Jump to content

User talk:Insertcleverphrasehere/Archive 15

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 20

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 10

Hi, I see you're working on Split screen (video games) and redirected Split screen (computing) to Split screen, I just wanted to ask if you could take a look at Split screen when you're done as Pi314m added Split screen (computing) to the page which results in a circular redirect (as well as some content not really appropriate for readers, such as "most of the article formerly (mis)named"). Thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 23:23, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Growth team updates #11

15:02, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Insertcleverphrasehere

Hello, you insert wrote article Pharmanutra is written as an advertising. Why do you say that? The article is neutral and it has much references by newspapers--Kaspo (talk) 13:40, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Kaspo, Even in the first sentence it reads "generating considerable interest in the market, closing the first day of trading with a leap of +40%" [2] Its products most famous are Cetilar and Sucrosomial Iron [3] holding 50% of the market share for iron supplements in Italy." This reads as intentional puffery. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:34, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I inserted that sentence to evidence the notability if you think that is an ad we can delete the sentence.--Kaspo (talk) 18:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Kaspo, Puffery does not evidence notability, Notability is defined by the topic's coverage in reliable sources. See WP:42 for a succinct explanation. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 18:12, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Merry Christmas, Insertcleverphrasehere!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. And for all the help you've thrown my way over the years. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Draft

The title should be changed to "List of prescription drug prices". How many sources do you want in the draft in order to move it back. I think students would want to edit it in the future. The sooner it is moved to article space the sooner it can be expanded by more editors. QuackGuru (talk) 13:32, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

QuackGuru, First of all, this article seemed more of a veiled attempt as bashing 'Big Phrama' (itself not a neutral term; that was used throughout the article previously). That has largely been fixed, and more sources for individual drugs have been added. Now the issue is more of a structural one. It is still not a "list of drug prices" (a topic is likely too broad for one article anyway and prices change day to day), it is a list of obscenely expensive drugs. Currently the topic could include Ibuprofen, at $0.01 a dose, which obviously doesn't fit with what the intention is. We might be able to have a list on such a topic, though we will need some consideration what the title would be and what the cutoff point would be. The problem is, I'm not sure that we can define what 'too expensive' is, I had a look for sources but can't really find any consensus on the topic.
Basically the idea behind this list is poorly formed and needs defining before releasing it into the wild, or else it will only ever be a partial and incomplete hodgepodge of random medicines. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, Also, drug prices are wildly different in different regions and countries of the world, how are we going to address that issue? — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
The issue is notability. If it is notable it belongs in article space. Editors are allowed to create stubs. You can search for different prices in different countries. I am not obligated to make the article perfect. The best way for it to improve is move it to article space for others to expand it. QuackGuru (talk) 19:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, the notability rules for lists are... strange. Making ill-concieved lists with an unclear and overly broad scope does not guarantee you automatic notability. See WP:LISTN. This isn’t a standalone list, it is a broad category, and there is no present consensus on how to assess the notability or suitability of such lists. As I said, in its current form it seems too broad a scope and unclear as to what exactly it is trying to be a list of: (Canadian or USA prices? Do we just list all the prices, they change all the time and might be different even at different places in the same country.) listing prices is hard, and the only way this list will work is if it is clearly defined what the parameters are supposed to be. As is, it is unworkable. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 09:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
It is supposed to be a list of fluctuating prescription drug prices worldwide. It is a stub but that does not mean it should be held hostage in draftspace. A few editors can't make it into a high quality article. It needs to be back to main space and allow many editors to work on it. It should not be hidden away. QuackGuru (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, Well, a "list of fluctuating prescription drug prices worldwide" is completely unmanageable. It would be constantly out of date at best, and at worst would be a fertile ground for edit warring. Even the title doesn't make sense. Prescription drugs where? In some countries certain drugs are prescription only, in other countries the same drug is over the counter. How about Marijuana? It is certainly a prescription drug in some places, but in others is an illicit substance; should we list the price to buy it over the counter in Amsterdam or the price on the black market in New Zealand? Please try to understand what I'm trying to say.
We have a List of drugs; it is a list of lists of other types of drugs, and is extremely complex (as would be expected as there are many thousands of drugs worldwide). Can you imagine trying to take all of these drugs, figure out which are prescription drugs, and somehow agree on a consensus for what the prices for all of them will be? It isn't possible.
I won't move it back to mainspace. You are free to submit it to articles for creation, or to contest my move to draft space by reverting it and moving it back to your preferred title in main space (if so I'll be taking it to articles for deletion though). — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
Where is the article about "List of prescription drug prices" in mainspace? If there is no such article in mainspace then there should be one. QuackGuru (talk) 17:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, As I've said repeatedly, such an article would be entirely unworkable. I can't stop you from moving the draft at Draft:List of drug prices to mainspace under that title, but I'll tell you now that I'll be taking it to Articles for Deletion for a discussion if so. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:23, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
It is workable if more editors were given a chance to expand it. An article does not need to have prices updated every month or every year. QuackGuru (talk) 17:26, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, Please answer me this for this list: what is a prescription drug? You've started listing prices from different times, what about different places? Drug prices vary wildly by country in some cases being a few dollars where in other countries they cost hundreds. What about government subsidies in countries like New Zealand (where I live), where most drugs that are prescribed are massively discounted but the governemnt foots most of the bill? What do we do in these cases? All of these need answers so that the scope of the list can be defined before a bunch of people start editing the list with different opinions on what should be listed, or else it will just become a hodgepodge of random info. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I included a note for the scope. See "For each prescription drug include the name of the drug, brand name, and price. Also include prices from various countries when available." When new sources are presented for other countries just summarise what they say. There are thousands of drugs that can be added to the list. One editor can't add all of them by themselves. QuackGuru (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, Tens of thousands. And even a multitude of editors won't be able to keep up. Also there is still no definition of a 'prescription drug', which is different in every jurisdiction. In any case, As I've said I will not be moving it to mainspace, but you are free to do so yourself. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 17:54, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
There is no reason to keep up with current pricing. No article needs prices updated every month or year. There is no need for a definition of a 'prescription drug'. Just summarise what each source said is the usual practice. A different definition for what is a 'prescription drug' seems to be irrelevant. A long list of drug prices is workable if more editors participated in expanding it. Hiding it will not help improving it. QuackGuru (talk) 22:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
QuackGuru, The ball is in your court. I'm done discussing this. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 03:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

