User talk:Salimfadhley/Archives/2021/November

Request on 09:28:33, 3 November 2021 for assistance on AfC submission by LDEN1

• LDEN1 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Leighton Denny MBE (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi, Many thanks for your quick reply on the submission of the article Leighton Denny MBE. I am hoping you may be able to provide more information on the reason for decline - it mentions that it appears to include reference to paid advertiorial features. As far as I am aware, all of the news articles features are standard editorial as none state advert/paid advert/partnership etc. Thanks in advance.

LDEN1 (talk) 09:28, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Please feel free to identify your two best sources. Salimfadhley (talk) 09:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Your volunteering for admin run

Thank you. Thank you for helping at #wikipedia-en-help forum. Don't feel bad about the poll feedback. You got some excellent advice from very kind editors in precisely the best positions to know how to help you. Wikipedia will need admins in the future.

Like you, I have had a sporadic relationship with Wikipedia over time, but this year I offered myself for examination in the same poll and was encouraged to run. An admin run was an opportunity for every single thing I've ever written on-wiki to be closely examined. I have a big mouth sometimes. I have learned to listen better ("read better" doesn't convey the same meaning) and show more respect for my fellow human. These are life skills improved here on the pedia. When I put myself forward for microscopic examination by the community I learned that the trust I had acquired over time counted a lot. A large group of self-selecting representatives of Wikipedia, our fellow editors, chose by consensus to give me permission to use the larger toolset. Since then I've had some personal challenges as admin but I'm getting back to being myself. When I did have trouble, I just asked for help. I'm not good at that.

So when veteran wikipedians recommend doing more AFC and NPP, they aren't putting you off or putting you down, they are pointing at the enormous pile of work any editor could do, then instructing you to hit the pile and start shoveling. Both New Page Patrol and Articles for Creation processes teach you an enormous amount about how a good page is constructed. That helps you feel more confident about building pagespace which interests you. (In my case, I'm always looking for an untold story.) When we work hard together, argue together, improve pages together, we learn to trust each other. Doing the work, and finding your voice as a wikipedian, that's what will earn your fellow contributors' support on your admin run if you choose to put yourself forward.

Good luck to you. Thanks for putting yourself forward as a volunteer Teahouse helper. Maybe you can get some credit for the good common sense you dispense to newer editors. Have some fun. Help other new editors to feel as comfortable as you feel. If you need help at some point, please call on me. BusterD (talk) 22:07, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for taking the time to reply. I really appreciate it. One thing that I was curious about was indeed the suggestion to look at AFC and NPP. The reason I found this advice so unexpected was that it's precisely what I have been doing. The vast majority of my edits this year have been related to AFC. I'm really curious why it seems that isn't the case.

I tend to be on IRC rather than Teahouse - mainly because IRC (being off-wiki) attracts more abusers, and I generally find myself interested on the side of fighting abuse than creating more content. Salimfadhley (talk) 02:23, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Volunteers choose their own favorite place to be. This a good thing. You seem a sensible editor and I see no big issues with your pagework, based on a cursory reading. I think an admin candidate should be seen to improve pagespace and demonstrate willingness to edit on a consistent basis. Continue what you've been doing and keep at it. Ask for help when you need it. Give help when asked. Come back as suggested. BusterD (talk) 03:37, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

You are doing fine work these days. Thanks for the help. BusterD (talk) 18:03, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Louise Hampton

Hello, Salimfadhley. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Louise Hampton, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:01, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Concern of declining Draft:Jelle Sels

