User talk:Liz/Archive 48

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 45 Archive 46 Archive 47 Archive 48 Archive 49 Archive 50 → Archive 54


Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Mail

You have. mail. The format of the project has changed since my last email (to anyone), so my apologies if this is inelegant or incorrect. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 15:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

For Category:WikiProject Taiwan 1000 article

This category is based on the ongoing WikiProject Taiwan 1000 and will be tagged with entries through the {{‎WikiProject Taiwan 1000}} template. I am sorry that my English is not good and I could not find out how to raise it on the relevant page, I hope can get help, thank you! -- NHC、not NPC！｡:.ﾟ(*`･ω･)ゞ:｡ 16:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sean Bielat

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sean Bielat. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Interestingfinds12 (talk) 17:34, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Undelete request: List of Verbotene Liebe characters

Hi, are you able to undelete List of Verbotene Liebe characters so I can take a look at the content? I will promptly redirect it to the main article, Verbotene Liebe. All of the poorly sourced, plot heavy individual character articles are currently being PRODed and I'm planning to redirect all of them as well. I'd like to get an overall picture of the existing content to strategize if and how any character info should be reintroduced, perhaps in the main article or as a sourced list. Thanks in advance.— TAnthonyTalk 21:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TAnthony,
 Done As a contested PROD, I have restored the page. If I remember rightly, there were a lot of redirects to this page but if you are just going to redirect the list to another article, then it doesn't make a lot of sense to restore the redirects to point to another redirect. Of course, if you want to recreate any of them, feel free but just be selective. Glad I could help. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks so much. Yes I won't restore any of the redirects to this page.— TAnthonyTalk 21:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, TAnthony,
I was looking at upcoming PRODs (at User:DumbBOT/ProdSummary) and there are quite a few that concern Verbotene Liebe. You might want to consider those listed. Liz Read! Talk! 23:50, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
With much appreciation for your thoughtfulness and help. Ppt91talk 23:58, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Softweb Technology Solution

You deleted this as G13, even though the last human edit appears to be October 21, 2022, which is less than 4 months ago. This was found via Wikipedia:Database reports/Possibly out-of-process deletions#G13, which you may want to keep an eye on (it updates every 3 days). * Pppery * it has begun... 04:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, * Pppery *,
Thank you so much for bringing this mistake to my attention. I'd say that 99.99% of the CSD G13 page deletions are identified as eligible by a bot, SDZeroBot, specifically. The bot is always accurate, to a fault. It's when drafts are tagged by human editors that mistakes happen. There seems to be a lot of confusion over the G13 criteria because I think the majority of CSD G13 taggings by human editors are incorrect, the editor doesn't look carefully at the "last edited date" or they think any old, abandoned User page is eligible. I should have caught this one.
Thanks for letting me know about Wikipedia:Database reports/Possibly out-of-process deletions#G13, I'll check it regularly from now on. Again, I appreciate the notice. Have a good weekend. Liz Read! Talk! 04:47, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The same report seems to have caught two other bad deletions you performed: Draft:Seat (car) (not G13 eligible for another week), EXPO Communications, Inc. (dba ExpoTV) (was deleted as R3 despite having been around for a decade and that criterion only applying to recently-created pages). * Pppery * it has begun... 23:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, * Pppery *,
 Done Restored. I think Draft:Seat (car) got caught up in an otherwise normal batch delete which is sometimes done in early morning hours when the G13s have accumulated overnight. We have a great editor Josh who tags all of the drafts that have expired during the middle of the night and it can lead to dozens of tagged drafts. During the day and evening (at least on my clock), we stay on top of them as they expire but in the middle of the night, we have few editors paying attention to them and they can pile up in large numbers.
But I have no explanation for how I came to delete EXPO Communications, Inc. (dba ExpoTV). That was just an outright mistake. I might nominate it at RFD but I've found that sometimes redirects I think are awkward or not useful are seen as valuable to RFD regulars. Thanks again for bringing these to my attention. It's nice to know that there is a safety net for admins when errors happen. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
I see there was also Draft:J O E which was tagged too early. I know I do a lot of page deletions so a couple of mistakes is to be expected but this is still disconcerting to me. I'll think about what might be going on over the weekend. I'm glad we have this database list. Liz Read! Talk! 23:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Drafts