December events with WIR

December 2019, Volume 5, Issue 12, Numbers 107, 108, 144, 145, 146, 147


Check out what's happening in December at Women in Red...

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:43, 25 November 2019 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Scripts++ Newsletter – Issue 11

The Signpost: 29 November 2019

Note about autopatrolled redirects RfC

Hi. Since you participated in the preliminary discussions, I thought I should let you know that I've opened an RfC at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers/Redirect autopatrol#RfC on autopatrolling redirects. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 01:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

added EvergreenFirToBeFree
removed AkhilleusAthaenaraJohn VandenbergMelchoirMichaelQSchmidtNeilNYoungamerican😂

CheckUser changes

readded Beeblebrox
removed Deskana

Interface administrator changes

readded Evad37

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


It’s that time of year!

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic)

Atsme Talk 📧 18:22, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Time To Spread A Little
Happy Holiday Cheer!!
I decorated a special kind of Christmas tree
in the spirit of the season.

What's especially nice about
this digitized version:
*it doesn't need water
*won't catch fire
*and batteries aren't required.
Have a very Merry Christmas - Happy Hanukkah‼️

and a prosperous New Year!!

🍸🎁 🎉

BFR

That was a gutsy closure and merge. I'm sorry I misjudged your perception of consensus. Peace, Rowan Forest (talk) 19:41, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Rowan Forest, Thanks for the kind words. I don't often invoke WP:IAR, but it had become clear that we were only delaying because of bureaucratic reasons and that everyone was in agreement what the consensus was. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 02:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, Insertcleverphrasehere

Thank you for creating Sanneke Vermeulen.

