User talk:Winged Blades of Godric/Archive 14

Closed page move

You recently closed a requested page move here as kmd. I'm a bit perplexed, what does it means? Regards, Mahveotm (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the confusion.I don't have the faintest of idea(s).Rollbacked.Winged Blades^Godric 09:41, 4 December 2017 (UT->

Requesting a RfC from the Village pump to be closed.

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. I was wondering if you would be willing to help close this RfC or bring it to the proper forum to be closed. I believe that it has been technically abandoned without any resolution despite seeming to be a controversial issue. I was thinking of making a request on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), but I have declined so far since it might just restart the debate without ending the prior one. --Super Goku V (talk) 09:30, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not.See the concerned thread at WP:ANRFC.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 09:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. You have helped me by telling me the proper location for the future. :) --Super Goku V (talk) 02:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Super Goku V: I am currently working on closing this. Nihlus 09:39, 4 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Ah, thank you for doing so. I will say that there is a link to the RfC in the regular archive, so there should not be any archiving issues unless I have missed something. --Super Goku V (talk) 02:34, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tanvi Dogra

Hello there, the draft you moved named Draft:Tanvi Dogra is with many of reliable sources of Indian news sites like Times of India and others, then why it fails WP:BLP and WP:Notability ? Because it is with a stub template. Many of Indian television actor and actress's articles of Wikipedia and they are same properties like references. HINDWIKI • CHAT 12:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@HindWIKI::--See WP:OSE as a rebuttal to your last point.And, I did not say, it failed WP:BLP.As to my decline, I do not find that any of the two sources, (barring the 2 TOI ones), covers her in a non-trivial manner.And I provide considerable less weight to city-entertainment-supplements of any Indian daily, courtesy its huge use as a promotional tool by different folks.I will re-assert that she is a WP:NOTNOW candidate.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:02, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you are a experienced editor of Wikipedia all time and I agree with you. Please I want a suggestion from you. See my pending changes related contribution here and suggest me become a Pending changes reviewer?. Thank you HINDWIKI • CHAT 13:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I rarely look at anything beyond the scenes of NPR and PM at PERM.So, I decline to make any comment.You may try out at PERM, where an admin will review the request.Winged Blades^Godric 16:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bajrang Dal

Do not revert changes. Use talk page to discuss.Mntzr (talk) 18:26, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mntzr::--Thank you.If you wish to resume your white-washing, you will find yourself very near the indef territory.Winged Blades^Godric 04:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notification

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AArbitration%2FRequests%2FEnforcement&type=revision&diff=814205379&oldid=814154270 --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 12:53, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contratulations WBOG on passing your RfA by the way. I didn't even get a chance to vote. GMG^talk 13:39, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- ...and he will impose his democracy upon you all... :p Serial Number54129^{...speculates} 13:51, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yep.Definitely elated at the prospects of the first 'pedian to have an invisible RFA.And isn't it well-hidden by a red-link?! And 54129, remain cautious, for history has shown that the variance in democracy is often interesting :) Winged Blades^Godric 16:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

mail

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

@Dlohcierekim::--Shot back:)Winged Blades^Godric 18:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CSHN

