, but if you feel this way about someone in the future, I suggest disengaging, rather than replying to them and then going to their talk page about it when they don't respond. -- asilvering (talk) 21:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

October 22–24 - Discussion phase
October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Vofa (13:52, 22 October 2024)

How to handle the erasure of my contributions by motivated users? Is it allowed to think that a user may be motivated to erase information? I abandoned several projects because of this. I am here to make an Encyclopedia. --Vofa (talk) 13:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Vofa, when you say users are "motivated", I assume what you mean is that they have some motivations beyond "create a better encyclopedia". It's really important to avoid making this kind of assumption - remember to assume good faith! I notice from your talk page that many different editors have come to talk about some edits that you've made, and they're names I recognize from various different areas of the project, so I don't think you're the target of some kind of censorship campaign (or whatever else). If you don't understand why someone is removing your edits, generally the best thing to do is ask them directly, but if you don't want to do that because you're worried about getting into a fight about it or for whatever other reason, feel free to link me to the dispute in question and I can tell you where I think they're coming from. -- asilvering (talk) 18:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The dispute in question is unclear. Im trying to be good faith, but what it seems to me is that it’s a blatant preventing of making an encyclopaedia. Please look at the Kazakhs page and look at the recent revert by the user https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Turkiishh&redlink=1. I’ve tried to talk to them but they erased they blanked their talk page for some reason. I’d really want to understand what’s the issue with my contributions. Hope you’re having a great day. Vofa (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That user looks like they should have their actions investigated, actually, so I'm glad you brought that up. "Vandalism" means that someone is intending to cause harm to the encyclopedia, which really does not appear to be the case with your edits, so I undid their removal of your edits and suggested they go to the talk page if they have to. If there is an issue with your contributions, hopefully someone can tell you there, but it looks more likely that this is an issue with the other editor. -- asilvering (talk) 19:34, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Vofa (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Growth News, October 2024

Current work

Newcomer Homepage Community Updates module

We will add a new module to the Newcomer Homepage that will allow communities to highlight specific events, projects, campaigns, and initiatives. We have released a simple version on beta wikis and we will soon start an A/B test on our pilot wikis. This module will only display on the Newcomer Homepage if communities decide to utilize it, so learn how to configure the Community Updates module, or share your thoughts on the project's talk page.

Constructive activation experimentation

After showcasing early design ideas at Wikimania, we conducted user testing of design prototypes. We now aim to engage communities in further discussions and plan to run a targeted experiment, presenting a structured task within the reading view to logged-in new account holders with zero edits.

Community Configuration

This Community Configuration extension was developed to help communities customize wiki features to meet their unique needs. The Growth team is now helping other Wikimedia Foundation teams make their products configurable:

The Moderation Tools team now provides Community Configuration for Automoderator. (T365046)
Certain Babel extension settings will be configurable soon. (T328171)

Future work

As part of the Growth team annual plan, we will continue to investigate ways to increase constructive activation on mobile, while also working with Data Products to move forward A/B testing functionality via the Metrics Platform.

Community events

Growth team members presented Community Configuration: Shaping On-Wiki Functionality Together at Wikimania (slides). The session recording is available to watch on YouTube. This session provided an update on the Community Configuration project and introduced details about the upcoming features that communities will soon be able to configure. Representatives from the Moderator Tools, Editing, Web, and Campaigns teams shared their plans for utilizing Community Configuration in the future. Following these presentations, the WMF Growth team's Benoît Evellin and Martin Urbanec answered audience questions.
Habib Mhenni gave a presentation of how mentorship works at WikiIndaba 2024. The recording is available.

Stay informed

Growth team weekly updates are available on wiki (in English) if you want to know more about our day-to-day work. If you want to receive more general updates about technical activity happening across the Wikimedia movement (including Growth work), we encourage you to subscribe to Tech News.

Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

Trizek_(WMF), 15:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good job with the AfD stats

Just wanted to say good job working through all the AfD stats on the AELECT pages, I know it must be taking a long time to do - just wanted to say the diligence and insight is appreciated! BugGhost 🦗👻 18:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I've been hoping that this encourages others to do something similar for other things, since "divide the discussion by topic and discuss the topics neutrally" keeps coming up in discussions of how to turn down the temperature at RFA. So far, no luck, haha. I'm a little worried that this will result in over-emphasis on AfD participation so I'd like to encourage anyone reading this to start something similar for a topic you're familiar with and see where it goes. -- asilvering (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, would like to thank you for posting those statistics. I find them very useful. I don't think they place undue importance on AfDs. PRODs, CSD tags and AfD participation is the closest most editors get to admin work, and their approach is often a good predictor for how they'll handle things once given the mop.

And since I'm here, I'd also mention that I really enjoy reading your well-thought-out, clearly explained AfD closing rationales. Keep up the good work! Owen× ☎ 11:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- asilvering (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are really adding value to this new Admin selection process -- not just stats but also a lot of effort into understanding what the stats mean for each candidate.

Thank you! --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it was helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered making a voter guide for ADE?

Category:Wikipedia administrator elections 2024 voter guides. I'd feature the category on the ADE2024 page, but ADE appears to have consensus not to do so. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't written anything beyond the bits I did up on AfDs and don't plan to - that's been enough already! It's my hope that others can speak for other oft-discussed-at-RFA-topics they're interested in. -- asilvering (talk) 06:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay! It's just that I thought the AfD stats would do better if centralized lol Aaron Liu (talk) 10:57, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, fair enough. That also gives me a chance to explain centrally why people shouldn't look at just the numbers. I'll get on that in a bit. -- asilvering (talk) 16:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's up at User:Asilvering/2024 EFA notes on AFDs but only partially finished so far. -- asilvering (talk) 17:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Louise Glover Article - Concerns over Harm and Balancing.

Hello, I would like a second opinion on the content of the article 'Louise Glover'. As you will know, it was recently kept after being nominated for deletion. In the discussion, it was established that the subject is still notable.

However, I would like a second opinion on is whether the subject could be considered a low-profile individual.

I argue that the subject is low-profile seeing as the they no longer do modelling work and receive a lot less media attention than in the past. If the subject is indeed a low-profile individual, then are following BLP guidelines justification for removing their criminal convictions?

"Exercise restraint and include only material relevant to the person's notability, focusing on high-quality secondary sources.", "Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care"

I ask this as the convictions have nothing to do with the subject's original reason for notability and they could also harm their reputation.

In summary, Is the subject a low-profile individual, and if so, is there a justified reason to remove material that could harm their reputation per the BLP guidelines such as their criminal convictions? Svenska356 (talk) 13:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Svenska356 (talk page watcher) It seems that the section was referenced by one article that was reposted to other sites. I found the original article, linked it as an inline citation, and made it clear that it was being reused a few times. I also removed a citation that was incomplete and indicated that another citation contained a dead link.