User:Insertcleverphrasehere, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Any verifiable info on her personal life that can be added? I.e. where she is from/lives, etc.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Insertcleverphrasehere}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 21:50, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Hmm. This is troubling to see... Barkeep49 (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
IFried (WMF) I know you just closed off the tasks but I don't see a reason ICPH got this message - it should have gone to User:Simeon. Could I ping your team when I file the phab ticket? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49, In the 'send a message', if you already reviewed the article it gives you the option to send it to the reviewer. It shouldn't give this option to you if you were the one that reviewed it. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 22:32, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49, Also, It is obviously using the wrong template. even if you wanted to send it to the reviewer the template as used is inappropriate. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 22:33, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Well that's the thing. I believe it's the same template regardless of whether it ends up to the reviewer or the creator. So we need to modify the template to fit both situations. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49, Also, 'reviewer' should not be the default of the drop down. It should default to the author. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 23:46, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
I hadn't noticed that they added that drop down. I actually think that's great. I also disagree - for reviewed articles I think the default should be the reviewer. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Barkeep49, Ok. fair enough, but it shouldn't list yourname if you were the reviewer... this is going to be happening a lot. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 21:07, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Cheers

Merry Christmas, Insertcleverphrasehere!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 11:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

A graph showing the number of articles in the page curation feed from 12/21/18 - 12/20/19

Reviewer of the Year

This year's Reviewer of the Year is Rosguill. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.

Special commendation again goes to Onel5969 who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to Boleyn and JTtheOG who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

Top 10 Reviewers over the last 365 days
Rank Username Num reviews Log
1 Rosguill (talk) 47,395 Patrol Page Curation
2 Onel5969 (talk) 41,883 Patrol Page Curation
3 JTtheOG (talk) 11,493 Patrol Page Curation
4 Arthistorian1977 (talk) 5,562 Patrol Page Curation
5 DannyS712 (talk) 4,866 Patrol Page Curation
6 CAPTAIN MEDUSA (talk) 3,995 Patrol Page Curation
7 DragonflySixtyseven (talk) 3,812 Patrol Page Curation
8 Boleyn (talk) 3,655 Patrol Page Curation
9 Ymblanter (talk) 3,553 Patrol Page Curation
10 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 3,522 Patrol Page Curation

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

Redirect autopatrol

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by DannyS712 bot III.

Source Guide Discussion

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.

This month's refresher course

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag.

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Hi ICPH! All the warmest wishes for this seasonal occasion, whichever you celebrate - or don't, while I swelter at 27℃ (80.6℉), and peace and prosperity for 2020. Seriously hoping that you'll join me for a cool beer in Bangkok in August when it will be even hotter!
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:47, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck

Deletion The New York Times Non-Fiction Best Sellers of 2020

Hi, why did you delete this article? There's already a number 1 for the first week of 2020, have you checked the link? --Marcetw (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

If you don't know how the NYT list works, please let me know, not just redirect an article. Ok? --Marcetw (talk) 22:10, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Marcetw, Apologies. I did a search for the list and missed it. I had not checked the link as I did not realise it was the link for the first week of next year. It might be good to put an archive link of that page on the first entry to make it more clear. I was reviewing a few other articles at the same time for jumping the gun off the whole list of 2020 thing. Sorry to catch you in the crossfire. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 23:21, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 December 2019

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding simplifying the graphs. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Tercer (talk) 11:05, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Insertcleverphrasehere!

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!
Insertcleverphrasehere,
Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.


   – 2020 is a leap yearnews article.
   – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2020}} to user talk pages.

Utopes (talk) 04:53, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


A barnstar for you!

The Rescue Barnstar
Thank you for helping me get my articles to the mainspace! Noahfgodard (talk) 02:12, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

RE:Ager Vaticanus

Hallo Insertcleverphrasehere, and thanks for your post! Already done... :-) Alex2006 (talk) 10:21, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Alessandro57, Nice! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 10:42, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

falcon 9

i expressed much criticism over the discussion, but tanks to ask me on final approval.

i hardly make changes in these pages because they are so big that can make mistakes and someone else have to come to correct me, so double work--Dwalin (talk) 12:58, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Years in the Philippines