I really don't know where we are going with the prof. He doesn't appear to be deliberately disruptive, but for an educated man, he seems resistant to/incapable of following our rules. Anyway, you seem to be his current public enemy number 1! I constantly feel that I should take some restraining action, yet he appears to be editing in good faith, at least in his view. Sigh... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: Is there a culturally driven styling involved in his writing that requires it to be so gushy and simpering and almost worshipful? At any rate. He certainly has the ability to write. If we can just harness and direct it into NPOV and if he can avoid unfortunate metaphors/similies, as well as accusing others of ganging up on him. I know it's hard to source some subjects from so far back in time. Unfortunately, it may be he's the only person writing about these subjects. In which case it's OR or primary sourcing. He might want to publish this elsewhere if he cannot hone it to meet Wikipedia's requirements. This is Y I have a personal web page. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dlohcierekim:Ha! I don't have much idea/analysis about culturally driven editing but Tinucherian, Tito dutta, Bhavani et al are sysops from India with quite proficient article-writing skills and AFAIK, the GA cup for the last time was won by an Indian.So, I guess it can't be too over-generalized.Your idea of using his personal website rather than WP very good esp. when he cannot live up to our editorial standards for some or the other reason. Winged Blades^Godric 04:01, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see the cite to his personal website on Draft:Bellamkonda Ramaraya Kavi or Draft:Kopparapu Sodara Kavulu. Most of the cites were opaque to me. They looked like books or something. I cannot tell if he places title first or author first. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 04:11, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And self-ref-spam in the context means citing to research-documents published by him, not to own websites.Winged Blades^Godric 06:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Also, while I agree about the difficulties of procuring sources in English from old eras in southern states, that does not give you any right to mis-use offline refs to support certain statements which are not even covered in the sources! And, before removing his self-refs, I scanned across GScholar. Only one of his publications manages to borderline-graze our suitability mark.Winged Blades^Godric 04:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And, going by some of my notes, Draft:Kopparapu Sodara Kavulu contained refs that did-not supp. the statement(s).I am yet to have any look at Bellamkonda but FIM may have some idea.But the crux of the issue is that once you have breached our trust by mis-citing refs. esp. in a scenario of using vernachlar sources which can't be easily verified and where good-faith-assumption is heavily imp., folks will remain skeptical of offline references until and unless self-verified.Winged Blades^Godric 04:31, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Dloh, you seem to have missed one revision:)Winged Blades^Godric 06:21, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also see this edit of mine and note the edit summary.Winged Blades^Godric 06:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak:--As to where we are going--I have nil idea except that till now we are on a collective steep descent to a time-sink.The defining time-span will be the next few days wherein Murthy can either heed to our advices and improve his content-writing-style, sourcing issues etc. or remain defiant about getting the things back into mainspace and (maybe) file the case at ArbCom.Either path will lead to an enlightment:) Winged Blades^Godric 04:08, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shyamal is another India-based sysop who writes better than me, I don't think there is anything cultural other than he is clearly so strongly committed to his language and religion that he struggles to even see NPOV, let alone address it. The people he writes about are, in his view, great writers with devout and saintly personalities, so why can't he say that? I've pointed out to him on my talk that his references don't have to be in English, and linked to a couple of examples, although if he starts using Telegu sources things might become even more opaque. And I wish he'd write on someone else's talk page... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:45, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

+1.I forgot Shyamal!Winged Blades^Godric 07:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Something completely different

I happened to see that you've been listing promotional user names used for promotion at the problematic user names page. In practice, if they are tagged for speedy deletion with U5/G11, they will always be deleted and blocked anyway, see my log for example. Up to you, just trying to save you some work... (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note.The reporting to UAA was taking 3 clicks and was a safeguard, in case any admin forgot to execute the block while deleting.Not everyone uses SUPG:)At any case, I will be just leaving the pages with the tags !Winged Blades^Godric 08:06, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think what is more problematic is admins who only softblock accounts that are clearly companies promoting themselves. Where blocks have been missed, they can always be imposed later. Incidentally, the message below shows that we rascals sometimes get appreciation for our efforts (: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is quite a problem.Some admins seem to softblock accounts created very clearly for promotional purposes.They tries their best at spewing the same spam from new policy-compliant usernames only to be hard-blocked for utilising WP for promo purposes!

Couldn't agree more w.r.t to the last point.Some pleasing calm amidst an ensuing storm:)Winged Blades^Godric 14:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC) Winged Blades^Godric 14:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You message

Thank You very much Winged Blades of Godric for making Kendriya Vidyalaya No.1 Kanchrapara live on Wikipedia. I created the article once before, but it was rejected. I again tried after improving the article and seeking help from helpful and experienced editors like you and Jimfbleak, who helped me out regarding this matter. As I am new here, so I am very much happy because of creation of my 1st article. I am now more inclined and committed towards Wikipedia now.

Thank You again Souravdas1998 (talk) 08:52, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We are pleased to help you:) I'm glad to know that you feel interested in the project.Have a happy wiki-journey and feel free to re-visit here if you need any help.Regards:) Winged Blades^Godric 15:00, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To complicate matters...