This is the question: how can I improve my Draft:Jelle Sels? I see that the draft is declined, however, it's notable, since the guidelines of tennis biographies, they can win at least one ITF final or ATP challenger. However, it was declined. I don't know how, but I would like a suggestion on this decline and get it published. Thank you. Severestorm28 (talk) 23:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps I got it wrong. Feel free to resubmit. I'm not a tennis expert. Salimfadhley (talk) 23:56, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Severestorm28: Just wanted to chime in actually as I noticed this draft as well and am a member of the tennis Wiki project. He doesn't actually meet notability guidelines, as the requirement is an ATP Tour title or Challenger title, not an ITF title. A vast majority of ITF tennis players are nowhere near notable for Wikipedia. Adamtt9 (talk) 21:34, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Much appreciated @Adamtt9. Salimfadhley (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

If a player can be found to meet WP:GNG, of course an article can be created as that takes precedence to the tennis Wikiproject. However, I feel like the decline due to lack of notability and sources is accurate in this assessment, and the tennis guidelines aren't met either. Adamtt9 (talk) 21:35, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Adamtt9: I see now. Maybe I could request the draft for deletion, due to the fact that he did not win any ATP tour level-ATP challenger titles. He has won one ITF title yes, but looking at your comment I can guess that it is most likely not notable for any tennis player. Thanks for reminding me about the notability of tennis players. Severestorm28 (talk) 21:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

@Adamtt9: Just want to make sure if Draft:Ezekiel Clark is notable. He has public personal life information on the internet, but maybe he is or not notable. Can you help me with this? Severestorm28 (talk) 21:50, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Spire Academy AFD

In regards to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Spire_Institute_and_Academy , There is not a single press release, we've checked every source and not a single one is a 404. They are one of three Official FINA Training Centres in the entire world, are a designated training site for USA Wrestling, the United States Olympic team, and are an official Olympic and Paralympic training site. These sources are the same if not extremely similar to IMG Academy which has no notability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMG_Academy Mooneys44 (talk) 15:53, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Discretionary sanctions

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in pseudoscience and fringe science. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Hesam Abedini page drafted

Hello "Salimfadhley"(talk) would you please determine "what was the problem with the article you sent it into drafts" ? you wrote me something about referencing issues, but I've scrutinized all the cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fagottii (talk • contribs) 19:18, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Fagottii, I moved Draft:Hesam Abedini to draft space because I did not think the sources you have referenced were sufficient to show that this subject meets our notability guidelines. Subsequently you submitted the draft for review, whereupon @Robert McClenon declined the draft, presumably on the basis that the article's sourcing had not been sufficiently improved. Salimfadhley (talk) 01:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Fagottii - I declined the draft more because the text of the draft does not satisfy notability. The draft does not appear to address any of the musical notability criteria. It also does not appear to address general notability. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

@Fagottii, and I might add that I completely agree with @Robert McClenon's actions. Please feel free to ask any questions you might have regarding our AFC process and your draft. Salimfadhley (talk) 09:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ankit yadav 529

Ankit Yadav appears to be another of those "Get my name onto WP" people Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 15:57, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure you know this. When you see a title Draft:Foo 2 then you need to look for drafts Foo, Foo 1, Foo 3 etc. Often they are one or more editors trying to game the system, so it required a little investigation and consideration of starting an SPI, falling for UPE, etc Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 16:37, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. It was immediately suspicious. I did check the undisambiguated title and found that it had not been salted, only expired through neglect, I did not check the alternative spellings of the name. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Salimfadhley (talk) 16:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is under continuous attack by vanity projects, paid and unpaid. The better we all get at spotting and shooting it down the better Wikipedia will be. Sometimes it feels like a distraction from reviewing and writing, but it's a great service we can all do. Also hunting down copyright pictures on commons is very useful Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:00, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I did notice that the picture associated with the article was clearly a professional shot, and unlikely to be the editor's own work. Somebody had already dealt with that. TBH, I actually find the anti-spam operation far more fascinating than the main business of Wikipedia. That's one of the reasons I hang around the en-help IRC channel - many of the abusers (including this person) are foolish enough to ask us for help vandalising the encyclopaedia. Salimfadhley (talk) 17:22, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh bless their little cotton socks! Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 17:31, 26 November 2021 (UTC)