Jump to content

User talk:BusterD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:BusterD public)
With thanks to User:RexxS: Wikipedia:Colons and asterisks. Please read and edit accordingly.
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
Worm That Turned 2 157 1 1 99 09:47, 18 November 2024 6 days, 6 hoursno report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report


AfC submissions
Random submission
~6 weeks
1,027 pending submissions
Purge to update
Archive Archives

22 Jul 05 – 26 Sep 06
09 Oct 06 – 05 Dec 06
14 Dec 06 – 07 Nov 07
01 Dec 07 – 12 Feb 08
15 Feb 08 – 08 May 08
19 May 08 – 13 Nov 08
26 Nov 08 – 07 Sep 09
08 Sep 09 – 29 Oct 10
29 Oct 10 – 26 Sep 11
04 Oct 11 – 30 Sep 12
01 Oct 12 – 13 Oct 13
26 Oct 13 – 27 Aug 14
09 Sep 14 – 24 Dec 15
25 Dec 15 – 08 Apr 18
21 Apr 18 – 30 Jun 19
07 Jul 19 – 26 Apr 21
03 May 21 – 05 Apr 22
07 Apr 22 – 26 Dec 22
01 Jan 23 – 01 Jan 24
01 Jan 24 – current
.


Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Lex Fridman protection

[edit]

You are mistaken. The editors being shut out are the ones trying to fix what they consider BLP violations. My opinion is that they should be heard because there haven't been substantial discussions on the talk page, and so what they want removed, though they come with inline citations, don't come with solid prior consensus for inclusion. You can still shut them out if you so choose, but it is factually incorrect to say they are committing BLP violations. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the assessment. I'll give this another look. BusterD (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Saville talk page

[edit]

I recently removed several comments from Talk:Jimmy Saville and requested page protection for repeated requests that are already explained by the FAQ. I was rejected and my edits were reverted on the basis that my actions were not in line with WP:TPO. While some of the comments I originally removed were legitimate good-faith requests this restored section strikes me as not really meaningfully different from trolling or WP:FORUM. As for page protection I don’t really get why that was rejected in the first place— making repetitive edit requests that are explicitly and clearly stated to be non-actionable, even if in good faith, is disruptive because it wastes editor time and could be solved non-intrusively with simple page protection. I was wondering on whether you could give a second opinion on this situation. Dronebogus (talk) 08:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your question and I appreciate your bringing it to me. I'm wondering why you aren't having this discussion with the admin who disagreed with you, but I'm always willing to help you with feedback, Dronebogus. I know you're trying to be helpful. I suspect User:Jauerback would say something much like I will: 1) protecting talk pages is something I do rarely and when doing so, always with regret, 2) in general clerking talk page discussions is something most editors should avoid, 3) once reverted by any admin (or by any editor for that matter), it is usually a mistake to reinstall your edit without discussion especially when you are certain of the correctness of your position. For my part, if any user wants to say something which makes them look unserious on talk, I'm inclined to let other talk page readers make their own personal assessment. Sysops aren't here to enforce opinions, merely civility. The talk thread which troubled you is borderline, I agree. But if I'd been the admin responding to your request for page protection, it's likely I would have made the same moves as Jauerback. BusterD (talk) 12:17, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining it better than I could have. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 13:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because I do care about retaining a contributor like yourself, and since you brought this issue to me, I'm going to expound about my approach, purely as constructive feedback. Dronebogus, I think you are useful contributor. You comprehend what we're trying to do here and you care about how readers might see the pedia. You have good eyes and a healthy sense of humor. Thank you. We need more editors like you. Seriously.
Let me explain from my point of view how you hurt your own cause: WP:BOLD is all about pagespace. On articlespace, it's important to allow even the newest editors to edit boldly. In pagespace new editors bring us a couple of irreplaceable values: 1) a fresh approach, not hamstrung by many years of dealing with disruption, and 2) an entirely new human being who might become a longterm editor like yourself. We want a clash of their ideas on the page, because there are lots of smart people out there who might have something unique to say. I want to hear their ideas, even if twisted and totally wrong. Reversion is cheap. Editors like you and I will come behind and cleanup any misdeeds or misinterpretations in articles. But I want new folks to edit pagespace BOLDLY.
In talkspace I also expect BOLD. I'd rather allow the user to say how they feel, what they're thinking. I almost never edit another in talkspace because rarely do such edits rise to such a level where they must be changed by another. PLUS, I want others to follow the discussion (perhaps years after) as it occurred, so the reader may follow the outcome and the process. When we choose to hat, close, or blank talk discussions, we are changing what the future reader might see. (and we're steering discussion, which is usually a bad idea) Administrators might need to see the individual edits in order to make a determination or assessment. It is easier to follow an unedited discussion as opposed to reading each diff. An edited discussion throws up many red flags for me, and I trust the discussion less when somebody has tried to clean it up. IMHO, this is why striking through is often superior to blanking, because the striker gets to decide what the reader will see unstruck.
As a sysop on English Wikipedia, I'm responsible for moving disagreement forward; that's what I am expected to do. Smart people often disagree. In pagespace, I'm counting on contributors' agency and willingness to solve most problems. I don't have to be everywhere, somebody like you will solve the problem without my help. In talkspace, BOLD has a lesser application. We don't normally edit anybody's talk contributions; we want to read about each editor's full opinion (even when foolish or disqualifying).
There's a scene in The Matrix where Cypher talks to Neo about the display, "You get used to it, I don't even see the code, All I see is blond, brunette, redhead". This is what an admin does. There are too many decisions by others going on; you can't look at it all without being overwhelmed. I have to trust all editors are all working like I am (like you are) for a positive outcome. It becomes simple to identify most bad doers quickly, because you've got eyes where I'm not looking, I trust you, and you will say something. BusterD (talk) 15:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 213, January 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 18:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2024