Hi WBoG, re: Draft:Christopher Karas, it's perhaps of note that this article has been created numerous times, with a big flurry a few years ago. There was some sockpuppetry, and overall it had the aroma of someone creating an article about himself or maybe friends building it for him. I brought the article to the attention of WikiProject LGBT, but apparently nobody's interested in it. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have read the above message. I will reply when I have a moment..Thank you!Winged Blades^Godric 07:28, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Log entry

We're done over here for now.It may be noted that ArbCom has already been duly notified of the occurence of the redaction incident and are currently looking into it.If anybody has anything to contribute, please contact the ArbCom directly.Thank you! Winged Blades^Godric 15:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believed I fixed the entry that was missing a reason: RD6. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 05:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I think I agree with SlimVirgin that these entries didn't exactly meet WP:RD6, implying they were unintended mistakes and removal would be non-contentious. These actions should be temporarily undone until some discussion have taken place, in my opinion. Alex Shih (talk) 06:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alex, RD6 ("non-contentious housekeeping") definitely doesn't apply here. The entries should be restored. SarahSV ^(talk) 06:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Coffee:--Sorry for the delay, RL got in the way.I find myself agreeing with Alex.I pretty well remember the non-redacted versions at the log and that of the summaries over here and was surprised to see the redaction mention in the deletion log.By the way, I didn't see SV's message on your t/p and your subseq. reversion.

As a side-note, I don't think replies coupled with undo button is a very good form of communication and would appreciate your's using your t/p.Thank you! Have a good day:)Winged Blades^Godric 07:26, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The log entries are of a block which does not fit the policy of WP:NPA. If I had not been so depressed at the time perhaps I would have saw this. But, I did not. But now I do. The block would not stand to muster at ArbCom, and I'm willing to take this all the way there. And if you got my message, I'd say that's exactly communication. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 09:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..Understood.Winged Blades^Godric 10:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"feel free to contact ArbCom": All the road signage one requires I think. >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 10:55, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, I get the concerns here, but I would suggest that it might be better to handle this in private either by emailing Coffee directly or by emailing the committee. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:14, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom is discussing this--just FYI, and I suppose that's all I can say right now. Drmies (talk) 21:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Articles for deletion/Hyper Car edit conflict

I was editing WP:Articles for deletion/Hyper Car at the same time you were closing it, and ended up submitting my comment after your close. Unclear why I didn't get an edit conflict warning. If it's OK with you, I'll just go ahead and move my comment inside the normal AfD text, since it seems to be in line with your close anyway. Or, I could just back it out. Whatever works for you. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No qualms:) I am thinking of whether and how it affects the close.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith::--AFD closure amendment is

Done.Wait a bit for execution:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith::--The last step would depend largely on the promptness of the execution of the merge.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 14:06, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

...and thank you :) >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 19:26, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Serial Number 54129--And the cause is.........?? Winged Blades^Godric 04:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because because because because because... Because of the wonderful things he does! <g> >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 06:37, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gee!....I guessed that:) Blame the monstrous Thank button on the mobile-editing-interface.Winged Blades^Godric 06:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And there was me thinking you were genuinly grateful to me for maintaining a pristine talk page :p >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 06:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I admire EEng's t/p the most! Try your hands at constructing that:)Winged Blades^Godric

I have my own views on that, so I think not. Cheers! >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 21:34, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering....

Any plans after the deprodding of Cole Williams (musician)? ^{Atsme📞📧} 13:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seen your reply.But somewhat busy as of today/next few days:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just so you don't think your efforts are not appreciated...THEY ARE!!! Keep up the good work! WP needs more editors like you! ^{Atsme📞📧} 21:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You! :)Winged Blades^Godric 10:19, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Saubhagya_Scheme

Hi saw that you made a comment on the page, I've been attempting to help the draftee by providing them with an example opening paragraph. You said you planned to merge the content, could you let me know what your plan is? I had debated whether to write up a small article myself and submit it (can we do that, submit another person's draft?) but was holding off to give the original draftee a chance to work on it. Egaoblai (talk) 00:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shortly replying in details:)Winged Blades^Godric 10:18, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Winged Blades of Godric, I saw your recent comment. I hope you don't mind but I've gone ahead and made the article in mainspace Saubhagya_Scheme. After a google search, it seems this scheme is pretty notable, not just as news, but with Op-eds for it and everything. Although it could in the future be merged into an electrification in india page. Egaoblai (talk) 05:59, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Egaoblai:-No qualms:) I will try my hands at improving that and probably creating the broader-scoped article at some later date! Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 14:02, 15 December 2017 (UT->