Can you please stop deleting my drafts. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 00:43, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆,
Every day, we get a list of drafts that have not been edited in at least 6 months and they are deleted when they expire. They are considered "abandoned" because no editor is working on them. It is not personal, it happens with all drafts no matter who created them. If you edit them at least every six months, they will not be deleted. It's very simple and I left you a talk page message about this a while ago.
Alternatively, you can move your drafts out of Draft space into your User space and do not submit them them to WP:AFC (or remove any AFC tags) and then they won't appear on the list of expiring drafts. We don't make individual exceptions, it's all up to you, either actively edit your drafts regularly or move them to your User space and out of Draft space. But you can't create draft articles and abandon them and expect them to be kept. It's an agreed upon speedy deletion criteria that we all live with. Liz Read! Talk! 01:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

User:Ckirby9

Hey Liz, I saw that you deleted User:Ckirby9 for using it as a web host. Can you tell me if the content was the same as Draft:Pro 32's or Draft:World Cup Simulations? Gonnym (talk) 14:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Gonnym,
No, it was a standard personal profile that many new editors post on their User page but it was of a minor and included some personal information. It was not an article draft. Liz Read! Talk! 17:46, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Undelete Request: User:Daniel Jackson 2001/sandbox

Greetings,

My personal sandbox was nominated for speedy deletion and has since been deleted. I've made a decision to contest the speedy deletion, and I wish to make a second appeal. Since I became a user on Wikipedia, I've constantly messed around and toyed with my personal sandbox, without any serious intention of publication. I've always been interested in alternative history, and using the vast amount of infoboxs, I've created alternative World War I or World War II scenarios. I've also created alternate versions of real-life countries, and even created scenarios of future versions or alternate versions of real-life royalty or politicians. I've done this for years, it is quite clearly fictional, and I do not understand as to why it would constitute an issue now. I have had no intention of spreading false information or hoaxes, this was my personal sandbox and not an actual article.

~~~~ Daniel Jackson 2001 (talk) 14:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Daniel Jackson 2001,
I see you are talking about User:Daniel Jackson 2001/sandbox and I was stunned to see that there are almost 3,000 edits to this page and that's about as many edits as you made during your entire time here! Are you contributing at all to building an encyclopedia or improving existing articles or are you just playing around in your sandbox? Ordinarily, I'd restore a page upon request but I think you are using Wikipedia as your personal webhost and not creating factual articles in your User space which is the purpose on this project.
There are other alternate history platforms where you can take your speculation about future kings of England but this is a clearly fictitious article that has no place on Wikipedia.
If you have questions about creating appropriate pages on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
I would be remiss if I didn't let you know that you can appeal this deletion decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Liz Read! Talk! 17:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Redirects to moved GA talk pages

Hi -- I see you're deleting redirects to moved GA talk pages. I've been doing a lot of these moves recently, and I have been in two minds about the usefulness of the redirects, but Chipmunkdavis asked me to leave them in place when doing the moves as they believe they are useful. (I'm not an admin but as I have the page mover right I can avoid leaving redirects when I do the moves.) Is there a standing consensus that these redirects should not exist? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:30, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mike Christie,
No, I don't think there is any agreed-upon understanding of what to do with these redirect pages, they just showed up on Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphaned talk subpages and usually pages that show up on database reports like this are deleted unless there is some outstanding reason to keep them. I guess you can restore them if you believe it's appropriate. Sorry for any confusion these page deletions caused. Liz Read! Talk! 17:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
No apology needed; I'm not even sure they shouldn't be deleted. I guess if there's some agreement they shouldn't be then we need to keep them out of the relevant database reports in some way. Chipmunkdavis, what do you think Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
The concern with such deletions is that they break existing links. For example, Talk:2009 Northwest Airlines Flight 253/GA1 is linked to in the article history of Talk:Northwest Airlines Flight 253, so as it has been deleted there is no link to the GA review on the talkpage. CMD (talk) 01:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Redirect

Hello. Could you create redirect List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen to Max Verstappen#Complete Formula One results and connect to list of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen (Q111507070). Eurohunter (talk) 19:50, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Eurohunter,