[edit]

Request for undeletion

[edit]

Hello. I'm the new Wikimedian-In-Residence for m:AfroCreatives WikiProject. We're reworking the campaign and would love to restore this Portal:African cinema/Selected picture/Layout part of the African cinema which you deleted at 16:00 on 11 July 2023. Thank you. Ceslause (talk) 14:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

[edit]

for the correction at the User:Worm That Turnedtalk page regarding the EOTW award. You are most kind. It's good to know that I have developed from being incorrigible to being inimitable. Buster Seven Talk (UTC) 06:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing incompatible between them, brother Buster7. BusterD (talk) 13:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on a draft RfA elections proposal – I opposed when this came up in 2021, but I've come to feel differently about why RfA doesn't work and how it can be fixed. I wonder if you might have any ideas on how to make it better :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 02:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invite and I have done some reading. Will discuss. BusterD (talk) 12:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Has there been a prior discussion about victory conditions? What is a healthy number of admins? How many a year is an appropriate number to expect? Twenty a year? Eighty? Our pass/fail rate? I know we've had a bunch of prior talk. Answer this for me. What would a happy situation for the community look like? I'm talking specifically about appropriate staffing. What do we need? Somebody at the Foundation has surely been talking about this, min-maxing the numbers. The internet has changed and through our inaction we have inadvertently made adminship a big deal. Rainbow & jellybeans allowed, what would the wiki-world look like, admin-wise? BusterD (talk) 13:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have two end goals in mind, either of which would be a win. The first would be reversing the downward trend of the number of admins. The second goal, which also serves as a threshold goal for the first, would be to make an RfA envrionment that is more focused, civil, and encouraging. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Antietam

[edit]

Not sure why I didn't let you know earlier but - if you're seeing a ton of heavy editing on the Antietam article - Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Battle of Antietam/1 was opened and I'm leading an effort to try to save GA status. Hog Farm Talk 14:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a longtime FA. You just showed why it needs help; it has 2000's-era sourcing. Made me perform a search on necrometrics.com. 90 appearances. The author Matthew White is a published author but his website is merely an aggregator of other known reliable sources. This has no place in our sourcing. I'm going to take a weed whacker to all those links in pagespace (about half) right now. BusterD (talk) 14:38, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This may take longer than I hoped. While the source may be quickly removed from some pages, it's apparently an anchor for some mass-casualty pages, with twenty or more uses in the article. I'll find something else I can utilize. Got me doing page work, though, so that's good. BusterD (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

[edit]

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

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous


A tag has been placed on Category:American Revolutionary War portal indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 01:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey mate, it's me! Look, I think I'm gonna made an edit war but this user still making disruptive edit behavior. I already left the talk message about this issue. Hoping to help me to resolve this issue. Thanks!! Cornerstone2.0 (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 214, February 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 19:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paula Vennels Talkpage