Watkin Tudor Jones / Die Antwoord / Yolandi Visser

Greetings,

Can I ask you to engage me regarding your edits to the Watkin Tudor Jones, Yolandi Visser and related pages? I saw your blanking and redirect of the Yolandi article, and I have some concerns about it. First, let me address some concerns you might have about me. I have no COI with these subjects, I have absolutely no relation to them in any way personal, business, financial, or otherwise. The claims being made about me in that context are simply not true. In particular wiping out Yolandi Visser without any discussion was problematic to me because it's not like she's just some backup singer, she's been a full contributor to a number of projects with WTJ, as well as a few without him, do we say she's not notable simply because she's the female half of a creative team? We may need better references on some of the information - sourcing information on this stuff, especially prior to Die Antwoord breaking internationally has been difficult, although I recently checked scholar.google and books.google and a few more recent articles and think we will be able to improve on that somewhat. Thank you. Centerone (talk) 06:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Centerone:If sourcing information reliably, is tough, having an independent article about the subject will be more tough:)Thus, please develop the article on the draft-space and vet it through WP:AFC, once you feel confident enough.Thank you!Winged Blades^Godric 07:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you think Yolandi Visser is non-notable, you should nominate the article for deletion at WP:AFD. It's fine to boldly redirect an article, but after you've been reverted, it's best to go to the proper forum and get consensus. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I didn't note the AfD.Notable but promo-mess.Winged Blades^Godric 12:25, 15 December 2017 (UT->

Request on 15:49:07, 16 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Nirmol360

Nirmol360 (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Mufassil Islam (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Need an Assistance who can make the draft page maintening Wikipedia guide line. I have news links but not understand article with full guide line.

Nirmol360 (talk) 15:49, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nirmol360::--As an encyclopedia, verifiability is one of our core goals and we are very dependent on reliable sources to back-up every information in any article.So, as a primary step, can you create a list of all reliable sources covering the subject non-trivially in your sandbox?(Remember that blogs, youtube etc. are not reliable).Also, DailyMail and RT with questionable editorial policies/practices are not RS, by our standards.Note, that you can use Bengali sources.Also, note that the BBC source does not focus much on the subject and (sort of) mentions his name, in association with the broader topic, in a trivial manner.Finally, read WP:BLP1E.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 16:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

for asking me to look at Karin Flaake. As here, sometimes the request for inline citation for utterly noncontroversial material is a little less than reasonable. . DGG ( talk ) 09:45, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request on 09:52:01, 17 December 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Kupfers

Kupfers (talk · contribs)
- Draft:Cyrus Highsmith (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hi Winged Blades,

you rejected my article about Cyrus Highsmith earlier. I disagree that the references I provided are not credible enough. You may not be familiar with the typeface industry or the work of type designers in general but they don’t get much coverage in general media, papers or on TV. An article in the New York Times is already as significant as it gets. You see from the list of typefaces that Mr. Highsmith is a very accomplished designer in our field and the list of clients who use his typefaces is impressive to say the least. I based the list of references on the French Wikipedia site about him and only added references and recent events that were not covered there. The French colleagues seem to have less of a problem with his significance. There is going to be a exhibition on Mr. Highsmith’s work in The Hague in March, and a book coming out. I was preparing this Wikipedia article for these events and because I am writing an article and a timeline of his typefaces right now and was surprised I could not find any sources online.

Maybe I formated the references in the wrong way, and I will try to add two or three more, but other than that, I don’t agree that Mr. Highsmith is not significant enough and the sources I provide not reliable. Maybe someone more familiar with the design scene could help judge this better.

Kupfers (talk) 09:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kupfers:--I will try to reply to the specific phrases, you used in your message:--

Reply. Winged Blades^Godric 13:10, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that the references I provided are not credible enough--Fontshop.com, PRnewswire.com, occupant.typenetwork and the like (all promo-spam-sites) and most-other font-related-websites and competition websites which featured him as a judge (cover the subject very trivially) don't add to notability.This is a good source.
but they don’t get much coverage in general media, papers or on TV--That's unfortunate but he does have to meet our notability guidelines.
.....and the list of clients who use his typefaces is impressive to say the least--I, without help from RS, don't get any impression from that.We aren't setting up business-deals for a new font:)
The French colleagues seem to have less of a problem with his significance.--Standards of notability vary widely and sister-wikis are completely editorially independent of one another.
I was preparing this Wikipedia article for these events--Please don't intend to use WP as a promo-vehicle.
and was surprised I could not find any sources online--You can always use offline sources.

Inspite of that, I definitely think with more improved sourcing, he can meet GNG.Regards:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winged Blades of Godric (talk • contribs) 13:10, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's a time for festivities...