I can create a redirect from List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen to Max Verstappen#Complete Formula One results although I'll need to protect it afterwards. But what do you mean by "connect to list of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen (Q111507070)"? We can add a category to a redirect page but I'm not sure what is involved with connecting a page to another Wiki project other than creating a soft redirect. Please clarify what additional steps you want me to do besides creating the redirect and I'll see what I can do. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 19:55, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Just link redirect to Wikidata item - I will do it myself then. Eurohunter (talk) 18:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Kowalski’s Market

Can you reverse your deletion of my Wikipedia page? There’s no reason for that. It was notable, had sourcing and someone mistakenly moved it to a draft space so I moved it back. TheUSConservative (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TheUSConservative,
The only page I deleted was Wikipedia:Kowalski's Markets and that is because articles do not belong in Wikipedia/Project space. Wikipedia space is for policy pages and noticeboards. So, I moved it back to Draft space. No content was deleted from your article, the only edit on Wikipedia:Kowalski's Markets was the page move there and back to Draft space so there is no deleted content to restore...everything is in the version in Draft space. I recommend you submit the draft to Articles for Creation for review so you can get the opinion of some experienced editors on it so it is less likely to be deleted. But, if you want, you can move it directly to main space/Article space. But there is no reason to restore a redirect from Wikipedia space to Draft space.
If you have questions about article creation, deletion policy, namespaces or editing on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. I hope this addresses your concern. Liz Read! Talk! 21:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I fixed it. TheUSConservative (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Soft delete?

Wouldn't Spider-Man and Batman: Disordered Minds be eligible for soft delete rather than relisting? FWIW, since you relisted it, there have been two comments favoring deletion. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 04:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Just Another Cringy Username,
I'll consider your suggestion and review the discussion later. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 04:12, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I'd make a similar request for Batman & Spider-Man: New Age Dawning once it finishes its AfD period. It's the sequel to Disordered Minds and the AfD is showing a similar lack of participation. Just Another Cringy Username (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Drafting

It's an entirely new problem which has really only started cropping up in the past week. What happens is that if somebody adds categories to the page while it's still in draft, and then moves the page into mainspace shortly thereafter, then the redirect created by the page move somehow lingers in an incategory search of the categories that the page was filed in, even though the categories aren't present on the redirect and the title isn't visible in a direct look at the category itself. The primary issue was with Category:Living people in particular — because that category has over a million articles in it, it can't be searched for WP:DRAFTNOCAT or WP:USERNOCAT violations just by eyeballing the category, so I have to use an incategory search to check it rather than scanning it directly off the polluted article reports, and thus was seeing them. And they weren't clearing on their own either, as about seven or eight of the ones that showed up last week were still lingering in the search this morning.

Even though I've been doing an incategory search on that category at least once or twice a day for years, I had never seen this happen at all before this year — there was one isolated case in January, the first time I had ever seen it at all, but then after that the problem didn't recur again until last week, when suddenly there were about 20 of them all at once. But I'm sure that "add categories to the draft just before moving the page into mainspace" isn't a new thing that people just suddenly started doing last week, and hadn't already been doing for years without incident, so it's very clearly a new problem.

I already reported it to WP:VPT last week, who advised me to file a bug report at Phabricator — which I did, and it looks like the issue may now have been solved, as none of the pages that were in the incategory search this morning are still there now. So hopefully I won't have to do that anymore, because it was really irritating to try to fix them all manually (which is why I only moved about half of them yesterday before giving up and going to bed while leaving the rest to be dealt with later.) But if it does recur again, at least now you have some context for what I was talking about. Bearcat (talk) 04:25, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for contributing so much to Wikipedia!

STB (talk) 01:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello Liz!

I'm the admin for the draft Cumulative Dis-Advantage (CDA). You deleted the page on 21:18, 7 January 2023 and I can't seem to tell why. I do understand that it was incomplete, but I didn't notice the draft's deletion until today when I came to communicate with the fine folx at Wikipedia, and add more sections to beef it up. I am working with a few other PhD students, and as you can imagine, getting people to agree on what's important and what's not is, well, trying.

Cumulative Dis/Advantage is the only actual theory in my field, which is Life Course Sociology. One of the first responses to the page submission was that it was too similar to The Matthew Effect, so we were trying to come together and figure out a way to differentiate it from CDA.

