User talk:TheEditster

December 2017

Hello, I'm Alpha3031. I noticed that in this edit to Lost Ark, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. — Alpha3031 (talk | contribs) 07:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Alpha3031:, I removed it because the article was not yet created. Thanks for the advice, though. TheEditster (talk) 07:39, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about Super Bowl LVII

Hello, TheEditster,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Super Bowl LVII should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Super Bowl LVII .

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks,

CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 23:07, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mission: Price moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Mission: Price, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 08:55, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Mission: Price

Thanks for creating Mission: Price.

A New Page Patroller Boleyn just tagged the page as having some issues to fix, and wrote this note for you:

This has been tagged for 2 issues.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can reply over here and ping me. Or, for broader editing help, you can talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 09:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mission: Price for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mission: Price is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mission: Price until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Boleyn (talk) 09:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Tpir-stub

Template:Tpir-stub has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. PamD 14:20, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Survivor: Edge of Extinction moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Survivor: Edge of Extinction, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jovanmilic97 (talk) 15:08, 10 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Survivor: Edge of Extinction for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Survivor: Edge of Extinction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Survivor: Edge of Extinction until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Sinjoh2015 (talk) 12:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Sinjoh2015:because every season recorded on IS is accurate. Watch the show and check the results. If any are untrue then you have a claim. TheEditster (talk) 22:06, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TheEditster: is wasn't about it being untrue, it was because the sources were self published and were not acceptable under the WP:RS since it's self-published. There's the reason why despite Inside Survivor is correct with their information, it is not used as a source. Even in previous seasons, it was not used as a source for either the seasons or even the castaways before they were officially revealed. Sinjoh2015 (talk) 00:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edge of Extinction

I'm curious as to why you're using a rumor as a basis for Edge of Extinction existing? (And don't pull the "other sites are taking about it, use Google" BS, I looked at come of those sources and they all cite back to the Inside Survivor article.) How do you know anything Inside Survivor is posting is verifiable, since they don;t disclose their supposed source? For all you know, they could be easily pulling stuff out of their ass or are being fed incorrect information. Sinjoh2015 (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Major World

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Major World requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Csgir (talk) 12:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Major World

Hello TheEditster,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Major World for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

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

Britishfinance (talk) 18:48, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2019

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with Major World. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. Jmertel23 (talk) 18:54, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In use article

Please don't edit Mystic Truth for a little while--you're making it hard for me to create the article. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:36, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Koavf: okay. TheEditster (talk) 21:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, man. Looking forward to working with you on it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:38, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm done for now. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:14, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Felicia clavipilosa

You added a template “talkpage” to Talk:Felicia clavipilosa. Apart that this feels superfluous, I am wondering if this will hamper the rating of the article according to Wikipedia:Wikiproject Plants and Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 12:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tushy deletion

Hi! Wondering if we can discuss deletion of Tushy page. Wondering why Quip and Thinx are noteworthy but Tushy is not? Thanks so much. --B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Briannasnyder83 (talk • contribs) 13:07, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bijan Zamani

Hi Edister. You recently relisted this AfD, and I wanted to let you know that I reverted your relisting for a few reasons. Firstly, the discussion had already been relisted once, and had copious amounts of discussions and sufficient participation. Secondly, you did not properly complete the relist. You added the AfD to today's log page, but you didn't remove it from the original log page. Therefore, it was showing up on both log pages. Your contributions are appreciated, but I'd suggest that you might want to review the guidelines at WP:RELIST, and may want to look into using an automated tool to do AfD closings (which makes it a lot faster, easier, and less prone to error). Cheers. ‑Scottywong | express _ 17:20, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a problem. TheEditster (talk) 12:15, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[Draft:] Leon C. Shelly

I was just starting work on this article, and when I tried to save my work, it looks like I accidentally published. If you can, could you please switch it back to draft status? Thanks! Filmhunter (talk) 17:41, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy tagging

Don't tag articles as WP:CSD#A3 unless at least 10 minutes have elapsed since their creation. You tagged Sandra Don-Arthur in less than a minute. More generally, I don't think you have sufficient experience to be tagging any articles for deletion.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:12, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]