Christmas tree worm, (Spirobranchus gigantic) ^{^{Atsme📞📧} 12:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)}[reply]
	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 festive holiday... and a prosperous New Year!! 🍸🎁 🎉

Many thanks.Wishing the same to you:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:41, 23 December 201560 -->

E-Century

The plagiarism issue does not go away just because they claim they dealt with it. Nor is it an isolated incident. See [1]. I suggest we post any of their proposed whitewashing edits to Talk for discussion before editing, since they are not giving you complete information (for obvious reasons).

Incidentally, part of the problem is that they publish a large volume of studies from China. There are well known systemic problems with Chinese research, especially medical research. In some fields they publish effectively no negative results. There are cultural reasons for this, and any publisher specialising in Chinese authored research should be aware of it and scrutinising data much more closely. Instead, they appear to have Chinese editors waving through Chinese authored papers. It's inevitable that this will make them look sloppy and substandard. Whether they are above the bar of actual junk journals or below it, they are right at the margin either way. Guy (Help!) 10:55, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JzG:--Here goes my reply:--

First things first, to dispel your misassumption(s), I am not proxying for any editor/any group.The edits were executed in my individual capacities as an independent editor.I am probably one of the harshest editors against any type of promo-spam and is one of the least-likely editors to help any company in any promo-activity.
Yeah, I know pretty well about the often-intentional non-disclosure of negative results in Chinese medical research (which partially led to the 2003 WHO blunder-report on Acupuncture!) and other allied factors.
I, essentially agree with your last paragraph but, unless and until some rel. source specifically criticizes the journal for these practices, in a non-trivial fashion, we are within the perimeter of orig. research.
- I see you have used Retraction Watch, a quite decent RS on the issue, to bolster the claims.But the problem lies in the fact, that RW mass-reports all instances of retractions et al (sort of a database) which leads to the broader question about whether the events are significant enough? If you can add one/two more reliable pieces which cover these aspects specifically, that would be great:)
I also see that you have re-inserted the phrase but with no evidence of the review process, so editorial reliability could not be assessed. I downloaded the entire transcripts/emails of the sting, years back but sadly could not locate it now. Would you be kind enough to mail the portion that supports the phrasing?
Finally, our job as an encyclopedia is neither to glorify their acctivities, nor to shine spotlights on their misdeeds.We faithfully reproduce the reliable sources, in accordance with the very-necessary constraints of proper weight etc.Winged Blades^Godric 13:51, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I know you're not proxying for them, I have been an OTRS agent too. I don't blame you at all: people will twist and turn every which way to try to get rid of published criticism, and the more bogus the subject, the more vociferous they will be (cf Sheldrake and morphic resonance, or Dana Ullman and homeopathy). The summary saying no evidence of editorial review, I will find again for you. Basically there are 5 tables, and this is in table 5, which is the ones that rejected but without any statement. I am not adding anything re the Chinese issue, but Retraction Watch has a number of relevant articles. Oh, and while RW kind of is a database, every article has significant and specific commentary. Not all retractions get full articles. Guy (Help!) 18:54, 18 December 201688 -->

No fancy template...

WBG, but just but to wish you happy holidays and all the best for 2018. It's probably a lot warmer where I am than where you are 😎 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:49, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It was so kind of you to drop by:) Wishing a happy and prosperous 2018!:) Winged Blades^Godric 16:31, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Surely not true, though? >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 12:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I actually did check and at that time it was 2 c warmer in Bangkok (if that's where kudpung lives in thailand) than in Kharagpur. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's still like that now :) so probably not a lot then :D >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 12:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129 and Galobtter:--To be fair, I did not tally the temperature-data.But Galobter's vigilance must be highly appreciated:)

On a side-note, if any of you choose to, you may choose to avail the opportunity to participate in a unique arbitration at User talk:CSHN Murthy.Winged Blades^Godric 13:03, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant :D >SerialNumber54129^{...speculates} 13:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Never knew you were a scoundrel.. Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:15, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Etnic hatred, religious bias, illiteracy......he has thrown literally anything he could clutch at.But, irrespective of everything, you've got to accept that not often do we come across such brilliant minds.

Winged Blades^Godric 13:25, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And olive branch & holiday wishes!

