Jump to content

User talk:Onel5969/Archive 97

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 90←Archive 95Archive 96Archive 97Archive 98Archive 99Archive 100

Archive 85: December 2021

Volleyball

See my latest edits and new league link, lot of updates needed 93.140.228.133 (talk) 13:39, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LionelRoyce.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LionelRoyce.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

A Certain Scientific Railgun

A Certain Scientific Railgun (2009 TV series) is not the name for the series that covers season 1 only, that is why I am using the A Certain Scientific Railgun (season 1). How do you propose getting that latter name if that name already existed and can't be used? Centcom08 (talk) 01:16, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

What you are doing, as has been explained to you now twice, is called a cut and paste move, and is not allowed. See WP:CUTANDPASTE. Continuing to do this will most likely get you blocked from editing. Please stop it. You must move the article. Onel5969 TT me 01:30, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Centcom08 - Expanding a bit - moving the article allows the correct attribution to be carried through, as required by copyright laws. If you can't move the article, or don't know how, you can go to [Wikipedia:Requested moves]] and make your request there, with an explanation.Onel5969 TT me 01:35, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Angelo Di Pietro (inventor)

Not that I care much, but I at least want to make my argument:

  • According to Wikipedia:Splitting, Wikipedia:Out of scope is a valid reason to split an article.
  • By keeping the biography, the article has to be held to the standard of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons.
  • I personally think that the engine is more notable then the inventor (as the only notable thing about the inventor is a single invention)
  • adding categories makes a lot more sense, when person and engine are separated.
  • some content of the biography article (Environmental Implications, Thermodynamics of compress air storage) is either relevant do Compressed air cars in general or just plain wrong - which either-way is irrelevant to the person. (But at least tangentially justify able in the engine article)
  • I think when Biography and Engine are separated, neutrality is much easier to achieve.
    • the engine can be criticized/quantified with facts
    • the biography does not need to justify compressed air cars, to justify the engine, to justify the inventor, when both the engine and compressed air car are in separate articles

-- MichaelFrey (talk) 19:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

2023 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Tournament

Why Did you redirect the article for too soon 98.186.54.177 (talk) 20:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Why Didn't You Answer me for. 98.186.54.177 (talk) 21:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Good to see you back!

Welcome back to NPP
you can come and play with us if you get stressed! JW 1961 Talk 16:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Joseywales1961, although it might be a bit premature. Saw the backlog was expanding and thought I'd give it another go, but after only 4 days, I'm reminded of why I stopped. At least no wikihounding has begun again. Yet. But again, thanks, and keep up the good work. Onel5969 TT me 12:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ultra Series

Hello! Why did you revert my edits? How can these movies be not notable? They are as notable as for example all Godzilla movies. Ultra Series is one of the most popular and one of the biggest franchises in Japan. Japanese versions of these pages cite numerous mentions of these movies in notable sources. If there's a rule these articles broke, please cite it exactly. For example, if a page doesn't cite enough sources, it's not because it's not notable, but because people didn't paste them. --Дейноніх (talk) 12:09, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Дейноніх - Please familiarize yourself with notability criteria, particularly WP:GNG and WP:NFILM. What these articles need is in depth coverage from at least 3 reliable, independent sources to show that they pass notability. Film databases don't help. And until a film's article shows that it's notable, a redirect is suitable. And I did explain why in each of my edit summaries.Onel5969 TT me 12:12, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello again and thank you for the answer! I understood your point. Actually I'm familiar with the rules and I know that articles have to cite sources. But what I mean is that if these articles don't cite them, that's not because they aren't notable but just because nobody added citations. How about copying them from Wikipedia in other languages? --Дейноніх (talk) 12:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
As long as citation meets the requirements of WP:VERIFY, it can be used. It has to be a secondary source, and it has to be reliable (for instance, for US films, imdb.com is not considered a reliable source). And to show notability, it has to be in-depth about the film. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 12:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ritch Esra

Please nominate for deletion rather than having the embarrassing tag at the top of the article! Those tags do damage. That tag is your opinion only. Notability needs discussion, and I see you did not care to use the talk page. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