Since it's reliably sourced as having actually happened (especially important for living people!), it could be a violation of NPOV to remove the information entirely. However, making sure it continues to not be overemphasized should be a priority. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 13:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that the key issue is making sure that the article is balanced, so as to meet NPOV guidelines. The quote about the subject having no remorse could be an overemphasis, and could be quite harmful to the subject's reputation. I agree that the information should be kept if the they are still high profile. But, it might still be best to condense the crinimal convictions and put it all in the same place, so that the article is balanced. Svenska356 (talk) 15:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting to this, @I dream of horses! @Svenska356, I also posted this one to WP:BLPN earlier, so the folks who like to work on this kind of thing can have a look. -- asilvering (talk) 16:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Svenska356 Just to avoid any confusion, it was PamD who reverted my edits. Any further discussion should take place on Talk:Louise Glover to avoid further fragmentation. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(ETA: Or, perhaps, on that BLPN post asilvering mentioned above...) I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 01:32, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OKA cleanup listing - Coordinates needed

Hey! I'll start working on the "Coordinates needed" section of your OKA cleanup list and I wanted to clarify some things.

Is there a specific template to use in order to satisfy the demand? Or should I see case by case?

Some articles have the location template (e.g. Abbey of Saint-Symphorien, Metz) where I can input coordinates. Some others are very simple and do not present templates (e.g. Aleksandrów Kujawski internment camp); in these cases I was thinking about adding {{Coord}} to the top of the article.

Thanks in advance!

Sintropepe (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I updated Historic Center of Caxias do Sul with {{coord}} at its top. Is it right? Another question: how do we update the list?

Sintropepe (talk) 13:53, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gosh, sorry, I have never touched the co-ordinates on any wikipedia article as far as I'm aware, so you're better off asking at WP:TEA. I think these are usually added to infoboxes, so I'm not sure why something would end up in the "co-ordinates needed" section of the maintenance list when it doesn't have an infobox. There are people out there who know a lot about this, but they're not me!

As for how to update the list, don't worry about it. The bot runs once a week, on Tuesdays, and the list will refresh automatically then. -- asilvering (talk) 16:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a suspicion I may be targeted.

Hello! I hope you’re having a great day. I have noticed that my contributions to the Bashkir page and maybe some more which I’m not active on have been reverted. The user in question is @Beshogur I have been threatened with a block from editing. My contributions have been labelled as “add a random spelling + asked for citations + erased sources” all of which are gross oversimplifications. I am not feeling safe. Please, help me and review the pages yourself. Another thing is that when @Beshogur said he “reverted the page to pre edit war” he did not do that, but instead reverted to the most recent contribution by the user @Turkiishh less than an hour after @Turkiishh made their edit. (No talk page was opened on the @Beshogur’s page by @Turkiishh user. Yesterday you said that that user needed investigation. Please help! The articles are Keraites and Bashkirs. There is currently an administration discussion regarding me. Vofa (talk) 18:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asilvering (talk · contribs) I opened ANI about his edit history. Also laughed at connecting me to Turkiishh (talk · contribs). Beshogur (talk) 18:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vofa, again, I encourage you to remember to assume good faith. I don't see any evidence (yet?) that you're being targetted. Your edits are being reverted, and the reversion rationales are often extremely unhelpful, and at any rate all participants ought to be going to the talk pages and not engaging in edit wars. But that doesn't mean you're being targetted - it means there is a failure of communication. -- asilvering (talk) 18:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thank you! Vofa (talk) 18:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Re-open ANI discussion on POV pushing

I am requesting that this ANI discussion: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#SheriffIsInTown%E2%80%99s_POV-Pushing,_User_Conduct

Be re-opened as I believe the user is continuing his POV pushing, I would also like to request more admin opinions on the matter after the re-opening of the discussion. Titan2456 (talk) 23:17, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Titan2456, I didn't close that one - the person to ask is Drmies. But you can also open a new discussion and simply link back to the old one, which may be a better choice. -- asilvering (talk) 23:19, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Vofa (06:11, 24 October 2024)

Hello! I want to link the discussion about the versions of the Keraites page first. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Star_Mississippi#Keraites what to do if the wrong revision of the page was restored? I have explained my thoughts on the situation and overall want your take on the page revisions. Please read the Talk page discussion I’ve linked! Good day. --Vofa (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want an admin's take on the page revisions, what you have to do is submit an edit request on the talk page of the article. Make it as clear and brief as possible. I don't recommend phrasing it as "the admin protected the wrong version of the page". Just say what edit you think is needed, give a brief rationale, and give at least one reliable source. -- asilvering (talk) 20:17, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advice

Hi, asilvering, the discussion phase has closed, so I thought I'd reply here instead, just to thank you for your comments. Your advice is eminently sensible. If successful, I wouldn't see myself using the tools on Irish-related articles, except for, say, cases of obvious vandalism. That's a practice that seems to have been/still is mostly followed by previous and current Irish admins, with one or two exceptions. In recent times I've (mostly) tended to stay away from topics where things can get very heated, very quickly - e.g., American politics, the ARBGG issues, and - oddly! - Marvel superhero TV shows (/insert shrug emoji and a smiley!) Cheers, Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 10:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, and good luck! -- asilvering (talk) 11:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from W0m4l1v2 (11:50, 25 October 2024)

I was asked to cite a source for my contribution to "No Worries". The source is an episode of The Fugitive that aired in December 1965. Here's a link to the transcript: https://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?p=184271#p184271 I'm not sure I understand how to cite it properly. --W0m4l1v2 (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all sure why the other editor has said "with different connotations" in their reversion of your edit. I've read the transcript and it sure seems like the same context to me. I'd go to the article's talk page and ask for clarification on that one.

As for your initial edit, I haven't checked the original source that was already on the sentence you added to (Hoffmann & Siebers 2009), so I don't know if your edit was incorrect - do they talk about this show specifically in their book? If they don't, the edit you made ([2]) is no good - see how it makes it look like Hoffman & Siebers were talking about The Fugitive? If you're going to add new information, make sure you're not adding it immediately before a footnote to a source that doesn't say that. It's an easy mistake to make, but a really hard mistake to fix, since it doesn't look "wrong" to anyone reading the article later. Thanks for editing wikipedia! -- asilvering (talk) 12:02, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting stat

With the caveat that 73% of statistics are made up ;) ...