Winged Blades of Godric, please accept these holiday wishes :)

I've caused this year to end on a chord of disappointment for many, but I hope that despite my mistakes and the differences in opinion and perspectives, and regardless of what the outcome is or in what capacity I can still contribute in the coming year, we can continue working together directly or indirectly on this encyclopedic project, whose ideals are surely carried by both of our hearts. I'm hoping I have not fallen in your esteem to the level where "no hard feelings" can no longer ring true, because I highly respect you and your dedication to Wikipedia, and I sincerely wish you and your loved ones all the best for 2018.

Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 03:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC), humbled but optimistic about the upcoming year of renewal and growth![reply]

@Salvidrim:--It was very kind of you to drop by:) And, I definitely have nothing personal against you! Wishing you and your loved ones a very happy, prosperous and pleasantful 2018.

Winged Blades^Godric 13:38, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Kiryat Motzkin – Haifa line

please relist this discussion. it was created in 2008, and the referenced talk page remarks are from 2006. it's now almost 2018, so the idea that it may be used in the future is not a strong argument at this point. in addition, you closed the discussion at "11:24, 22 December 2017" which is not the full 7 days after I started the discussion. Frietjes (talk) 00:25, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. The policy states:--The template is not used, either directly or by template substitution and has no likelihood of being used.At least, a TFD participant, (who isn't the original creator) has displayed potential interest in the template and may choose to work on it.Amos has once displayed a potential interest.Even I may choose to have a go at it.On the counter side, I fail to see any benefits of the deletion.Winged Blades^Godric 08:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On a sidenote, by the rates of participation at TfD, three hours wouldn't have mattered a bit in the final outcome.Winged Blades^Godric 08:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not, but relisting a discussion with only 2 participants for another 7 days seems like a no brainer. I have opened a deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 December 24. Frietjes (talk) 14:29, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see. It will surely be a learning experience.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 14:37, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you

	Holiday barnstar
	You deserve a holiday barnstar, but this barn flake was as close as I could come. And best holiday wishes to you. Thank you for making Wikipedia a better place. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:53, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can't ping you --Many thanks:) Have a prosperous and gleeful 2018.

Cheers ! Winged Blades^Godric 05:17, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you use [[User:7&6=thirteen]] it works. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

	Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
	Wish you a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2018! – GSS (talk\|c\|em) 18:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@GSS-1987:--Many thanks

.Wishing you and your loved ones a belated (~45 minutes) Merry Christmas and a gleeful and most-prosperous 2018 too:) Winged Blades^Godric 19:15, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice: improper COI tagging

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Improper_COI_tagging. The discussion is about the topic Language Creation Society.

That's just going nowhere.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 19:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blanked as a courtesy...

... But as long as the page has history, I'm not being protected. Please delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.218.150 (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, talk-pages are normally never-ever deleted.See WP:VANISHING.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 13:05, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may, though, choose to contact the folks over here detailing your situation and rationale behind your demand.Winged Blades^Godric 13:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I sent the email was to detail the situation and request deletion. All I've received are two blanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.218.150 (talk) 14:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about what you're trying to describe.If you mean that they have not replied to your request, they are probably looking at the issue.Winged Blades^Godric 14:55, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I sent an email to some arbitration group or something. The only response I've had is two different people blanking my page, which is obviously something I can do myself. Why did you blank my page? You must have received the email? 99.203.17.167 (talk) 15:57, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not an arbitrator and obviously didn't recieve your mail.I further did not blank the page and just inserted the courtsy-blanking template, after I came across Rob's t/p.As, I said before, you may choose to mail the folks at WMF Support and Safety Team who may provide some alternative scopes.Winged Blades^Godric 16:02, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

McDonnell Gambit

I see what you mean about the article I wrote, I and User:Ihardlythinkso have gone over it and I'm wondering what else I need to improve, can you help User:Winged Blades of Godric Michael james campbell (talk) 21:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IHTS is an experienced editor in the field.The curr. version of the article is definitely below our main-space standards but I'm utterly hopeful he can flesh it out into something good.Have a pleasantful 2018Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 08:35, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of a brouhaha at Talk:Turkey

Hey! So I closed the follow up RfC you started as a result of your previous close on the Turkey lede RfC. Needless to say stuff happened. Thought I'd give you a head up if you have any input you'd wish to make. Brustopher (talk) 23:02, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluating.I was not following the scape for a while.Have a pleasant 2018:)Winged Blades^Godric 08:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brustopher:--That was a close par excellence.Commented on Talk:turkey.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 11:38, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Signature breaks syntax highlight

Hello, your signature uses the <span> tags across wikicode closing brackets. If you could move the style tags inside the wikilink itself, that'd fix it. With thanks. --QEDK (愛 ☃️ 海) 06:05, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking.Winged Blades^Godric 08:37, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK:-I hope to have fixed it.As a curiosity, can you elaborate on the problems caused by by prev. signature ? Wishing you a pleasant 2018.