[edit]

Thank you for your reversion. I do think that IP, and the other(s?) they are using is going to need a block. When they were just ranting about the supposed illegitimacy of the king’s marriage, they were merely a nuisance, but they are now ramping up their disruptive activity. Thanks and regards. KJP1 (talk) 13:28, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate your stopping by. Doing this reading right now. I didn't understand the sudden escalation. There's unnatural chatter around this page. BusterD (talk) 13:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If one was in a sympathetic frame of mind, I’d say they were unwell. But they are also becoming rather disruptive. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 13:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 February 2024

[edit]

Request to Restore Previous Version of Operation Valuable Page

[edit]

Dear Buster D,

I hope this message finds you well. I'm writing to request your assistance regarding theOperation Valuable page.

Recently, there have been some edits made to the page by a user who is suspected sockpuppet. These edits have significantly altered the content and may not accurately reflect the original information or consensus of the community.

Before any further action is taken, I kindly request that the previous version of the page, before the sockpuppet's edits, be restored. This will help maintain the integrity of the page until a resolution is reached regarding the disputed edits.

I understand the importance of maintaining accuracy and neutrality on Wikipedia, and I believe that restoring the previous version of the page will help uphold these principles.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please let me know if you need any further information or assistance.

Best regards, Azphalt (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Azphalt - you are extensively restoring edits from your previous sock NormalguyfromUK. You were blocked for these last year - including your efforts to move the page to a completely OR title in line with the first line you're trying to restore now. You're removing extensive additions of academic sources. You're adding completely speculative captions and badly sourced POV info in the infoboxes 2.48.50.195 (talk) 15:14, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

[edit]

Hi, BusterD,

I am not as busy closing AFDs as I used to be (I got a little burned out) but I use to see you there, contributing a valuable and thoughtful opinion and I haven't seen you much lately in AFDland. I hope you are well and busy, doing something interesting and engaging. I just thought I'd say "Hi!". Take care, Liz Read! Talk! 03:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know that I'm logging this protection of yours as a contentious-topic action. Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Anti-Flame Barnstar
I appreciate your efforts to handle edit conflicts gracefully. Imperial[AFCND] 10:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is an unexpected honor. I hope are all just keeping the peace because we agree this is a better way of living. Thank you, truly. BusterD (talk) 14:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 2 March 2024

[edit]

The Bugle: Issue 215, March 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am serious, don't let Soeterman remove the cast of Disney Magic Kingdoms game.

[edit]

Look up the "Voice Talent" in https://www.mobygames.com/game/77907/disney-magic-kingdoms/credits/android/ (Disney Magic Kingdoms), and I'm sure Soeterman will understands that, ok?

The cast:

2600:1700:4210:2450:E729:DF35:2BF8:AC89 (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want it to stay in, you'll need a better source. Moby games, like Wikipedia is user generated content and cannot be considered independent or reliable. You're getting entirely the wrong message here: User:Soetermans doesn't care one way or the other if the cast list is inserted, so long as the list is supported and cited to WP:Reliable sources. BusterD (talk) 15:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not entirely, generally a cast list is not appropriate for a video game article. See WP:VGSCOPE point No. 11: Cast lists: Generally speaking, a list of the actors providing voices, likenesses or motion capture acting performances for video game characters is not appropriate. If mention of an actor has received substantial coverage in independent reliable sources, typically the actor will be mentioned in the prose of the development section. So we shouldn't have a cast list at all. And if is significant coverage by reliable sources on the actors' voiceover work, reused apparently I might add, it should be incorporated into a development section. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 18:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The edit protection was just lifted and they're back up to doing the same thing. I've requested a longer edit protection this time. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I promise I won't do the same edit again, Soetermans. 2600:1700:4210:2450:DAAF:B482:3CC6:E712 (talk) 15:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, Soetermans. Why did you not care one way or the other if the cast list is inserted, so long as the list is supported and cited to WP:Reliable sources? 2600:1700:4210:2450:1A64:848F:1F1F:CA1B (talk) 15:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't follow. I clearly stated it is not appropriate. You can see the manual of style bit I copy-pasted. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 15:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Soetermans has now made clear their position. WP:VGSCOPE states such lists are inappropriate, EVEN IF reliably sourced. BusterD (talk) 01:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

[edit]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Guidance Barnstar
My first GA nomination passed today. The first person I thought about was you. Thank you once again for the kind way in which you have supported me as an editor.—Alalch E. 14:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm proud of you, dude. Thank you! BusterD (talk) 15:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024

[edit]

Hello BusterD,

New Page Review queue January to March 2024

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 216, April 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol May 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each review will earn 1 point.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

[edit]
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppet Elephantmario

[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ElephantMario seems a lot like the banned alt user https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/BalloonMario who is an alt of the puppet master https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rayanmou07. Could you please take a look? Thanks. 2604:2DC0:101:200:0:0:0:1B1D (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A brownie for you!