No. I'm going to let another NPP reviewer take a look at it. If you feel the tags are embarrassing, find better sourcing so that the article does not need to be tagged. I don't nominate articles for deletion if I think there is a possibility that the subject might be notable. I'm not sure about this one, but currently the sources do not show they pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 15:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
The tags are not embarrassing to me, but to all the living persons so tagged. It is my firm opinion that no BLP ever should be so tagged, that it is far more respectful to the living person to try the article through a deletion nomination, where a number of cooperating people can contribute to sourcing and quickly get it approved or deleted by consensus, than it is to have a big ugly box at the top of the article for a long time questioning the person's notability, i. e. reputation to be frank. Those tags have done a lot of damage to people, damage which they do not deserve even if deleted. Only Wikipedia insiders know of & accept the excuse, worded in a variety of ways, that they are not intended as derogatory. You have your opinion. I don't expect to change it. Policy should be changed by Wikipedia, where we are encouraged to engage in this kind of policy hypocrisy while posing as if the project really cares about every BLP. Best wishes, in any case --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I'd suggest you consider WP:INTERVIEWS to establish Esra's notability. TanookiKoopa (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

May i expand the article Gaya Municipal Corporation

Sir, I saw you are the last editor of the Article. May i expand that article. This is well known Municipal Corporation in Bihar i think it should be expanded. Please help. Thank you. Bihariboy Rahul (talk) 06:50, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

i Bihariboy Rahul - first, you don't have to ask for permission. Second, as long as you have valid sourcing for everything you put into the article, you can definitely expand the article. If you want me to take a look at it while you're working on it, be more than happy to. Onel5969 TT me 13:21, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of BMW 2 Series (G42)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BMW_2_Series_(G42)&diff=1059926288&oldid=1059908896 This page is supposed to be the individual page of the model. And I removed the detailed information of the new model in the model series article to better fit the other models in that article. This is a recent model and needs to have it's own article in order to be more consistent with the previous model. Please explain why you turned it into a redirect to the model range article and what "covered in target" means if you want to improve this article go ahead but someone has to make a standalone article to fit more information. Speedyboi69 (talk) 18:22, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Please provide a link. And remember to sign your comments using four tildes: ~~~~. Onel5969 TT me 12:11, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Speedyboi69 - thanks for the link and the signature. No subject "needs" to have its own article. And I did explain in my edit summary, it's covered in the target article. And for folks looking for stuff like this, it makes more sense to have all of the info in one article. And since it's already there, then it should meet either of the two requirements of WP:SPLIT before splitting into its own article. That being said, if and when it is split, proper attribution must be made in order to satisfy copyright requirements. Hope that explains it to you. Onel5969 TT me 19:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Name change

Hi , you recently changed the name of the page maharaja ishwari prasad narayan singh to ishwari prasad nrayan singh. please explain Gaurav 3894 (talk) 05:16, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

As was said in the edit summary, it's per naming conventions. Titles are not used. Onel5969 TT me 12:12, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Requesting the undeletion of Jinx (League of Legends) page

My apologies if you're the wrong person to request this, but your name was the last person who edited the piece before it was deleted. The feature was deleted for reasons, as you wrote, for not enough in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to pass the GNG. There were also issues with how the summary biography was written. I feel as if I can fix the piece by reworking the summary section, and providing more independent sources to prove that the piece has notoriety. In general, I think the fictional character is the biggest icon from a very popular video game, and I do believe the character deserves their own page. I think the deletion was a little bit hasty. Thanks for the time reading this. Transformers03(talk) 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, the deletion was not what was hasty, but the article's creation. You'll need in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable sourcing to show that the character meets WP:GNG, and that should not focus on the character's in-world life, but should have major sections on it's development, creation and reception. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 11:40, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
It sure does, and it turns out the page has not been deleted but simply redirected to a new page. I'll work on that to find the appropriate sources that will focus on the development, creation, and reception of the character that will help meet the WP:GNG to justify the character deserving their own page. Transformers03(talk) 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Im 애국심 존중. I have a Questions. I was from korean Wikipedia. And, Im korean. So, I can't Understand many Things in English Wikipedia. In Eternatus, It was REDIRECT. But, I was thought I need to make new pages for Eternatus. In korean Wikipedia, Many people is deleting Redirect page. Thank you. ( It is different) 애국심 존중 (talk) 09:10, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi 애국심 존중 - on English Wikipedia, an article needs to show notability to be included, not simply that exists. To show notability, you need in-depth coverage from at least 3 independent reliable sources. Another very important concept is WP:VERIFY. I understand the language barrier, and appreciate your attempt to help. I would suggest you read WP:GNG and WP:VERIFY. Onel5969 TT me 11:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Tuba Smarties