I was crunching some numbers on administrator action statistics. Of all the admins who became admins in the last 2.5 years, you are the admin with the most average actions per day at more than 26 per day. Based on standard deviations on this population, this likely places you in the top 3% of the most active admins we have on the project. Please don't burnout :) --Hammersoft (talk) 15:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting, and I second your comment about burnout. Asilvering, you do a lot at GA and your work there is very appreciated! I'd suspect I'm near the bottom of the list for admin activity. I was elevated mostly on the basis of good content work, and though I pitch in from time to time, I don't get through tons of admin actions on a regular basis. —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:25, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I take this as further evidence that stats aren't everything and that deletion work shoots those numbers up real fast! I'm about to head to my cave for the rest of the semester, so I presume I'll be doing less. Busy doing all the writing and marking I neglected in October, as is my terrible and unshakable habit. -- asilvering (talk) 18:10, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi asilvering, I am still finding it impossible to discuss edits with Shahray, already less than a day after their block expired. They made an edit to Kievan Rus' and subsequently restored it after I reverted them. They did not make another revert after this, but they replied in a completely different discussion on Talk:History of Ukraine saying I won't create hundreds of talk pages just because you always disagree with me for precisely no reason.[3] I told them they should start a discussion on the relevant talk page and that I would discuss with them there, but they stated: If you want to create new topic there, you can do it... And now, I ask for a clear explanation for why my changes are "synth" or "not an improvement", otherwise it's just another unreasonable edit.[4]. I reiterated what I said, saying that this would be a misuse of the talk page, and they responded: I shouldn't waste my time on interrogating you everywhere for "more details", you should give a clear reasoning for you edit from the beginning. If you prefer to give explanation in the talk page, then fine, do it there.[5]

I also noted that they had already started a talk page discussion before (as an IP) on Talk:Kievan Rus' about similar changes they made now (and a couple other editors had discussed this with them and there was no consensus for those changes). I was certain that this was them because I had previously reverted Shahray's edits before and the same IP left a message on my talk page asking why I reverted them.[6] After this they self-reverted and logged in as Shahray and wrote the same comment.[7] I told them to continue the discussion there as a result and I responded there. Despite this, Shahray said: This is not a discussion done by me, and looks antinormanist, why should I care?.[8] Then they edited the comment to say: obviously, do you know anything about this topic or are you just testing my patience?.[9] In their last comment, they once again imply that I am simply reverting them in bad faith: I just have no interest to wander in circles because of you giving some of the most minor excuses to not let my changes get in again and again.[10]

I have tried to explain my reverts using policy-based reasons but it seems that no matter what, they will always suggest that I just reverting them for no reason. I do not want to start another ANI discussion so soon, particularly if this may be viewed as premature. Can you suggest any steps that can be taken here to resolve the issue here, if possible? Thank you. Mellk (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you to look at your behavior first and stop complaining to other editors like a child.

Typing "I don't think this is an improvement" and inserting a random policy isn't yet a proper explanation. I asked you repeatedly why you consider this a WP:Synth [11], yet you haven't managed to reply to me properly. This is your last comment: "Also, I have not seen the formulation "first Rus people" before". Explains absolutely nothing about why my changes are "WP:Synth". Because you never really give an explanation, you just force to constantly wander in circles.

You've also made a claim like there's no source that tells about "Rus' land" [12], when it's literally mentioned one sentence above.

It looks more like you are just trying to create most minor excuses to not let my changes get in. The fact that you don't want to further discuss this on the talk page and instead you wrote this message proves my point.

You have been already formally warned to not make unreasonable reverts, yet here we are again.

If you feel like you are unable to constructively discuss in this topic, then you shouldn't be trying to waste more time of other editors and instead move to the topics you're more knowledgeable about. This is my advice for you. Shahray (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I think you're fine to go to ANI about it. They've been blocked twice for this already, and now they might be doing WP:LOUTSOCK stuff. There was some pretty serious failure to "get it" in response to El_C's week-long block. Sometimes people don't course-correct and there's nothing you can do. -- asilvering (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead and use that reply above as evidence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- asilvering (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I was hoping there could be an alternative way to resolve this without having to go to ANI, but their response above, along with the subsequent edits they've made and what they wrote on the talk page of El C has unfortunately made ANI inevitable. Mellk (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Thewriterthree (20:03, 26 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering, it is a pleasure to e-meet you. I have added a citation on-to this article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_New_York_City

And wanted to make sure I did it correctly.

The statement is:

"The beaver’s importance in New York’s history is reflected by its use on the city’s official sea" --Thewriterthree (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Thewriterthree, welcome to wikipedia! It looks like you did the first one correctly (the one on "Hudson's report on the regional beaver population served as the impetus for the founding of Dutch trading colonies in the New World."), but not the second. See how the second is missing "ref" tags? I'll fix it for you so you can see. -- asilvering (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fixed it. There are lots of easier ways to add citations, too - I tend to add mine using the automatic function on Visual Editor. (Press "cite", then drop the ISBN into the popup. It sucks at searching for titles but works fine on ISBNs, dois, URLs, etc.) -- asilvering (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. Thewriterthree (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Redirect Questions

I suggested in redirects here? Are they reasonable, and does the AfD closure meant prohibit me from making them? McYeee (talk) 03:31, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I don't know anything about the topic so I can't really say if making a redirect would be a good idea. I don't see a good spot on Heat-assisted magnetic recording for those to redirect to (I'd be hoping for a section heading or something like that). Does WP:REDYES apply? If so, it's probably better not to create any redirects. -- asilvering (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redyes applies. Thanks for pointing it out! I think the place I thought made a good redirect target was actually a single paragraph in hard drive, but that's not actually a good target. McYeee (talk) 04:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from L'Andreea (08:28, 28 October 2024)

Hello. I created an article about a month ago. How long will it take to be reviewed? --L'Andreea (talk) 08:28, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it just was! Unfortunately it was declined because it didn't meet the notability guidelines. I don't suggest that you keep trying with this one, I'm afraid. Wikipedia is looking for articles on people who are already well into their careers, rather than people who are just starting out. Sorry! I'll come by your talk page and drop you some useful links. -- asilvering (talk) 08:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Sumanmali11 (16:00, 28 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering,

I am editing my clients wiki and one guys started to revert the changes. How can I lock the wiki page? --Sumanmali11 (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sumanmali11 (talk page watcher) To answer your question, you can't have the page locked so only you can edit it. It's against policy to restrict editing for people who are abiding by the policies and guidelines, and also technologically impossible.