[edit]
Thanks for the advice on my talkpage about making some edits of my own. I've taken it to heart, and am now starting to look down some rabbit holes I've fallen down to go and make some contributions. I like Astatine (Talk to me) 15:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome, and thanks for the treat. It's very easy to go down any path on Wikipedia, and I can see you're dipping your toes in. I encourage you to read the pedia. Just read. Find some things which delight you. Policing others is one way to contribute, but I urge you to edit articles boldly, knowing somebody will come behind, (perhaps years later) to further improve the work. The article count on Wikipedia will continue to rise for many years. Take part. Help us. Don't be shy. Be bold. BusterD (talk) 15:58, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 217, May 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2024

[edit]

Draft article at AFC for John Greaton

[edit]

Hi! I'm a new editor who decided to write an article about a Revolutionary War brigadier general named John Greaton. I'd love to have some collaborators on the article. I found a lot of sources, but freely admit that the article needs more sources relating to the specific campaigns and battles that Greaton fought in. MurmuringRock(talk) 15:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, some might not approve of you approaching a prospective reviewer directly. Just FYI. For my part, I admire the WP:BOLD action. Plus you gave me an easy task. I've approved your draft and assessed its current quality as start class. Welcome! Pretty good for a newcomer and starting from scratch. Welcome again! You are under no obligation to join, but I'd like to introduce you to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. This is a well-established group of like-minded lay historians. Looking at the assessment link in the the nested Military history WikiProject template, you might see how this one wikiproject assesses articles for quality, giving examples of pages at various stages of improvement. Other wikiprojects have slightly different assessment strategies. WikiProject Biography may be another useful group for John Greaton. In my opinion, a B-class article roughly corresponds to well-written high school term paper. Good Articles, A-class, and Featured Article pages (in order to quality from good to best) have experienced a vetting from other editors. It's helpful to have other sets of eyes. What sorts of subjects do you enjoy reading about? BusterD (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the helpful warning and the breakdown between the different article classes! I enjoy reading about history, art, animation, and food. MurmuringRock(talk) 23:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 8 June 2024

[edit]

The Bugle: Issue 218, June 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:42, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, undelete Natalia Esquivel

[edit]

Good morning, BusterD. Sorry for popping up. Days ago I created the article Natalia Esquivel. All of a sudden, one day I saw the article had been deleted. Too late, I didn't even have the chance to just see the "request for deletion" template. By the way, that same day there was at least another article created by me whose deletion was requested, but hopefully it was still extant, then I had the opportunity to correct references and wording, afterwards the template "request for deletion" was removed. So, if you don't mind, please, undelete Natalia Esquivel, and I will do my best to rewrite it (by the way, if you take a look here, she does have meaningful references in the field of music). Best regards and thanks for your time. Fadesga (talk) 10:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the page but moved to draftspace. I'd like you to develop the page further and then submit it to me or another reviewer for approval. I can't argue the artist exists. The speedy deletion tag was applied by another editor who felt the page was overly promotional. Based on a cursory assessment I agreed. I am restoring on the good faith you will not try to take undue advantage of my attention. BusterD (talk) 13:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should have researched entire situation further before I responded here. I did not notice User:Fadesga is an editor of very, very, very long experience. I am sorry if my responses to that person to this point have seemed adversarial or unnecessarily defensive of the pedia. I am happy to cooperate with Fadesga in good faith, like any editor in good standing. I still see a coi issue with the subject in the thread below. For this reason I'm choosing not to undelete that page at this time. BusterD (talk) 14:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your email. I very much enjoyed hearing from you. I better understand what I see now. Neither of the articles were egregiously promotional, which is one of the reasons we're talking. I will send you a reply email describing the issue which I red flagged. You did make a serious error, but I can see now it's a good faith one that can be corrected in another draft. BusterD (talk) 15:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, undelete Gabriela Franco