Hi. Was it really not worth it? Ugo1970 (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it was wholly uncited. Please see WP:GNG. Onel5969 TT me 17:48, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Gasolin AG

Hi, I'm elemimele, the person who was daft enough to translate the German version of Gasolin AG. You've quite rightly noticed that the article is a bit thin on references. This is partly because I was relying on translation, and of course standards of referencing vary. You've used the general tag rather than tagging any specific bits, but were there any sections/statements that leapt out at you as particular offenders? If so, let me know, and I'll see if Google can turn up anything.
As background, I speak reasonable German but I'm not an expert on the petrol industry; the article arose because English WP decided to delete its article on Bruno Bergner on grounds there was only one really good secondary source for his work. Had Gasolin AG existed at the time, it would have been a perfect merge-target for Bergner, his notability stemming from a very long-term output of widely-known work for Gasolin. Since it didn't, I decided to translate it! Poor old Bruno got rather neglected in the process, and I'd like to add a picture of two of his, and maybe a brief statement of his background based on the one source we have (obviously I mustn't overdo it, he's only one person in Gasolin's history, albeit their public face). Elemimele (talk) 18:31, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Elemimele - first, thanks for stepping up and doing the translation. Second, the over-riding principle is WP:VERIFY, so every assertion made in the article should come from an underlying references. If an entire paragraph is paraphrased from an underlying source, then that paragraph can have a single footnote at the end. If each sentence in a paragraph is taken from a different source, each sentence should have a footnote. Hope that helps. On a different note, if you want to go to the trouble, you could ask an admin to restore the Bergner article to your userspace, and you could incorporate it into this article. Nice job on the translation. Onel5969 TT me 18:40, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! I never knew what to do with situations where an entire paragraph is supported by one source (reference at start, end, or everywhere) so that's really helpful to know. I'll see what I can find. For the Bergner bits, I'm okay about using the German version. Elemimele (talk) 19:12, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

End Redirect from Ocean engineering to Marine engineering

I have noticed that the page for ocean engineering continues to be redirected to marine engineering's page due to a "forking" issue, under the supposition that the articles cover the same (or indistinguishably similar) topic matter. Although the difference between ocean engineering and marine engineering is admittedly not well-known to the general public, I believe I can provide some clarification that justifies ocean engineering having its own article – both as an ocean engineer with graduate and undergraduate degrees in the subject and as a colleague of marine engineers with whom I have worked closely. More importantly, my colleagues and I have some great supporting information and sources to share with the world to educate them about what ocean engineers do!

The difference between naval architecture, marine engineering, and ocean engineering is actually quite simple: naval architecture deals with the design of ships and submarines; marine engineering deals with the design and integration of shipboard systems (e.g. propulsion, electronics, mechanical equipment); and ocean engineering deals with the design of other ocean systems not directly related to ships and submarines. Ocean engineering is mostly focused on structures (e.g. offshore platforms, coastal structures, port and harbor design), but underwater life support systems and wave power also fall within our education and training (and not naval architects or marine engineers), so I plan to include sections for those on the ocean engineering page. You can see my most recent edits of ocean engineering for a few sources that provide a good distinction between these topics.