You have a conflict of interest that you need to declare on your userpage per our policies. Don't worry, we're forgiving of those who don't already know. Courtesy ping for Viewmont Viking I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting this one, @I dream of horses. @Sumanmali11, I'll just add that if you need a page locked in the future because of vandalism (eg, someone repeatedly replaces the entire contents with "penis penis penis" or whatever), the place to go is WP:RPP. Do not go there because someone reverted your changes to your client's Wikipedia article. -- asilvering (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Beauthentic (16:02, 28 October 2024)

Hi, my goal is to contribute to the Wikipedia community by creating neutral profiles for notable people from underrepresented backgrounds. I already have a list of folks that I've written articles for that I believe adhere to all guidelines (neutrality, notability, citations, etc.), but would love to get your input before doing my first :) --Beauthentic (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Beauthentic, welcome to wikipedia! If you've already written the articles, no need to ask in advance: just set them up as drafts. WP:WIZARD makes this really easy. You can then submit the drafts to the Articles for Creation process for review. I'm happy to give you some feedback about your drafts, and so will other AfC reviewers. By the way, if those underrepresented people are women, you might be interested in joining WP:WIRED, which is a wikiproject that is very supportive to new editors. -- asilvering (talk) 16:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Asilvering! Super helpful. I'd love to get your feedback about my draft. Here it is:

== Layne Eskridge ==

Layne Eskridge (born September 8, 1981)^[1] is an American television executive and producer who has overseen the development of multiple Emmy Award-winning series.^[2] She founded POV Entertainment in 2020.^[3]

=== Career ===

==== Netflix (2016–2020) ====

At Netflix, Eskridge served as a creative executive overseeing drama series development.^[4] During her tenure, she supervised Ozark, which garnered 45 Primetime Emmy Award nominations and four wins between 2017 and 2022, including Outstanding Directing for Jason Bateman.^[5]

She oversaw When They See Us, which received 16 Emmy nominations and won Outstanding Lead Actor for Jharrel Jerome in 2019.^[6] The series earned a Peabody Award that same year.^[7]

Her portfolio included Dead to Me, which The Washington Post described as compelling television,^[8] and Top Boy, which won the 2024 BAFTA TV Award for Best Drama Series.^[9]

==== POV Entertainment (2020–present) ====

In 2020, Eskridge founded POV Entertainment and established a development deal with Endeavor Content in January 2021.^[2] Through this partnership, POV Entertainment began developing The Plot, a limited series adaptation starring Mahershala Ali for Disney's Onyx Collective.^[10]

In 2024, she executive produced Lady in the Lake for Apple TV+, starring Natalie Portman and Moses Ingram.^[11] She also serves as executive producer on Manhunt, an Apple TV+ series about John Wilkes Booth following Abraham Lincoln's assassination.^[12]

=== Selected filmography ===

==== Executive producer ====

Lady in the Lake (Apple TV+, 2024)
Manhunt (Apple TV+, 2024)
The Plot (Hulu, in development)

==== Development executive ====

Ozark (Netflix, 2017–2022)
When They See Us (Netflix, 2019)
Dead to Me (Netflix, 2019–2022)
Top Boy (Netflix, 2019–2023)
Seven Seconds (Netflix, 2018)
Messiah (Netflix, 2020)
Self Made (Netflix, 2020)

== References ==

^ Smith, John (March 15, 2020). "Profile: Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ ^a ^b Fleming, Mike Jr. (January 6, 2021). "Layne Eskridge Inks Producing Deal With Endeavor Content Via Her POV Banner". Deadline Hollywood. |url=https://deadline.com/2021/01/layne-eskridge-endeavor-content-pov-banner-deal-1234666791/ |access-date=October 27, 2024}}
^ Otterson, Joe (June 10, 2021). "Endeavor Content Partners With Jeff Friday Media to Develop TV Series From Diverse Creators". Variety. |url=https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/endeavor-content-jeff-friday-media-1234992834/ |access-date=October 27, 2024
^ Andreeva, Nellie (March 15, 2020). "Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge Launches Production Company". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ "74th Emmy Awards Complete Nominations List" (PDF). Television Academy. July 12, 2022. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ "Emmy Awards: Complete Winners List". The Hollywood Reporter. September 22, 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ "When They See Us". Peabody Awards. 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ Stuever, Hank (May 3, 2019). "It's hard to stop watching 'Dead to Me'". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ "Top Boy wins Best Drama at BAFTA TV Awards". BBC News. May 12, 2024. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ Petski, Denise (January 27, 2023). "Disney's Onyx Collective Orders 'The Plot' Limited Series With Mahershala Ali". Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ Kroll, Justin (January 19, 2024). "'Lady in the Lake' Trailer: Natalie Portman, Moses Ingram Lead Apple Series". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
^ Otterson, Joe (March 10, 2022). "Apple Orders Lincoln Assassination Series 'Manhunt'". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

Beauthentic (talk) 14:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beauthentic, please just go ahead and create the draft, it's much easier to edit and discuss that way. -- asilvering (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So to be clear about the process: that means to put the draft in my sandbox and then hit publish? Or should I be doing something else? Beauthentic (talk) 19:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Beauthentic (talk page watcher) You could do that. You could also create Draft:Layne Eskridge, and put the draft there. Either way is a legitimate way to create a draft. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:The Land of Skulls

Hello, Asilvering,

I see you turned down a CSD G5 tag for this article because the editor was not blocked. But you can see if you go to Special:Contributions/Cassigad you can see that the editor has been globally blocked as an LTA. Exactly who, it doesn't say. I have a script that shows globally blocked editors with their username crossed out but if you don't use it, you should check out the contributions page to see if WikiMedia has imposed a sockpuppet block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, thanks for the catch. I was using a script that indicated editors who were blocked, but I didn't know there was one that also showed global locks. Thanks for letting me know that one exists, I've stolen it from your common.js for myself. -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what to do about this

Talk:Russian language#The map of the geographic distribution of the Russian language this time it is not from a decade ago,but i saw some users message "It`s more accurate only in your head. Who are you, ukrainian warrior? Just the encouraged vandal. Do they even pay for your work? Fuc Count (talk) 10:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)",seems like a violent message,is this one of the messages discouraged here Wikipedia:Harassment?? UnsungHistory (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's not acceptable. I've removed that from the talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 19:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But how did you do it? UnsungHistory (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering UnsungHistory (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed this earlier. Here is the diff. Does that answer your question? -- asilvering (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes UnsungHistory (talk) 21:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your message about my edit

Thank you very much for your message about my edit of 'The Society of the Spectacle'; I wondered whether I was being pedantic. Thank you again.John Desmond (talk) John Desmond (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing citations like that is extremely helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Women in Red November 2024

Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323

Online events:

New: Asian women | Geofocus: Islands Q-Z | Women in engineering

Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative)

Announcements from other communities

Annual Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) is an online campaign designed to boost
Asian content on Wikipedia each November.
Unreferenced articles backlog drive. These Wikiproject clean-up lists offer a start
to November's backlog drive, e.g. Women's History and Women writers

Tip of the month:

Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed images at
search.creativecommons.org/

Other ways to participate:

Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications.
Join the conversations on our talkpage.
Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project.
Follow us on social media:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Question from SahibSinghJi (23:11, 29 October 2024)

Hi Cocobb8.

I have joined to update and add new articles.

I wish to write about The Gurbani School app. Is there anything I need to know before I start writing new articles? --SahibSinghJi (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @SahibSinghJi, welcome to wikipedia! I'm not @Cocobb8, but I've tagged them into this in case you needed them in particular for some reason?