There is a bug in the {{Years in the Philippines}}; I suspect you didn't intend to WP:PROD 2021, but 2021 in the Philippines, which apparently never existed. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:07, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Arthur Rubin, yes... that is correct. Apologies. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 09:15, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Insertcleverphrasehere, I am relatively new to Wikipedia and I was researching all the areas of Wikipedia and I went through WP:NPR and I'm interested in it, I've been adding to short descriptions to new articles but it seems NPR is more than adding short descriptions, so can you give me some tips on it?Antila333 (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Antila333, New Page Review is for somewhat more advanced Wikipedia editors, who already know many of the policies and guidelines related to what should be on wikipedia and what should not. Ultimately, it is triage; rather than an article improvement process it strives merely to identify what new articles should not be on Wikipedia and deal with them accordingly. AfC may be somewhere you can help, though you still need a good working knowledge of the notability guidelines to know where expansion is productive and where the topic simply isn't notable. See the box at right for more info on notability in general and also a more specific dive into notability of various categories of topics. Participating in discussions at WP:AFD is also a good place to learn notability guidelines.
If you just want to expand articles, perhaps the WP:Article Rescue Squadron, could be a place to start.
Cheers and good luck. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 18:48, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020

February with Women in Red

February 2020, Volume 6, Issue 2, Numbers 150, 151, 152, 154, 155


Happy Valentine's Day from all of us at Women in Red.

Online events:


Editor feedback:


Social media: Facebook / Instagram / Pinterest / Twitter

Stay in touch: Join WikiProject Women in Red / Opt-out of notifications

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC) via MassMessaging

I don't need that message on my talk page. I created this article because he meets WP:NMOTORSPORT for competing in one of the 3 touring series of NASCAR (Truck Series). NASCARfan0548  04:32, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

NASCARfan0548, a one line stub with a single source to a statistics page is not acceptable. It may meet an SNG, but that's not an excuse for creating a stub that fails the second pillar of Wikipedia. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 04:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Page patrol

Please stop adding the tags to those articles and my talkpage. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

This is now becoming disruptive. If you continue, you could be blocked from editing. Please reply here to state you understand this. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:56, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Lugnuts, Please see the NPP process, particularly the NPP flowchart. If you follow it through theser is a specific action pointed out that recommends adding the 'more refs' tag. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 18:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Lugnuts, As an autopatrolled user, you shouldn't be creating single source stubs. If I wasn't patrolling 'reviewed' articles, nobody would have even noticed. Yes, they meet an SNG, but they still require multiple sources for verifiability. I'll stop messaging your talk page, but I'm going to keep tagging the articles. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 18:57, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Where does it say that I shouldn't? I've been doing this for the best part of 15 years, with nearly 70,000 new pages, so this is news to me. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 18:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Lugnuts, All articles require multiple sources. Period. This is enshrined in the highest levels of WP policy (even the 5 pillars says that all articles should be sourced to "sources" (plural). I realise that they meet SNGs and am not going to require that the articles meet the GNG as created, but two independent sources are not hard to come by. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 19:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
"but two independent sources are not hard to come by" - then by all means find them and add them. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:02, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Lugnuts, not my job... and more importantly, your articles don't even use the NPP queue! You can't expect NPP to clean up your articles when they aren't even expected to see them! — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 19:06, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

"The Page Curation process is for identifying articles which do not meet the criteria for inclusion and to tag them for attention" - Which all of my articles do meet the criteria for inclusion. Please find something more productive to do with your time. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:01, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Lugnuts, I am following the process, please provide better sourcing to your articles to meet the bare minimum as required by Wikipedia policy. As an Autopatrolled user, this is part of the social contract. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 19:04, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
There's no such thing a "social contract"! WP:HOUND is also a policy, which this feels very much like to me. Maybe focus your time on new articles by new editors instead. And stop pining me, please. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:07, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm not checking your articles specifically, I was just checking through new articles in the side feed. You created like 10 of them with the same issues in the space of 5 minutes. My side feed script waits 10 min before articles show on it (to allow time for users to clean up initial submissions and A1/A3). That's all the tags came 10 min after submission. You'll notice in my contributions other edits to other articles immediately before and after yours. I'm literally just patrolling new articles, your's just had issues, that's not my fault and it isn't harassment to tag them. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 19:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Lugnuts, please stop removing appropriate maintenence tags. I'm trying to find sources, but where I can't, the tag is appropriate. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)(click me!) 19:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:30, 30 January 2020 (UTC)