As previously mentioned, the difference I just described is not well-known outside of industry and academia, so I understand why some people may be eager to group everything under a single topic (i.e. “marine engineering”). To satisfy this predilection, I could try to overlook the inconsistency in nomenclature and add my contributions to the marine engineering page, but the fact is that ocean engineering as it is taught and practiced today simply does not belong there. There are accredited ocean engineering programs at several institutions across multiple countries, as well as a number of journals, conferences, and companies dedicated to ocean engineering (also in my most recent edit). These things alone would probably justify ocean engineering having its own article, but I wanted to paint the whole picture.

I don’t want to go longer than I already have, but suffice it to say that there is a lot of helpful information specific to ocean engineering that the world would benefit from knowing here on Wikipedia. We have experts from industry and academia who are ready to contribute sources and information toward this effort. The result will be an extensive, well-cited, and well-connected article on ocean engineering. (I also plan to bring the marine engineering page up to speed, since it is a bit lacking in citations right now.) Thanks for your help! Oceaneng21 (talk) 16:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Oceaneng21 - my advice would be to create your article in draftspace, and carefully build your case for delineation between the two topics, as the current existing page equates the two terms. Once you think it's ready, you can submit it for review. And even if there is a technical or slight difference between the two specialties, it has to be different enough to warrant an entire separate article, rather than just be included as a section on the existing article. If the difference is too technical, then it would probably benefit from being included in the existing page, so that casual researchers can see the difference without having to bounce between two articles. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:10, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Reason for speedy deletion

Hello Why should Hossein Mohammadi Vahidi's article be deleted so quickly? I think this article has a criterion of recognition. If you do a little research on graphic designers, you will see that he is active and has attended many eventJackpet11 (talk) 14:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Because it was already deleted through a deletion discussion. Onel5969 TT me 14:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

This is unfair. I ask you to help me keep this article.Jackpet11 (talk) 14:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC) Can I draft the article? I do not want to be deleted againJackpet11 (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

If you would like, I'll move it into draftspace for you. Then you can submit it through AfC, if it passes AfC, that takes precedence over the AfD. Would you like me to do that for you? Onel5969 TT me 15:20, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes this is better. I do not know why this article should be deleted but other articles like this should stayJackpet11 (talk) 15:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Mystery solved

Ummm why isn’t the backlog still ballooning every day? I asked myself. Then I saw you’d come back, so mystery solved. Very decent of you not to come back for the notability drive so I could earn a bit of virtual silverware during your absence - I could never keep up with you in a normal month, let alone a backlog drive. Welcome back. Mccapra (talk) 16:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Mccapra -lol. Well, we see how long I last this time. What made me leave last time was the several wikihounds I picked up, and a lack of back-up from admins in dealing with them. Onel5969 TT me 12:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Moving notable articles

Why have you moved three football articles into draftspace?

Each of the articles have citations from reliable, independent sources and meet notability requirements per WP:FOOTY.Mooretwin (talk) 23:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

No, they don't. Please read WP:VERIFY, as to what is needed for a source. And they need to be from independent sources.Onel5969 TT me 12:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Please explain how the sources don't meet the requirements of WP:VERIFY, in particular, how they aren't independent? The sources used are a published book (the Northern Ireland Soccer Yearbook) and newspapers. Mooretwin (talk) 19:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
The yearbook is not an independent source. The refs do not contain enough information to pass verify. See WP:CIT on what info needs to be included. Onel5969 TT me 20:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
The yearbook certainly is an independent source. I've added more information to the references as requested. Please restore the articles. Thank you. Mooretwin (talk) 11:29, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Songs of the season

Holiday cheer
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022. MarnetteD|Talk 02:45, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you MarnetteD - hope you have a great holiday season. Onel5969 TT me 01:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Turkish geostubs

Hey, I noticed you reviewed a few Turkish village stubs including Kadıköy, Baskil, Düğüntepe, Baskil and Doğancık, Baskil. Lugnuts' geostubs have been discussed multiple times [1][2][3] with consensus that anything sourced only to Koyumuz should be redirected to the district. These particular ones might be a grey area since they have a second source and I don't want to pull you into that debate, but at the very least Koyumuz should probably be tagged as Better Source Needed. –dlthewave ☎ 12:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

This user forgot to mention this AfD where they had to backtrack on their own nom in this area. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 12:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Reviewed