Winged Blades^Godric 08:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's fixed now. The previous signature is syntactically wrong but MediaWiki allows some pretty hackey HTML, so the markup gets processed. The only problem is that the tags shows up as unclosed on the new syntax highlighter. --QEDK (愛 ☃️ 海) 16:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm..Understood. Cheers! Winged Blades^Godric 16:51, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conor Lamb Close

I am thinking of taking your close of Conor Lamb to review. One, I don't think consensus is clear. Second, national coverage continues. Even if he loses, he will likely be noteworthy, as Jon Ossoff. Coverage continues and I think that makes a clear argument for reversing this decision.Casprings (talk) 04:44, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is pretty clear in the sense that Delete !voters will be obviously satisfied with a redirect result than a NC.And, feel free to approach DRV, since I ain't revisiting my close.Regards:)Winged Blades^Godric 05:28, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Howl's Moving Castle Edit Warring

Hey there. Here is what I sent to Vanamonde93 if you hadn't read it yet.

Hello there.

Strange how this page isn't fine at all, but other movies (including the other Studio Ghibli movies) that have a long production section are fine. That is the reason why I keep edit warring your revision. Luigitehplumber (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So why is Howl not fine to have a long production section, yet other movies like the other Ghibli movies are fine? I'm confused. Luigitehplumber (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at corresponding t/p.And, long-term edit warring sans 3RR violation is also blockable. Winged Blades^Godric 04:41, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year

Hi Winged Blades of Godric, I'm so sorry I thought I left a greeting but apparently not!, Just wanted to say a belated Merry Christmas - Hope you and yours had a lovely day and I also wish you and yours a very Happy and Healthy New Year :), Thanks, –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 17:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to worry about.:)Best wishes as always! Winged Blades^Godric 04:36, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mexicans Dispute Resolution

If you are acting as the moderator, please change the status of the dispute to in progress. If you are merely discussing the dispute, it can be left at New. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:34, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merely discussing.IMO, a DRN will be of little use since any compromise will essentially run counter to general prohibition against synthesis and original research.Sort of an open and shut case to my eyes. Winged Blades^Godric 04:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help with keeping Ty Morse page

Winged Blades of Godric, what can I do to prevent this page from being deleted? I understand your concern for the integrity of wikipedia and respect your commitment to this important cultural enterprise. I created a few pages several years ago in order to learn more about wikipedia and how it works. I tried to follow the Articles for Creation procedures, cite sources appropriately, and review guidelines. I learned a lot about the challenges of encoding material for wikipedia's system, and I continue to use what I have learned, and the pages I created, to help my students at the university where I teach. As I have already responded on my user talk page, I am not and have never been paid for my contributions to wikipedia. I believe that the article on Ty Morse meets the standards for notability as demonstrated by the citations provided. If there are other problems with the the article, please let me know so that I may have an opportunity to correct them. I am very interested in keeping my pages alive and would appreciate your expert advice. Jemima1418 (talk) 00:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I extremely appreciate your enthusiasm and interest about WP but to be fair,I don't believe that the subject is notable.I will be analysing the bunch of sources at the AfD. Winged Blades^Godric 04:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for giving me information about the Arbitration Committee and giving me hope for further help. Actually i am new to this so i don't know much about it. Jagat jit singh (talk) 15:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There wasn't any considerable info about the ArbCom and to be blunt, the template solely states:--If you further continue with your disruptive activities and don't wait for the establishment of concensus in talk-page discussions before inserting controversial edits, you will be soon subject to a topic-ban from the area of Indian politics,religion,caste et al and if you still choose to edit in the area, you will be indefinitely blocked.Regards:) Winged Blades^Godric 16:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

need help

i know that i engaged in edit warring in Bhagat singh. but the edit was truely based on a source. let me clear, although Bhagat singh become atheist later on his life but he was born in a Sikh jat family. the jat is divided into three categories Sikh jat, Muslim jat and Hindu jat and bhagat singh was born in a Sikh jat family, but here it has only mention jat. Here are the sources which clears it, please see^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]^[8]^[9] so, i need your help by supporting me on this issue on Talk:Bhagat Singh--Jagat jit singh (talk) 17:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

ePUAP

Hi, please review the article and remove the deletion tag if fixed. Please also share your thoughts on the article's talk page. --Rezonansowy_akaRezy (talk | contribs) 19:12, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Winged Blades of Godric. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Youngnoah (talk) 01:11, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seen. Expect a reply within 48 hours. Winged Blades^Godric 09:11, 30 December 200435 -->