[edit]

Good morning, BusterD. Sorry for coming up once again. Days ago I created another article, Gabriela Franco. Some days after that, the article had been deleted. Too late, I didn't even have the chance to just see the "request for deletion" template. So, if you don't mind, please, undelete Gabriela Franco, and I will do my best to rewrite it (further, this artist has meaningful references in the field of music). Thanks again! Best regards, Fadesga (talk) 10:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to decline this request UNTIL you get the other page past review. There is an undeclared WP:COI issue. I don't know whether you've been paid but you have many red flags of a connected editor. I'm be happy to explain this privately to any interested admin but have no intention of educating others further on how to avoid detection next time. BusterD (talk) 14:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done and draftified. Get a review before republishing please. BusterD (talk) 15:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

[edit]

FYI I will be in Indy this October

[edit]

and a slightly larger event in early August. Looking forward to seeing many fellow wikipedians at WikiConference North America 2024! Anybody else I know going? BusterD (talk) 15:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Precious anniversary

[edit]
Precious
Three years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:07, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very sweet to think of me. On July 22, my account turns 19! 12:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC) BusterD (talk) 12:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Impressive! A few days later, mine will be 15 ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:15, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of our younglings are making an impression, aren't they? BusterD (talk) 13:43, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

[edit]
Thanks, User:The Herald! Nice of you to think about me. A celebration of dubious significance, but another successful turn round the old fiery thing in the daytime sky. BusterD (talk) 23:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Thank you for encouraging new editors to edit, even if their content is promotional. Also thanks for your reply on my talk page. Myrealnamm (💬pros · ✏️cons) 21:35, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The person was hired to do a job. They may be quite a good writer. Writing encyclopedically is challenging; easy to imitate but hard to capture. Both noms for speedy were within range. Probably should have deleted it. But here we have new editor, and if they are willing to follow our policies and guidelines, I'm not going to bite them just because they are trying to do the job. BusterD (talk) 23:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presidency Navigation Templates vs. Biography Navigation Templates discussion

[edit]

Hello, BusterD! Since you are listed as an active member of the United States Presidents WikiProject, would you mind leaving a comment at a project talk page discussion about a series of templates that I created for the presidencies of Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush? Another editor and myself disagree about whether there should be a separate navigation template for each Presidency apart from the biographical navigation template. Thanks! -- CommonKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

😂

[edit]

to hell with your bot Chris denny 4840 (talk) 11:28, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to be nice... BusterD (talk) 11:31, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:07, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explaining rationale of RFC close

[edit]

Hi, I see that you closed the RFC here: [1], but besides making the claim that there is strong consensus, you haven't included any rationale as to how you determined that this consensus exists, and that it is strong. You mentioned WP:UNCENSORED, but haven't said why it is a stronger than the counter-arguments that were given to address this concern. Could you please elaborate more on this? spintheer (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions on Wikipedia are determined by consensus usually applied by an editor who has no direct interest in the subject under discussion. In the RFC, about a half dozen contributors referred to WP:UNCENSORED. An opposing argument was MOS:VULGAR, but your italicized quote of the section omits a key section (quotes should always be used verbatim) which a number of Option 1 proponents mentioned. One editor (Birdelephant) changed their opinion away from Option 2 specifically because of your interaction with them over verbatim language. While consensus is not generally derived from majority, when twelve editors who make reasonable arguments oppose five editors with reasonable arguments, the twelve will usually prevail. In this case, the RFC was started on June 5 by somebody whom advocated option 3. By June 13, eleven editors had contributed. By that date I see four for Option 3, five for Option 1, and two for Option 2. After June 13, six editors came along, read the previous discussion and chose Option 1. None advocated another option. When the trend of the discussion is so obviously pointing towards a single outcome, a closer is wise to choose that outcome. IMHO, if we had let the discussion run longer, it would have been closed the same. BusterD (talk) 11:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Thank you for responding. spintheer (talk) 07:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recently closed Donald Trump RfC

[edit]

Hello. You recently closed a RfC on the Donald Trump talk page, citing MOS:CONTENTIOUS i.e. the avoidance of contentious labels.

However, this rule already applied to the article, as it does to others. The previous RfC that was questioned here applied additional editorial protection to the article that goes beyond MOS:CONTENTIOUS.