Hi, you marked List of book publishing houses in India as reviewed. But should this article be on the mainspace. I don't think so. I would have moved it directly to draft space, but thought to ask you first. What is your opinion? ― ItcouldbepossibleTalk 14:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Itcouldbepossible - yeah, I struggled with that as well. But as per WP:LISTN, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources...". The single source does mention it as a group. In that instance I felt it would pass AfD, just needs more sourcing. I could've draftified it, and would have been justified in doing so, so feel free to do that if you feel strongly about it. On another note, have you ever thought of joing WP:NPP? With the volume of Indian articles created, you'd be a valuable set of eyes. Onel5969 TT me 14:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I read WP:LISTN and understood it that if the group or set is notable, the individual items in the list do not need to be independently notable, but it is also stated that editors may, at their discretion, choose to limit large lists by only including entries for independently notable items or those with Wikipedia articles. So, it is rather tough to decide. But lets just wait. I am leaving a message to the user who created the page.
And thanks for calling me "valuable". You are really the first one who has done so. Many others have complained about my editing pattern and other stuff. You can go and see all the things in my talk page if you want.
Well to say the truth, I have not yet thought of joining WP:NPP, as many other tell that I have not grasped the concepts and policies of Wikipedia yet, which I agree. I am still learning, and it is difficult to know all the policies so soon. And moreover all the amount of stuff that is written tutorial section of WP:NPP scares me. Anyway, but I still lookout for new articles, of every sort, so I don't think the Indian ones will go a miss. Thanks for suggesting still. I will surely join the project, once I am here for some time, and know all the policies, so that editors don't complain about my edits.
PS: I don't know if it is possible, but can a discussion be started regarding draftifying the page? Is there such a thing called Move to Draft discussion. I really don't know. I am still new and don't really know about everything which is possible to do here. So kindly clarify this doubt of mine. Thanks again. ― ItcouldbepossibleTalk 16:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
And just a suggestion if you won't mind. Why are you not archiving this big talk page? Is there a special purpose? Don't mind this question from a new user. ― ItcouldbepossibleTalk 16:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

~~~ Merry Christmas! ~~~
Joyeux Noël! ~ Buon Natale! ~ Vrolijk Kerstfeest! ~ Frohe Weihnachten!
¡Feliz Navidad! ~ Feliz Natal! ~ Καλά Χριστούγεννα! ~ Hyvää Joulua!
God Jul! ~ Glædelig Jul! ~ Linksmų Kalėdų! ~ Priecīgus Ziemassvētkus!
Häid Jõule! ~ Wesołych Świąt! ~ Boldog Karácsonyt! ~ Veselé Vánoce!
Veselé Vianoce! ~ Crăciun Fericit! ~ Sretan Božić! ~ С Рождеством!
শুভ বড়দিন! ~ 圣诞节快乐！~ メリークリスマス！~ 메리 크리스마스!
สุขสันต์วันคริสต์มาส! ~ Selamat Hari Natal! ~ Giáng sinh an lành!
Весела Коледа!

Hello, Onel5969! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 09:39, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}
Thank you so much for your well wishes. Right back at you, CAPTAIN RAJU. Onel5969 TT me 01:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Reviewed

Why did you give no reason for deleting the wiki page for Alexander Kluge's Die Macht Der Gefuhle. Many of his other films have pages and the information on there was of note for film fans. Now when I click the page link it just goes to Kluge's own wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liveartlegend (talk • contribs) 11:56, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

I did give a reason. Onel5969 TT me 12:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!!

To: Onel5969 ... thank you for your industrious year on New Page Patrol! Spread the Merry! WikiGnomes 4ever!!!

From: Whiteguru
Thank you so much Whiteguru, and for all you do on WP. Onel5969 TT me 14:04, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Many thanks; same to you! GiantSnowman 12:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to you too

Hello Onel5969: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice. Thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Polyamorph (talk) 17:47, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Have a happy Christmas and New Year

Hello Onel5969: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, JW 1961 Talk 11:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Seasons Greetings

Hello Onel5969: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, John B123 (talk) 15:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas Onel5969

Hi Onel5969, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas
and a very happy and healthy New Year,
Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,
   –Davey2010Talk 17:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Share similar holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Davey2010/MerryChristmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Plotek

