User talk:K.e.coffman/Archive/2016/September

Archives

November 2015
December 2015
January–February 2016
March 2016
April 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016

Use of the term 'elite' for SS units

Please join me here. I'm interested in another opinion on the matter. --MaxRavenclaw (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pageant issues

I have now been called "childish", "needing to get a backbone" and related things because I reversed a reversal of my removal of content from my own talk page by an editor. I was going to try posting an administrative incident, but decided to first ask them to desist from personalized attacks. I also could not figure out how to do diffs. Also, since PBP who has decided to turn the beauty pageant's into yet another place where he engages in personalized attacks on my, calling my understanding of GNG "perverted", and since he is the number one believer in turning administrative notices on the one who made it, and has at least 3 times in the past tried to get me banned from editing Wikipedia, I am trying to avoid actions that would open the way for them to try to get me banned from editing. It is all the more odd because neither of these two editors have comments on the vast majority of my beauty pageant related nominations at all. If my understanding of GNG is "Perverted" as has been claimed, then why are they not there disproving it. Of course the fact that PBP's attempt to get the article on Carol F. McConkie deleted was totally rebuffed, I think he should start being a less confident that my understanding is "perverted" and his is right.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

By an editor who was not aware of the policy. I won't do it again - I think it's an idiotic policy in that it's stupid to be able to use it to hide from a reasoned discussion and pretend there isn't an issue, but if that's the way it is then fine. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 03:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't try to pawn this off on me, JPL. I didn't make you nominate those articles, and I am hardly the only one critical of your recent behavior. Also, I find it a bit off that you get McConkie kept by adding Deseret News and Salt Lake Tribune sources to it...then nominate a beauty pageant winner/political candidate for deletion despite she being sourced from those two publications. JPL, if you are really trying to avoid actions that would get you banned from editing, what you should be doing is clear: nominate far fewer beauty pageant articles for deletion per week, and devote more time to each AfD. p b p 20:14, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnpacklambert: Yes, the pageant area is heating up! I’m not sure how I came across the discussion — perhaps via the RfC (?) — but it’s been an interesting one. I agree with one observer on that thread that it’s very similar to youth sports—only a few go on to become notable in professional sports. Same things for beauty pageant winners: some go on to have film or TV careers, but that’s not often.

I was struck how similar the issues of notability are for pageant winners, adult entertainment actors (see Proposed Change to PORNBIO) and German Knight’s Cross winners of WWII (see discussion: Notability in KC Holder Articles). Many have issues of insufficient sources, WP:BIO1E situations and WP:PSEUDO biographies (or none at all, just the list of awards). In all three fields I’ve encountered arguments that the award qualifies under WP:ANYBIO #1 :-).

Since you are asking for input, I’d like to share my commentary. I would suggest letting the backlog at beauty pageants page work itself down to at least half of the current size before nominating more. It appears that editors have some frustration that there are too many nominations to be able respond properly. So it’s better to let things cool off. You could try a different field for a while. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AFD

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mahmoud Abbas Holocaust Denial

This one may be of interest to you. Kierzek (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dartz!

Once again you have PRODed an article (this time after also removing content without a proper explanation) with a rationale "no significant RS coverage can be found". The first few pages of a Google search for 'Dartz! Middlesbrough' found coverage from the BBC: [1], [2], The Skinny: [3], GazetteLive: [4], getSurrey: [5], Gigwise: [6], The Encyclopedia of Popular Music: [7], and DIY: [8]. All reliable sources that were easily found. --Michig (talk) 17:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Michig: Okay, I will stay away from bands from now on, or would check in with you before nominating, if that's okay. K.e.coffman (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always happy for anyone to ask my advice. Google searching for bands can often be complicated by false positives and results for shops, downloads, video sites, etc. that obscure any coverage that exists. I put some tips together here which may also be helpful in getting better results from searches. --Michig (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Space Development Steering Committee

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Space Development Steering Committee

Hello,

Just letting you know I was working this AfD today and noticed potential SPA/Canvassing activity taking place in this discussion. I added the appropriate templates, struck a duplicate vote and tagged the SPA comments. I have some reservations about whether or not there is a sock situation happening here, but I digress for now. I just wanted to give you a heads up since you made the initial nomination.