You have not explained why you thought the there is a consenus for editorial protection beyond that policy, or why such protection is appropriate. Please do so. Cheers. Cortador (talk) 02:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As closer, I'm required to read the discussion and determine what the community had decided to do about the question. Your ostensible objective was to see a previous (2017) consensus overturned (to see whether there is consensus to cancel it). You'd have needed strong support for that position, and you didn't get it. There was a fair amount of discussion, but no strong demonstrated agreement for your position. Mostly the folks in the discussion thought using Wikipedia's voice to call anyone a liar was outside of the purpose of an online encyclopedia (MOS:CONTENTIOUS). BusterD (talk) 11:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RfC are to be decided on arguments, not number of votes. MOS:CONTENTIOUS already applies to the article - the RfC was about protection beyond MOS:CONTENTIOUS.
I didn't see anyone bring forward a sound argument for this kind of protection, nor did you mention it in your closing statement. Cortador (talk) 14:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Sabrina Brier

[edit]

I saw that you were the closer for the speedy deletion of Sabrina Brier, which I created and which was deleted based on WP:A7. The article had multiple reliable secondary sources establishing Brier's notability and even barring this, WP:A7 appears to be reserved for there being no claim of notability regardless of sourcing, so it seemed to me like it was being misattributed. I responded on the talk page to contest the speedy deletion tag but there was seemingly never any response to that and the page got deleted anyway.

Even if one were to argue for the page's deletion, further discussion would definitely be necessary here. I was wondering if you would be willing to review the page and, if you find it to be okay, to restore it. Thanks! benǝʇᴉɯ 23:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the page at your request. While I did read the page prior to my deletion, in the moment I was responding to the A7 tag of an experienced admin I respect highly in the deletion process (User:Liz ). If I read the page in a cursory way before hitting the button, I apologize. If Liz wants to pursue deletion process, she is welcome to nominate in the normal way. I remain neutral as to whether the page should be included on Wikipedia. Thanks for your courtesy and understanding.
FYI for page stalkers. I rarely edit from my phone but have never used admin actions before from my mobile. If anything was processed incorrectly, please fix it for me. Thanks. BusterD (talk) 14:45, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

[edit]

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

[edit]

Neo-Confederate blanking

[edit]

Hello! I pushed the "thank button", but also wanted to thank you more directly for making this edit; it was exactly one month ago, but I noticed it only today. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 19:43, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While you and I frequently disagree, I can read in your edits you share with me agreement on many issues as well. Strong and documented disagreement can provide our encyclopedia a basis for the fullest transparency. Your generous thanks are welcome and noted. BusterD (talk) 11:06, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:Sundostund, I'm going to take a liberty and thank you twice as well. Rereading my thank you, it seems so formal. To expand: I find wikipedians' engagement in full-blown arguments sometimes leads to my discovering an inner truth abut myself and humankind. This makes me happy. There are fewer and fewer issues on this planet that require the use of weapons, once people can get access to information and connection. Anyone on the planet can read our conversation on this talk page. And respond. This gives me confidence. Wikipedians' community of good faith but tested trust teaches me that I don't have to be right all the time. Frequently on Wikipedia I'm learning a minor fact (or position) which blows my mind. Often it's because somebody disagreed with me. This happens often enough to give me willingness to listen. None of us can know everything, but I trust your skepticism and you trust mine. That may be enough. You and I now are forever linked by your gratitude. BusterD (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Buster, I can't thank you enough for your more than kind words. Beside fully agreeing with you, I can only add this – I have learned long time ago to accept my (periodical) mistakes and ignorance, and to accept the knowledge of others at the same time. That is the only way to improve myself, and to avoid repeating what I did wrong in the past. — Sundostund mppria (talk / contribs) 22:44, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration


The Bugle: Issue 220, August 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

[edit]

New pages patrol September 2024 Backlog drive

[edit]
New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election have opened. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]

The Bugle: Issue 221, September 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open!