I have a question. I recently started this article on a Canadian abstract artist. An editor put an Orphan tag on it. I deleted the tag because the individual has so-many categories and he`s a well-known abstract artist. Now I`m wondering if I did the right thing. Can you advise? Thanks, Joan arden murray (talk) 18:11, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your message and all your help!

Dear friend: I was touched by your message and deeply grateful to you for all your help. Wikipedia is a great force for the good and like all the editors, I am glad to add my contribution! Merriest! Joan arden murray (talk) 11:20, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

No worries, keep up the good work, Joan arden murrayOnel5969 TT me 14:09, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

★Trekker (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Concern about using speedy deletion without solid evidence of plagiarism

Onel5969,

First, thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia. I'm concerned about how quickly a page I created, Peraton, was marked for speedy deletion by you, simply because you found a website (theladders.com) that had the exact same content. I have since proven that theladders.com copies Wikipedia articles for nearly all of their company entries, you can see for yourself, but the real concern is that this shows a lack of investigative effort and I don't think articles should be speedily-deleted like this, I mean there are many sites that scrape Wikipedia and copy off of it, so just because the content of a relatively new article is found somewhere else word-for-word, doesn't mean it was a plagiarized Wikipedia article. I think that in these types of situations, there's nothing wrong with marking a page as to be considered for deletion, but it should only be after looking deeper into the issue. In this situation it was deleted less than an hour after marked which left no time for me to defend it, and that doesn't seem right. Anyway, hopefully it won't happen again and Peraton can get restored. Supremedemency (talk) 23:13, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, copyright infringement is taken very seriously on WP. The Ladders was not the only source which had the exact same wording, and pre-dated the creation of your article. Onel5969 TT me 14:11, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
I have an email correspondence from The Ladders where they admit to copying it off Wikipedia... What other websites are you referring to? I'm sorry to say that you are wrong about this one, I wrote the article using my own words so I know for a fact it wasn't plagiarized, I'm just trying to figure out how to prove it to you guys. Ask yourself this- why would I be fighting so hard for this one if I really did plagiarize it? I'm fighting hard because I know for a fact you screwed up and it's showing a weakness in your review system. Please restore the page and give me at least a week to show proof I'm right. Is that too much to ask? Supremedemency (talk) 19:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Nope. Go away. Onel5969 TT me 20:11, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022!!

Hello Onel5969, warm wishes to you and your family throughout the holiday season. May your heart and home be filled with all of the joys the festive season brings. Here is a toast to a Merry Christmas and prosperous New Year!. 

scope_creepTalk 01:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Plotek

Dear One15969: I think I understand about Orphan now. Thank you for saving Blake Fitzgerald! You know what? This is a real Christmas present!Joan arden murray (talk) 12:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I'm not sure you understand what "orphan" means, which simply says that no other article links to that article. It's pretty easy to check. If you go to the left side of the page, you'll see the tools section. One of the tools is "What links here", click on it, and you'll be able to see any other pages which link to that article. In this case, while there are a dozen or so other links, none are from articles, so it still is an orphan. I've reviewed the page and marked it reviewed, but have re-added the orphan tag. I checked several of the others that are linked from his page, and he's not mentioned at those articles, although he is mentioned in a footnote on Susanna Heller, for their dual exhibition. You could add him in at that article, and then link, or you could add him to List of McGill University people, and then link. Either of those would de-orphan him. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 14:20, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_Plotek

Did both - added category McGill people and added Plotek to Susanna Heller catalogue! Thank you! Think I am getting it!Joan arden murray (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Good job! Onel5969 TT me 15:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Viva Rock

https://www.oricon.co.jp/prof/297008/products/521166/1/ https://www.billboard-japan.com/goods/detail/274107 https://music.apple.com/gb/album/viva-rock-ep/1537386692 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cluT6HNO1bI — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWX28 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Removed page to redirect after review?

Hello, looks like you reviewed the page for the music album Muh Dikhai and removed all contents entirely? It is now redirecting to the album artiste Shafqat Amanat Ali's page which I don't think it should? Could you please undo this and restore the original Muh Dikhai album page? Or, please let me know what your concerns are with the original page (notability or otherwise) so I can attempt to address them. Thank you for your time. Priyanka2330 (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