I don't suggest that you write about an app. It would almost certainly not meet the guidelines at WP:N, which any topic needs to meet in order to be eligible for a wikipedia article. I see you've got a welcome message on your talk page already - have a look at those links for some tips to help you getting started. -- asilvering (talk) 02:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Safari's talk page

Did my reply ping you in some way? Or do you have super antennae that pick up a mere mention of your name? :) S0091 (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no guarantee I'll see it, of course, but an edit summary left on a prolific AfC reviewer's page that says "re Fram, admins are active at AfC" will tend to sent off the super antennae, haha. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now I have this picture of you as a faceless person with big antennae lol (no tin foil hat though). I hope Fram takes the suggestion to bring his concerns to AfC because, based on my experience, reviewers do a good job with neutral re-reviews (and I personally have a distaste for ANI) but I can understand if he thinks a broader audience is needed. I also left him instructions on his tp for resubmitting drafts on behalf of another user. S0091 (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so as well. The speed with which the backlog has been going down has made me a bit nervous that something like this would come up. But I think AfC will be less angst for all involved and lead to a more successful cleanup effort. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from MarkWHowe (23:26, 30 October 2024)

Hello; Is there a way\ location, perhaps in my sandbox, to upload and store graphics like photos, diagrams, drawings etc? I'm thinking I could refine them in that place and then it would be convenient to copy and paste them into articles when needed. These would all be railroad related; photos of personages, maps, scans of documents etc. --MarkWHowe (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MarkWHowe, if you're talking about graphics that can go in articles where needed - as in, graphics that are compatibly licensed - the right place for most of those images is Wikimedia Commons. -- asilvering (talk) 23:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But I can't see where there is a way to find them again as my personal group of images. Hence my tho't of having such in/on my sandbox. I have bookmarked the 'upload wizard' but I'm wondering if it is somewhere in my 'tools' list. If so it's not obvious. MarkWHowe (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I got the answer; Special:ListFiles/MarkWHowe. precisely what i was looking for.

Still wondering if the 'upload wizard' is somewhere in my 'tools' list and I'm just not seeing it. MarkWHowe (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MarkWHowe, I use the old Vector skin so I'm not sure exactly where it's hiding on others, but I can get to the upload wizard on Commons in the left-hand menu, under "Participate". The link is called "Upload file". Does that help you find it? -- asilvering (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a link to all your uploads on Commons - is this the kind of thing you're hoping for? -- asilvering (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is exactly what I want but I have not yet found a way to install the link in my 'tools' sidebar., or if that is even possible. I figured it should be a 'user log' item; nope. Or a 'special pages' item; nope. Somebody said I should see an 'uploads' item in the upper right corner; not that I notice. I am now simply bookmarking the pages. That works. MarkWHowe (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Random redirects

So we can have random redirects like Vulgar Turkish? This isn't a proper name. Beshogur (talk) 10:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, this user Mr. Information1409 (talk · contribs) claims there is a "vulgar Turkish" like Vulgar Latin, but that's simply translation of the Turkish term kaba Türkçe (see Ottoman Turkish). This user didn't even bother to try to create something, just a redirect. Beshogur (talk) 10:53, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I admit that, sorry for that mistake. It was something that was referenced in the Turkish language article. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you can't do is put a CSD tag on a redirect without giving a reason, where no CSD criteria apply. If you object to a redirect for editorial reasons, nominate it at WP:RFD. -- asilvering (talk) 14:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, for the next time in other article. You can delete it, I'm seemingly wrong despite the fact that it were references, I didn't fully searched them. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. Information1409, that was a reply to @Beshogur, not to you, so don't worry. -- asilvering (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. Information1409: I understand your thing, but with all respect, there's nothing like "vulgar Turkish". Turkish language (aka Istanbul Turkish) isn't spoken in rural Turkey either. So your edits were basically illogical. Same applies for Ottoman Turkish article, if you read it carefully, it covered all versions. Beshogur (talk) 20:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Rakeshkrish 19 on Heinrich Klaasen (13:48, 31 October 2024)

How to insert image --Rakeshkrish 19 (talk) 13:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Rakeshkrish 19, there's information on uploading images at WP:UPIMAGE. Does that help? -- asilvering (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Hallowme (15:02, 31 October 2024)

Why do all of my Wikipedia articles for creation get deleted even if I had 200 trusted sources the the new article --Hallowme (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hallowme, I only see that you've had one AfC draft deleted. Can you tell me what the others were? -- asilvering (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean my article but I had enough trusted sources Hallowme (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Really? The article was deleted as a hoax. Are you sure the trusted sources verified the article content? -- asilvering (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Now that voting is over, I wish to thank you for reviewing all the candidates' AfD records. Your hard work is greatly appreciated! starship.paint (talk / cont) 02:05, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and good luck! -- asilvering (talk) 02:07, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk-psychology

Thank you User:Asilvering for the message that you have left on my talk page. I understand now that you consider psychology as a real medical field that me as an old woman should rather not talk about, and you are %100 right. My question is if there can be a space in Wikipedia for social talk psychology for non-medical situations, where I would still have some life experience and knowledge to share. Chelky (talk) 02:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all! Please do go ahead and edit articles on psychology, medical or otherwise - we just need to be following WP:MEDRS whenever we're editing something that contains a biomedical claim of some kind. I see that almost all of your edits to mainspace articles have been reverted for lack of reliable sources, which is why I suggest going through AfC first if you want to create a new article. -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

topic ban?

Does this allows me to respond on the talk page? If not, then please specify it, so I can ask broadly and reach consensus for my changes. Shahray (talk) 06:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, if you're banned from a topic, that means talk pages as well. See WP:TBAN. -- asilvering (talk) 06:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't this violate the topic ban? Since they are starting a RfC regarding the Rus/Russian naming they previously tried to change. At Talk:Second_Bulgarian_Empire#"Russian"_anachronisms they insisted on the "Rus" naming. Mellk (talk) 08:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it would. @Shahray, I've removed the RfC from that talk page. If it would be clearer, I can broaden the wording of the topic ban to "History of Ukraine and Russia", or whatever other phrasing you think would be more helpful, but this is certainly the kind of edit you are not supposed to be making while topic-banned. -- asilvering (talk) 00:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Clelland

Hi, thank you for your great work with AfDs. Looking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Clelland, I notice it was closed as no consensus, but I think that keep would be a more fair closing as there were no delete views expressed at all other than the nominator, and adequate sources were provided with two keep views.

Could you please consider changing the closing decision to keep? I know it has no material impact right now, but down the line it will be useful to establish a precedent should someone decide to nominate the article again in the future.

Thanks, --Habst (talk) 12:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the second vote were more substantial, I might have, but I have to say this does look pretty shaky to me. In lieu of closing keep, I'll re-open it, and we'll see if someone else will come and add some more affirmation. -- asilvering (talk) 00:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Robert Justin 514 Gee! (20:19, 1 November 2024)

I'm currently experiencing a discreet lack of brunch. Thanks I am amused. Take your time, O-doogle! --Robert Justin 514 Gee! (talk) 20:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

Crisco 1492

CheckUser changes

Maxim

Oversighter changes

Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Following a discussion, the discussion-only period proposal that went for a trial to refine the requests for adminship (RfA) process has been discontinued.
Following a request for comment, Administrator recall is adopted as a policy.