Thanks -- Dane2007 ^talk 21:10, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Gaming the system?. Thank you. Guy Macon (talk) 04:46, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Your comments on the Afd desk are quite insightful, and the amount of research you do to support your comments is commen(t)dable! Great work. Good job! Lourdes 03:57, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion input sought

Given your contributions to articles about white nationalism and white nationalists, there is a discussion currently at the talk page on the Nationalism template which may interest you. Thank you. Rockypedia (talk) 02:39, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hi, In regards to this AFD thanks for kindly putting the redirect target, It's frustrating at the amount of people who put "Redirect" but don't state where so thanks for that :), Thanks for all your contributions here & Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 23:31, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rommel myth

A query as to the status of this GA review? Any word. Kierzek (talk) 15:09, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest pinging the reviewer as to status. Kierzek (talk) 13:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked the GA reviewer's talk page and he has been absent due to personal matters; see his post: "On my absence" therein. Kierzek (talk) 14:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Special awards

Just to discuss this before you continue to remove these sections, the awards might not be considered worthy of their own article but they are not unnecessary in the context of the state pageant articles. The winner of these awards is frequently mentioned in news articles. Again, not having newspapers.com access any more makes this more difficult to source. I can see a Newspapers.com article via google search to source Cara Jackson for example, but I can't view the actual piece. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 07:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's possible to search at least. [9] [10] --- PageantUpdater (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

paul ardaji

Producers in the film industry are rarely "Money Men". They find the material, attach talent, and are involved every step of the way, until the film is released in theaters. I find your comment irresponsible for an obviously well rounded, intellectual individual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.81.108.227 (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shannon Marketic

Prod removed as clearly subject is notable, you'd already cleaned up some of it but I have gone in & referenced etc. --- PageantUpdater (talk) 01:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PageantUpdater: Thanks for adding references & other improvements. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"5pm" article

Hello. I was one of the contributors to the "5pm" page. You marked it for deletion, pending updates. I see it was deleted already. Unfortunately, I was not around to take care of it and to look into required edits at that time. Can the article be restored so I can try and update it? I am trying to help maintain this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_project_management_software and this article is part of the effort. Thank you. NancyJeanGF (talk) 16:12, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@NancyJeanGF: thank you for your message. You can contact the deleting administrator; they should have the ability to pull up the article's history, and move it into draft if necessary. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now for something completely different...

I was wondering if you might want to look at Operation Infinite Reach, which I've been working on extensively for FA (fingers crossed). It's not World War II, but it's a fascinating subject, nonetheless. Regards, GAB^gab 22:52, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bugatti Vision Gran Turismo

Hello. I would like to discuss this AfD with you [11]. I notice that when it comes to AfDs we have similar views. But not in this one. Obviously, I probably made a bad call on that one. But to me, it just seemed like a concept car that got a lot publicity, which I am sure all concept cars get - but in auto related publications. I think 50 years from now, no one is going to recall the "Bugatti Vision Gran Turismo". Anyway I noticed that you saw that is passes GNG. What did you base this on? I'm not here to be argumentative or re-hash the AfD. I'm thinking I will stay away from concept cars in regards to AfDs. Steve Quinn (talk) 06:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Steve Quinn: looking back at the AfD, I admit that I may have been somewhat too generous in my !vote as no sources had been added to the article, and sources themselves look a bit bloggy / fluffy. It may have been due to me having a slight bias towards keeping articles for "historical purposes" vs articles that could continue being used for promotion or to advance a certain point of view. A prototype is "once and done" & sources looked legit for the industry.

Please consider it a fluke :-). If you see something similar in my !votes going forward, please feel free to ping me. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How about this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/XNUMBERS. ;) --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Lemongirl942: Touché! In my defense, I had said that it was "borderline". :-) K.e.coffman (talk) 23:23, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another "on this day" shocker

[12] I suspect that OTD might need some kind of clean up. Nick-D (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I ran through the OTDs for the rest of the year, and they were OK Nick-D (talk) 05:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I never review/see those, but if you ever need help editing one, let me know. Good catch by the way, Nick. Kierzek (talk) 13:09, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Selective warning system

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Brandenburgers. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:53, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- ~~No such warning was issues to the other party in the dispute.~~ Please also see: Talk:Brandenburgers#Unsourced content and this diff by an uninvolved editor. K.e.coffman (talk) 14:45, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Warning was issued to - User SWF88. Kierzek (talk) 14:52, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The warning was issued after the dispute was submitted to WP:30: diff. K.e.coffman (talk) 14:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]