As I said in the edit as summary, as per WP:NALBUM. In a nutshell, it doesn't meet any of the notability criteria. Onel5969 TT me 22:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for responding. I'd appreciate it if you could help me better understand how the pages for any of the following albums meet notability criteria: Jal Pari (album), Doorie, Meri Kahani, Koi Aanay Wala Hai, Dhaani. I could list about 50 more similar examples of stub articles on albums that are less than 2,000 bytes in size and have poor quality references. In comparison, the page you removed was nearly 8,000 bytes in size and had 12+ high-quality references from across multiple countries. The album received widespread media coverage (as evidenced from references) and is a prominent piece of work in the realm of Sufi music from South Asia. Please help me understand what the other pages I listed above have in terms of notability that this page does not. Once again, thank you for your time. Priyanka2330 (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Quickly following up on general notability guidelines (also see Article Talk page):
1. The album received "significant coverage" in the media (criteria 1) as evident from a dozen news sources and interviews with prominent media channels in not one but TWO countries.
2. The article was backed-up with "reliable" media sources (criteria 2), in both India and Pakistan.
3. Sources/references were high quality and "objective" (criteria 3).
4. Finally, all the sources used to support the article are "independent of the subject" (criteria 4).
It should also be noted that the album is a prominent piece of work in the realm of Sufi music from South Asia and I'm genuinely surprised that it merits removal. An additional review would be greatly appreciated and/or please tell me what needs to change to merit notability that the original article was missing. Thank you again. Priyanka2330 (talk) 23:39, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

.

Foot Clan Piñata Farms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D4C6:BEAD:DCA0:C710 (talk) 07:26, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Reverted by changes to Scouting in Puerto Rico and Guajataka Scout Reservation

Hello, I noticed that you reverted my recent changes and additions to the articles Scouting in Puerto Rico and Guajataka Scout Reservation. I currently working to expand specifically the content around GSR and I would like to understand your reasoning in doing so.

Hi. First, please remember to "sign" your posts with the 4 tildes (~~~~). Second, the article, when you split it off was woefully unsourced, as I noted in the edit summary. Onel5969 TT me 14:53, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Grave of Zembîlfiroş

HI, this is a different article from Zembîlfiroş, this article about grave and location this grave but Zembîlfiroş article speak about the person how he was live , I hope you understand what I mean and do not merge this article with Zembîlfiroş, Thank you Hamaredha (talk) 16:47, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Article review

Hi Onel5969 Merry Christmas, Could you please review it Draft:Dhadkan Zindaggi Kii. What's more changes required in it. Thanks, eargerly wait for your response. --C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 05:17, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Motettu de tristura: Revision history

Hi, I don't understand on the basis of which parameters the page Motettu de tristura was brought to the draft. The information is coherent and the piece is part of a very specific cultural tradition. After all, I think it is equivalent, for example, with the song The Bitter Withy which has been part of wikipedia for several years. Waiting for some explanation, thanks Fpittui (talk) 07:28, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Fpittui - there are two issues. First, there is not nearly enough in-depth coverage from reliable sources to show that it meets WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC. There is a single ref from a reliable source (the ArkivMusic.com is simply a listing). You need 3 in-depth sources from independent reliable sources to show it meets notability criteria. Second, most of the article is completely unsourced, so you would have to provide sources for where you got that information. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 11:53, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, these issues you have listed apply even more to many other wiki pages, for example (to name a few) The Bitter Withy, Chirmi, Bonny Baby Livingston, entries that don't even have a note, for which the criteria are even more applicable or is the choice at your discretion? Please let me know Fpittui (talk) 12:19, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
That is what is called an other stuff exists argument, and is completely irrelevant. Feel free to improve those other articles, if they concern you. Onel5969 TT me 13:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Do not post on my talk page again, since you seem not to comprehend basic concepts, and are uncivil. Onel5969 TT me 15:40, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft? Tamaš Hryb