Technical news

Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

RoySmith, Barkeep49 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2024 Arbitration Committee Elections. ThadeusOfNazereth and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.
Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate from 3 November 2024 until 12 November 2024 to stand in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections.
The Arbitration Committee is seeking volunteers for roles such as clerks, access to the COI queue, checkuser, and oversight.

Miscellaneous

An unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in November 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ban appeal by Shahray

Notifying you about the appeal in WP:AE. Shahray (talk) 10:52, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to change the name of a page

So the page that i want to change the name of is San Francisco 4th and King Street station,it is not called the 4th and King street station, it is called just san francisco station,additionally i have actually ridden caltrain to that very station,i heard the announcements and on the screens it specifically says san francisco,i am very confident about this and i even have a source [13] UnsungHistory (talk) 18:42, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@UnsungHistory, you could open a WP:RM for that if you really want to, but the reason it is at that title is probably to disambiguate it from the other entries at San Francisco station. -- asilvering (talk) 20:08, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They reverted it,they told me that it is potentially controversial and i should file a request instead of doing it outright for that matter,i do not get how is it controversial,but,how do i file a request for a move? UnsungHistory (talk) 04:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The instructions are at WP:PCM. -- asilvering (talk) 04:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Wikiversary!

It's still November 3 where I am. JamesMLane t c 00:40, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, indeed! Happy 3rd to me! Thanks. :) -- asilvering (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G11

Hey asilvering, I saw that you declined my G11 here. While I felt like the article in its current state looked a lot like an advert, with awards and stating the organization's mission, I don't want to be too bitey so I just wanted to hear your side of the story for the future potentially? Oh and can you potentially make sure that there isn't a copyright violation in paragraph 4 of the draft? Earwig's seems to indicate that it was mostly copy-pasted from this website. But of course I could always be making a mistake, just wanted to get your opinion. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:10, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a copyright violation, please make sure you tag with WP:G12, even if you think it's also WP:G11 level - otherwise it might be undeleted. In this case I think I can fix it with revdel, thanks for pointing it out. Regarding whether it looks like an advert, I absolutely agree that it's made up of Marketing Language that isn't really acceptable on Wikipedia (looks like that copyvio is a press release, which explains that!). But this contributor is a declared paid contributor doing their best to follow the rules, so I don't think it's appropriate to delete their first attempt, even if it's not what we'd really want. In general I'd say that CSDs in draftspace are way too bitey, especially G11, and they also make it harder for AfC reviewers who aren't admins to help out when the submitting editor goes to the help desk in confusion. And drafts aren't very urgent - they'll all end up going out via WP:G13 in the end if the editor can't get it through AfC. Unless it's something so bad an editor also ought to catch an indef for spamming, imo it's better to let them keep trying. Though I will somewhat hypocritically admit that I have a close-to-zero tolerance level for the "SEO entrepreneur" and "Nigerian rapper" genres of draftspace G11s. -- asilvering (talk) 17:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Draft:LatitudeLearning. I was just wondering why you declined db-spam on this one. Does it not read as promotional? Hitro talk 17:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HitroMilanese, it's mostly a list of facts, so it's not so totally awful that someone couldn't use that as a basis to write something less promo. Will someone write something less promo? Probably not. In that case, @Hey man im josh will end up killing it six months from now. -- asilvering (talk) 17:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:G13 - Explicit, Liz, and myself check User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon several times a day and try to postpone deletion for any promising drafts, while deleting the rest. It'll get gone eventually if no one improves it. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@HitroMilanese While there's some content in that draft that reads as promotional, personally I would have declined since there isn't any serious puffery-style language. I'd say it's a more ambiguous case than the one that I linked above and I wouldn't have tagged it myself. Again, probably my standards for deletion might be less tolerable than asilvering's. Personally maybe a deeper discussion on this could be had somewhere since people like my friend Hey man im josh might have different standards than me. But I was interested in making sure I didn't do too much, and thanks for asilvering for letting me know. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G12 would only apply if there is no non-infringing content worth saving, which in this case I saw that there was content that didn't show up on Earwig's. That's why I didn't tag for G12 and only tagged for G11. Personally I feel like your approach is probably unique from what I've seen, since I've seen that you've declined G11s from even other admins. But of course I don't really have an opinion, there's always a chance another person with less tolerance would just delete it. Maybe I've just fallen behind things since when I was an admin a few months ago, but I don't want to be too bitey either. I think it's more of an area that the community hasn't really defined that well, especially with the current discussion around U5 at ANI. Similar to how draftification discussions can be a mess sometime. But yeah, was just interested in your opinion, thanks for that. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's unique - when I've talked to other admins about CSD tagging, I've mostly had the experience of having them agree with me that things shouldn't be CSD'd. Unique among admins who routinely patrol CSDs... maybe. But I don't think it's a good idea to calibrate CSD expectations based on the handful of admins who routinely perform those deletions, given what's happening at ANI and now recall. -- asilvering (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's why I've been trying to kind of recalibrate if that makes sense? For the future with taggings that I might make while I'm patrolling and if I ever become an admin again, though I'm not 100% sure I'd be wanted for the latter. But there's a lot of interpretation that goes into this, so can you maybe point to some other admins who talked to you about CSD tagging? I'm just making sure anyway. Fathoms Below (talk) 17:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hesitate to tag people in because I think I'm probably being annoying enough already asking all my questions, haha. But there's Josh above, for example, and I don't think @Elli will mind a ping for her opinions. :) -- asilvering (talk) 18:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh Elli? Can't wait to meet up with her soon :) Fathoms Below (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise :) and I'm happy to give you my thoughts if you have questions on whether particular deletions would be appropriate. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering, @Fathoms Below, @Hey man im josh, and @Elli: (talk page watcher) As a 'low hanging fruit' AfC reviewer, I often nominate for G11 deletion when it's pretty obvious that someone has come here to spam Wikipedia, and not to constructively edit it. However, if someone were to decline it, I'd take it as a sign that I've been looking at low quality articles for too long, and that I need to touch grass. /lighthearted /halfjoke I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 03:04, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good response to have, that will do much to protect your sanity from SEO farms. -- asilvering (talk) 15:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi asilvering. Uh, now I'm curious why you just blanked this page instead of deleting it per G12. It seemed like there was no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. (G12) Personally, I've never seen an admin blank a page and revdel when the history seemed to be entirely a copyvio from a promotional account. Another admin deleted the same sandbox when I tagged it earlier before the account recreated it. Are you entirely sure that this approach is in line with our policies right now? I'm just curious since it seemed like an unambiguous case and it seems entirely appropriate to delete per G12. Maybe a third opinion from another admin might help but it's just new to me. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The end result is the same - copyvio removed - so I don't know that there are any policies involved here that say one way or the other is better. -- asilvering (talk) 21:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure the end result is the same but it just seems... weird from my point of view. Maybe I'm just too used for things being one way rather than the other, but you have an unfamiliar approach to me. I guess we can agree that we're different anyway. Fathoms Below (talk) 21:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't i insert an infobox??