[edit]

Voting for WikiProject Military history coordinators is now open! A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. Register your vote here by 23:59 UTC on 29 September! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Football League 2025

[edit]

It was immediately recreated after you deleted it. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:47, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It just happened again! I've now also tagged the page for salting. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the eyes. Salted. BusterD (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Smiley No problem! I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 19:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]

Re: Advice

[edit]

Hi,

I hope that this message finds you well. I have seen your message on the page concerned. I agree with your advice to recuse myself from editing activities pro tempore. I would pay less attention to the articles for which I have sacrificed a tremendous amount of time and effort rewriting. I may have contributed everything I willed due to my limited capacity. I wish that my initiative could be accepted as a substitute for sanctions to enable a constructive return to relevant topic areas.

Cheers Steven1991 (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response in my talk. I can't know how you feel, but I wrote WP:PACE after I went through an incident of my own many years ago. I found my own voice by not writing for a while. BusterD (talk) 15:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

I don't know what happened, it was indeed unintentional, so thank you for this. Fram (talk) 18:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreeing with smart people is always better than the various alternatives. Let's keep that going. I believe you and I both want the best for Wikipedia. I didn't have your experiences with Hawkeye7 and I can't know your feelings. But you and I are only opponents here on the merits, and never as wikipedians. BusterD (talk) 18:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

[edit]

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) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Deletion review for November 31

[edit]

Web-julio has asked for a deletion review of November 31. Because you speedily deleted the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. (April 31 and September 31, too.) —Cryptic 21:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buster, as the deleting admin you get the blame even though I think that more of the responsibility should be on the CSD tagger (me in this case). I will be perusing through our redirect review checklist again after this. I'm still looking askance at these redirects and am definitely taking Apr 31 to RfD. Thanks for your admining and happy editing! -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Everybody's trying to do something useful. Thanks for putting the date(s) up for discussion. BusterD (talk) 10:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Silly MfD

[edit]

The person who started the silly MfD has put on my a notice that he withdrew the MfD (as if I didn't already know), and an admonition for both you and I to AGF (!). I just thought you would be interested, I certainly don't want to pursue this any further, just letting you know. Good day and thanks again. rogerd (talk) 22:24, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now that language as been removed a few minutes later. --rogerd (talk) 22:27, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They misjudged and reconsidered. This looks like an adult to me. We have handled worse. BusterD (talk) 22:50, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are absolutely right we have handled worse. I was never really concerned. Even if the powers that be deleted my silly user box, it wouldn't have been worth losing any sleep. rogerd (talk) 23:43, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the last year or so, ragpicking retired users' talk and subpages has been somewhat fashionable. Sometimes they don't notice the editor is still active. BusterD (talk) 00:01, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection for User:DGG (NYPL)

[edit]

I just noticed the protection you placed on User:DGG (NYPL) was temporary and has expired. Was that intentional? Steel1943 (talk) 22:04, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks again. Lot of distractions in RL. BusterD (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand as I've had a few myself, so I hate to have to ask another question: Is the semi-protection you applied instead of full protection intentional? Steel1943 (talk) 04:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jeez. Thanks again. BusterD (talk) 10:18, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Hope all gets better. Steel1943 (talk) 13:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue 222, October 2024

[edit]
Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

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

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]

Thanks for the acknowledgement and input on my request at Project Military History

[edit]
The Original Barnstar
Acknowledging my inquiry regarding lede sentences for American Civil War generals. 9mm.trilla (talk) 05:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very nice thing to say. BusterD (talk) 10:37, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appleton Oaksmith's birthplace

[edit]

In Shipwrecked, p. 6, in the paragraph about AO's birth, it states, "On the streets of Portland, strangers would stop 'to look at' baby Appleton 'and exclaim at his beauty.'" I leave it to you to decide whether this constitutes an adequate source for his having been born in Maine, and whether the question is important enough to spend time editing. I would let it go. Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem "politician" is a poor single word to describe the man. Hope to find a better one. BusterD (talk) 13:02, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about “shipper, possible slave-trader, convicted criminal, blockade runner, and state legislator”? Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All at once, perhaps. If you don't mind I'm going to read further on this guy. Writers for parents. There's a real story here. Not a big one, perhaps, but a really deep one... BusterD (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t mind, and I won’t edit the article for now. This site states explicitly that AO was born in Maine: digital.lib.ecu.edu Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The OG Bloodline

[edit]

Can you please tag The OG Bloodline (professional wrestling) for deletion? It has one source even though the page is 10,000 bytes in length meaning the majority of its contents are unsourced. Lemonademan22 (talk) 00:43, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, the article has been made into a redirect. Lemonademan22 (talk) 00:58, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]