User:Winged Blades of Godric/sandbox3

Hello Winged Blades of Godric. I was patrolling Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as vandalism, and I found User talk:Winged Blades of Godric/sandbox3. However, you included a note at the bottom of the page asking sysops not to delete the page. For this reason, I surrounded the CSD tag with <pre> tags.

I noticed, however, that the page is a copy of the deleted revisions of the Pa Sulay Njie article, which was speedily deleted for being a blatant hoax. Why are we recreating articles deleted as hoaxes in userspace? Just because there is an OTRS ticket doesn't mean we should bypass the usual methods for appealing speedy deletions. Mz7 (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mz7:--You've got the facts wrong.I asked RHaworth to email the deleted version and the revision history.On initial searches, I doubted that it might not be a hoax and choose to create it at userspace for running IABot and a detailed review.(Without any comments on the merits of the article), my assumptions were correct i.e. the article is not a hoax and I have subsequently asked RHaworth to restore it.Also, I frankly don't see how I am bypassing speedy-deletion-appeal methods;WP is not a bureaucracy.Anyways, the purposes of the sandbox are met and I am tagging it under G7. Feel free to delete it. Winged Blades^Godric 03:16, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay excellent – I was merely concerned that an apparent hoax was being reposted, and you’ve addressed these concerns. Naturally Wikipedia isn’t a bureaucracy, but the “proper” speedy deletion appeal method is to contact the deleting administrator, which you did correctly. In any case, I’m sorry that I may have come off as overly confrontational, and I apologize as well for the false accusations. I jumped too quickly to conclusions and should have just asked what was going on.

Self-trout. Mz7 (talk) 04:04, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year, Winged Blades of Godric! I hope our exchange above hasn’t completely soured the festive mood. I hope we can work together in 2018. Mz7 (talk) 17:19, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mz7:-Many thanks for your wishes.It's just minutes into 2018There was nothing in the last thread that soured my mood (Sorry, if my reply was a bit terse). And I too eagerly look forward to collaborative endeavours in future!Warm Regards:) Winged Blades^Godric 18:37, 31 December 2017 (UT

[1] ttps://www.ndtv.com/photos/news/the-life-and-times-of-bhagat-singh-9157

[2] ttp://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/bhagat-singh-a-jat-sikh-rajguru-a-brahmin-says-congress-party-organ-7456.html

[3] ttp://zeenews.india.com/news/nation/bhagat-singh-a-jat-rajguru-brahmin_699295.html

[4] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=OLctDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA312&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYw4X28bDYAhWHsI8KHflwD1E4ChDoAQhWMAk#v=onepage&q=bhagat%20singh%20sikh%20jat&f=false

[5] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=UJckBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA11&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYw4X28bDYAhWHsI8KHflwD1E4ChDoAQgnMAA#v=onepage&q=bhagat%20singh%20sikh%20jat&f=false

[6] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=Cty5vgLuGCgC&pg=PA350&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYw4X28bDYAhWHsI8KHflwD1E4ChDoAQg0MAM#v=onepage&q=bhagat%20singh%20sikh%20jat&f=false

[7] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=8hhXq7hpzSwC&pg=PA126&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiWyNK97rDYAhUUS48KHQmJASgQ6AEINzAD#v=onepage&q=bhagat%20singh%20sikh%20jat&f=false

[8] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=IYNRtwvYSi8C&pg=PA59&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjd3Ofk87DYAhUPSo8KHfbyBnI4FBDoAQgnMAA#v=onepage&q=bhagat%20singh%20sikh%20jat&f=false

[9] ttps://books.google.co.in/books?id=oByfSQAACAAJ&dq=bhagat+singh+sikh+jat&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYw4X28bDYAhWHsI8KHflwD1E4ChDoAQgsMAE

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]