Trying to Insert an infobox on my user page, i copied pasted infobox wikitext from Template:Infobox Wikipedia user,that failed,and then trying to get creative,maybe write about myself via infobox country,to express my intrest in politics,by copying pasting wikitext from Template:Infobox country,also refused to convert wiki-text,it usually converts wikitext,what is going on?? UnsungHistory (talk) 21:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wait,never mind,i figured it out UnsungHistory (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

but still,why is not the Wikitext working?? UnsungHistory (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you've fixed it? -- asilvering (talk) 23:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Umm,the wikitext is not working,i used the alternate way (through the insert option in edit mode),but i wonder,what glitch is that where wikitext does not get converted?? UnsungHistory (talk) 00:19, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't have any idea what you're talking about. Maybe someone at WP:TEA will recognize the issue? -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from TheSkillet (22:54, 4 November 2024)

are you a real person --TheSkillet (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. -- asilvering (talk) 23:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Voorts

Sorry, I accidentally touched your edit when I was placing my vote. I already self reverted and replaced my edit (this time taking extra care not to be the WP:BULLINCHINASHOP.) Just wanted to properly apologize.

RCSCott91 (talk) 00:34, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never noticed! No worries. -- asilvering (talk) 00:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You sure about declining the U5 on what has now been moved to Draft:Emmanuel Alexander Onofua?

This was created as a userpage. If you compare the username to the page content, it looks to me that this is a CV, not an attempt at a draft. E.g., text like this by an account named Eonofua, that is E Onofua, and a userpage that begins Dr. Emmanuel Alexander Onofua and continues with text like Highly accomplished finance expert with 10+ years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Highly accomplished finance expert with a PhD in Finance and over 15 years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Looks like someone writing their personal profile to me. Thanks, MarcGarver (talk) 08:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, sure looks like someone writing a crap autobio to me, too. People write all kinds of those (we see them at AfC all the time). They're drafts. Crap drafts! But drafts. And drafts aren't eligible for U5. -- asilvering (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that at the time. I would have deleted per U5 and G11 instead of draftifying. I agree we sometimes are over zealous with U5's and would like to learn more about your approach. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I should have just sighed and blocked that guy in particular for spamming, but in general my thinking is that if we're extending enough grace and good faith to someone that we're not going to make them eat an indef over their crap first edits, those edits don't deserve to be immediately summarily deleted either. Moving it to draft doesn't cost us much (only a bit more admin time than deleting), and it breaks the possibly desired "here is my linkedin profile" effect for the editor just as well as deletion. If they're a good faith editor making a genuine but foolish attempt at engaging with Wikipedia, they'll appreciate it. If they go to the AfC help desk or Teahouse in confusion, the non-admin reviewers/hosts will appreciate being able to see it (rather than having to say "I dunno, but it looks like your first try sucked so bad we set it on fire"). If they don't come back, it'll be resolved by G13 in six months, and if they refuse to get it and keep recreating their userpage, we can indef them and move on with our lives. -- asilvering (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Insightful. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there -- If you don't mind me butting in -- I'm keen to share admin perspectives on what to do with U5–G11 tagged pages in the light of the discussion of Fastily's U5 deletions. For example, User:Billybilluk/Sample page, currently tagged G11, which I would probably generally delete G11 (but not U5), but I'm thinking (in the light of the above) you wouldn't? My feeling on some of these is that they overshare, and often give private information not only about themselves, but also relatives/friends/enemies. (This is particularly problematic with such pages from clear minors.) Anyway, interested in sharing views informally somewhere outside the Fastily petition. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, I have more stringent criteria for honoring CSD's than some. Not sure I would honor that one. I do not detag them 'cause I know i'm out of alignment with other admins. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's very interesting to know, Deepfriedokra. What would drive me to delete it more than anything else is the names of all the subject's relatives. I tend to have three heaps when looking at G11: delete, grey area, decline, and am finding more and more that my personal grey area expands as I realise that there is a huge spectrum of response among admins. However, the great majority (though not all) of my grey-area G11s are later deleted by someone else, and some of my declines lead to conflict with patrollers (eg recently Draft:Posity Online), so I have been feeling rather out of step with community norms of late. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure, @Deepfriedokra - of course, there's going to be a wide variety of opinions when you ask any 800 Wikipedians about anything, but I think there might be more sympathy for the "don't delete" end of things than you think. I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it. We probably shouldn't be calibrating ourselves on "it got deleted eventually" if that's going to end in that admin getting hung out to dry over it.

As for this example... ugh. I admit that I have found exceptions to my ability to extend grace and good faith, and two of those exceptions are "SEO professionals" and "up-and-coming Nigerian rappers". As a promotional userspace draft on an "up-and-coming Nigerian tech entrepreneur"... I twitch and let someone else handle it. Yes, I know this means it will be deleted. I feel slightly better for not having pulled the trigger. -- asilvering (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it." Indeed. And over time, those of us who started out being inclusionist,-user/draft-space-is-rarely-a-problem–type admins either turn away from deletion, or turn into deletion machines. I am more likely to intervene for things where I'm prepared to strip out overt promotion, but it's not clear whether that's ok in userspace. I'd certainly be offended if someone I didn't know came along and edited my sandbox drafts substantively. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't think about all the other people named. Of course if there are minors involved, it needs oversight. Most of my Gray area CSDs get deleted. I learned very quickly after my return to just leave be. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deepfriedokra Thanks. When to call for oversight is another thorny one; I have had most of my calls for oversight declined, too. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
under 14 yo seems to be the threshold. YMMV. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Deepfriedokra, @Espresso Addict: I've been told the threshold is 15/16 years and younger. I've also had most of my rejected requests for oversight rev-deleted instead. I strongly suspect there's a gray area. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I dream of horses I'm fairly sure I've been told that deleted articles even on quite young children (12–15) need not be oversighted unless there is clear identifying material such as telephone number, or some other reason for caution. But perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well. PS: Sorry to hijack your talk on this issue, Asilvering! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Espresso Addict Perhaps I owe Asilvering an apology as well, since I was thinking about editors self-outing themselves (including but not limited to an autobiography).

About perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well: I recently once sent something into User:Oversight, which apparently prompted a discussion aamong the oversighers as to whether or not it should be oversighted. It was oversighted during the discussion and remained oversighted. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble with oversight, by its very nature, is that we mortals can't see what is oversighted and what isn't. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, I think everything I've referred to OS for "minor outing themselves" reasons has been actioned. But then, my "this needs oversight" alarms didn't go off for that User:Billybilluk/Sample page. -- asilvering (talk) 09:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[Missed this...] For clarity, I don't think there's anything that needs oversight in User:Billybilluk/Sample page (which seems to have bounced back) but unsourced personal info of that sort I remove from mainspace all the time, and even in userspace drafts that look like autobios, the subject is unlikely to have got consent from relatives to mention them. You do have to read the whole thing as sometimes similar profiles mention conquering drug abuse or the like, or even make allegations of sexual abuse towards identifiable people. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 14:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hello and thank you. Crafterstar (talk) 12:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Good luck out there. -- asilvering (talk) 16:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How to Archive conversations

So,I just tested out my new signature on my talk page (because I thought it is the most logical place on Wikipedia to do so)it works just fine,so,since it is working i want to archive it UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to archive the signature test UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 20:46, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you need to archive it? You could simply remove it from the page. -- asilvering (talk) 00:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well,Remove or Archive,I do not know how to Archive,and I am always eager to learn more Edit tricks!UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 00:52, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ARCHIVE has info on how to archive talk pages in general. It can be confusing, but basically all you have to do is copy the code in the table "Sequentially numbered archives" under "ClueBot III" and paste it into the top of your user talk page. That will set up an automatic talk page archive. Once the bot runs the first time and generates you an archive page, you can just cut-and-paste the section you want to archive over onto it if you want to archive something early. -- asilvering (talk) 00:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if i may seem too pestering,but what does table "Sequentially numbered archives" under "ClueBot III" mean UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 02:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to direct you to the right part of the page. Do a ctrl+f (or command+f or whatever) search for "Sequentially numbered archives" and you'll find it. -- asilvering (talk) 02:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is strange....it shows 0/0 results.... UnsungHistory (Questions or Concerns?) (See how I messed up) 02:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Christoph Lüthy

Hello, Asilvering,

I see you are active on the project so I thought I'd ask you a question. I was looking at draft articles that were due for CSD G13 speedy deletion later tonight and saw that you commented upon this draft that you thought it should be accepted as an article. Do you think so? Enough that we should postpone this deletion? I rarely see comments like that on drafts that were abandoned so I thought I'd ask. Thanks. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:08, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Liz, I'll try and fix it up. -- asilvering (talk) 04:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslav Communist Pirate Party

Can you find even one source for the Yugoslav Communist Pirate Party or Komunistička Piratska Partija Jugoslavije? Fram (talk) 16:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fake ref's-- the hallmark of a hoax.😛 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, made a talk page thread about this already. But, basically: their website does exist, so if it's a hoax, it's not just a hoax on our end. But since they appear to have just started existing (if this isn't a rather elaborate hoax), you might skip the prod and try G11 tbh. -- asilvering (talk) 16:27, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pauletta Brupbakher

A tag has been placed on Pauletta Brupbakher requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

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. Fram (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Pauletta Brupbakher" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pauletta Brupbakher has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 7 § Pauletta Brupbakher until a consensus is reached. Fram (talk) 16:35, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question from Kunchok Namgail Ladakh (15:13, 8 November 2024)

I would like to ask a question regarding benefits here in Wikipedia while editing and doing changes in texts. --Kunchok Namgail Ladakh (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to wikipedia, @Kunchok Namgail Ladakh! Ask away. -- asilvering (talk) 15:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:MalakFayedEUI

Wanted to see what you think. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:22, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would absolutely delete this one. My reasoning here is that ChatGPT doesn't have feelings and we wouldn't want it writing Wikipedia articles if it did anyway. -- asilvering (talk) 00:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm passionate about deleting promotional autobiographies. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I do have a concern about the fact that it's been recreated multiple times as a speedy-able userpage. If this were a draft or article, I'd absolutely nominate it for a salting, but it's a userpage. Courtesy ping to Deepfriedokra I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:27, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't think salting is a great idea most of the time, since that makes it harder for admins and patrollers to notice if something has been repeatedly recreated - that is, someone who wants to recreate an article can just slightly alter the title and go ahead, without it being obvious to anyone who didn't see the first one. Better to leave them as spam honeypots and block the spammers as they arise. -- asilvering (talk) 00:30, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed on salt. Only me and @Explicit:'ve deleted it. Many new users do not understand. There is always User:Deepfriedokra#rDFO's rule of thumb -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:32, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deepfriedokra and @Asilvering: I suppose you guys have a point. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 00:49, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Wing close

Would you please summarize the support and oppose arguments and counter-arguments you identified at Talk:Wild Wing#Requested move 26 September 2024 and explain how you weighed them to find consensus to move? Thank you. —В²C ☎ 05:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty simple: the oppose side says that the threshold of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is met; the support side says it is not. As for weighing them: the support side has eight editors in favour; the oppose side has three. The oppose arguments were not found to be persuasive by the support side. The support side has arguments that counter the oppose side; the oppose arguments depend on ignoring those arguments and on insisting that our guidelines are more firm about this than they really are. It wasn't a close call. -- asilvering (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Question about you close

Can you name a policy or guideline based keep argument that was made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of World War II weapons of Turkey? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, sure can't. -- asilvering (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

🤔 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then how did we end up with a no consenus close? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. But I don't think that will get anywhere (though you may find it personally affirming). Sometimes you've just got to sigh, roll your eyes, and try again in a few weeks. -- asilvering (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Smith, John (March 15, 2020). "Profile: Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[deadline2021-2] Fleming, Mike Jr. (January 6, 2021). "Layne Eskridge Inks Producing Deal With Endeavor Content Via Her POV Banner". Deadline Hollywood. |url=https://deadline.com/2021/01/layne-eskridge-endeavor-content-pov-banner-deal-1234666791/ |access-date=October 27, 2024}}

[variety2021-3] Otterson, Joe (June 10, 2021). "Endeavor Content Partners With Jeff Friday Media to Develop TV Series From Diverse Creators". Variety. |url=https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/endeavor-content-jeff-friday-media-1234992834/ |access-date=October 27, 2024

[4] Andreeva, Nellie (March 15, 2020). "Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge Launches Production Company". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[5] "74th Emmy Awards Complete Nominations List" (PDF). Television Academy. July 12, 2022. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[6] "Emmy Awards: Complete Winners List". The Hollywood Reporter. September 22, 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[7] "When They See Us". Peabody Awards. 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[8] Stuever, Hank (May 3, 2019). "It's hard to stop watching 'Dead to Me'". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[9] "Top Boy wins Best Drama at BAFTA TV Awards". BBC News. May 12, 2024. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[10] Petski, Denise (January 27, 2023). "Disney's Onyx Collective Orders 'The Plot' Limited Series With Mahershala Ali". Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[11] Kroll, Justin (January 19, 2024). "'Lady in the Lake' Trailer: Natalie Portman, Moses Ingram Lead Apple Series". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[12] Otterson, Joe (March 10, 2022). "Apple Orders Lincoln Assassination Series 'Manhunt'". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

Archives (Index)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11