Hi Onel5969 Merry Christmas. It is not exactly clear why you have placed the article Tamaš Hryb to draft category - it is well-referenced and complete. Could you please clarify? Seems to be a mistake--Czalex 11:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Czalex and Merry Christmas (belatedly) to you as well. The issue is not whether or not they meet notability, but it is the referencing which becomes an issue. More than half the article is uncited. I could have removed the uncited material, but felt it was better for you to move it to draft where you could provide the citations. When you have, feel free to move it back into mainspace, and if you would like to ping me, I'll take a look at it. Also, your fourth citation does not have enough information to meet the standards of citation. Please see WP:CIT to see what needs to be included. I hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 11:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christimas! I wish you much health and peace. I would also like to wish you an excellent 2022. Best regards. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 14:29, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind wishes, A.WagnerC. And a very Merry Christmas to you as well. Onel5969 TT me 22:32, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination declined

I have had to decline your speedy deletion nomination of Viy Cortez. Unfortunately, the creator of the article requested and obtained speedy deletion, thus leading to closure of the deletion discussion without its reaching a conclusion, and then re-created the article. That has the unfortunate effect of making a G4 deletion impossible. I suggest taking it back to AfD. Naturally I hope this was not deliberate gaming of the system. JBW (talk) 21:23, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Reviewing Articles

I noticed you reviewed The United States of Anxiety, but I'm not totally sure what that means. I think I've seen mentions of this specific review process, but it appears to be largely done in the background. Would you mind pointing me to the relevant pages discussing the process? I don't remember what it's called exactly. TipsyElephant (talk) 21:36, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant - it simply means that one of the volunteers over at New Page Patrol has taken a look at your article, and feels it passes all the various guidelines/policies of Wikipedia, such as notability, verifiability, etc. You can read more about it at WP:NPP. Onel5969 TT me 22:34, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Jon Trichter

Hello! I am seeing that you reviewed the page Jonathan Trichter and turned it into a redirect. I understand that Trichter was not elected to the office he ran for, but I believe the article is important enough because it is the only time in modern history to my knowledge that a Wilson Pakula was used. This fact alone got the article on the front page of Wikipedia in September 2021. I realize now that I never actually mentioned the Wilson Pakula in the article, and if you would be willing to reconsider your decision, I would write the Wilson Pakula aspect of Trichter's candidacy into the article. Thank you! Capisred (talk) 17:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Capisred - since he doesn't meet WP:NPOL, he would have to meet WP:GNG, which would require several (usually at least 3, depending on the sources) in-depth, independent references about him. The Pakula fact is very interesting, and if there is not enough in-depth coverage about Trichter for an article, including it on the election's page would be a big plus. Hope this helps. Onel5969 TT me 20:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Leylines

Is it notable yet? Skyerise (talk) 16:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

You were edit-warring about the appropriate tag, so I'm done looking at it. Onel5969 TT me 17:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Suggested Deletion

I would point out I have seen articles on writers with far less biographical information, so not sure the "not in depth enough" point is valid. Ummunmutamnag (talk) 21:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy New Year to you and yours! CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 14:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
– Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Happy New Year, Onel5969!

Happy New Year!

Onel5969,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
John B123 (talk) 17:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Ryan Persaud

Hey One5969, I reviewed your speedy deletion request for Ryan Persaud, and the previous AFD request. It looks like the new authors of the page substantially expanded the article and added a great deal more references, so I think this one needs to go back to AfD to be deleted again.

Let me know if you have any questions! Prodego talk 21:03, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Prodego - thanks for letting me know. I can't see the deleted article, and there didn't seem to be any changes in his accomplishments in the last two years which would affect notability. Onel5969 TT me 21:48, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive:
  • On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed.
  • Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate:
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.

Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages.

--Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:18, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onel5969/Archive_97&oldid=1174050722"