Before realizing the page had been deleted, I wanted to ask you guys if you had any specific recommendations on how the page could be written and/or organized better, if empirical examples would help, that kind of thing.

Would you consider reinstating the draft so my colleagues and I can continue working on it?

Thank you kindly,

Micah Micaharafah (talk) 03:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker). @Micaharafah, the article was not deleted. What Liz deleted was a redirect to Draft:Cumulative dis-advantage, which is the page's current title. Star Mississippi 03:27, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you @Star Mississippi!! Micaharafah (talk) 13:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Vilikesa AfD

I think you knew this was coming... I strenuously disagree that this was closable as "keep". All arguments on what constitutes SIGCOV aside, WP:YOUNGATH is a guideline that makes it very clear coverage must be prolonged to count towards notability, and this is a 15-year-old who has never played even semi-professionally, nor for a national team, so two interviews in local news (most interviews and local news also both being inadmissible per YOUNGATH) published in the same week are objectively unacceptable for establishing notability. Can you please relist? JoelleJay (talk) 18:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, JoelleJay,
Yes, I expected to hear from you. Ordinarily, I would refuse your request as I believe the consensus was clear to "Keep" this article even if some of the Keeps were Weak Keeps. But I expect then you would go straight to Deletion review and I think it is less disruptive to just allow a relist for another week or until another closer wants to bring the discussion to an end. Now I expect other editors will come here and complain about a relist so it's one of those sports-related decisions that doesn't make everyone happy.
However, I ask that you not do any canvassing about this discusion. You might be offended by even the suggestion of you doing this but it's always a possibility in these lopsided discussions where there is a lone dedicated editor whose opinion is not aligned with everyone else in the discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 19:26, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz, thank you very much for considering the relist. I understand your rationale and also why you would want to caution against canvassing. I did start a conversation with SpiderOne at his talk before I saw your reply, but as he's already !voted I don't think that's a problem? JoelleJay (talk) 19:38, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
I thought I'd also mention the reason this is getting more attention now is probably from my mentioning the backlog at AfD on the NSPORT talk page before asking for a relist (i.e. not from me canvassing anyone). JoelleJay (talk) 22:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Terrorism in 2021

The deletion tag seems a bit premature. Doesn't it say the category has to be empty for 7 days? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Someone who's wrong on the internet,
Well, you are right and wrong. As soon as an empty category is found, it is tagged CSD C1. Then it sits for 7 days. If it wasn't tagged, then we'd have no idea when the 7 day period was over. The tagging starts the 7 day period. If it is no longer empty during that week, the tag is removed. If it is still empty after a week, it is deleted. Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Makes sense. Thanks! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 05:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Adam Odufuye sandbox

Hi, I tagged the user subpage User:Adam Odufuye/sandbox for G11, not U5. The subject of the page is an obvious immediate family of the user and the page is blatantly promotional. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 19:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

This is not a plausible draft. The page speaks highly of the person and is completely business related, not a genuine biography. Fancy Refrigerator (talk) 19:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Agree

I read your closing statement at WP:Articles for deletion/Shiho Yano with interest, and head-nodding. I guess it is better than outright deletion, as you said, but damn, I hate tacking a woman's lives onto the husband's article as though she is merely a fleshy appendage. There are a couple of entries like that on the never-ending list of AfD-merges that can just sit there until they rot. I'm not going to merge them. Joyous! Noise! 22:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Aissatou Barry

User:Raymarcbadz removed the redirect for this article (it was closed as a redirect last year). IS this an appropriate edit? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sportsfan 1234,
No, it's not appropriate to change a redirect resulting from an AFD closure back into an article but it happens. It's not rare but usually the editor waits a few weeks or months before they try to circumvent the AFD decision. Typically, if another editor notices, it goes back for a 2nd AFD unless the article recreation is a vast improvement over the original article and the AFD results in a deletion rather than a redirect. Liz Read! Talk! 22:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Is there away to compare the articles? Am I allowed to redirect it again, or does it need to go to AFD again? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 22:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Expiring drafts

Hope you're having a good weekend. Re this deletion, what happened to the bot that used to give a warning? No issue with the deletion, of course, and I'll restore it if I find sourcing, but I feel like the process had a hiccup here. Star Mississippi 22:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Star Mississippi,
No, no hiccups, unfortunately this worked according to the current system. Firefly Bot gives a 5 month warning ONCE which I think you received in September 2022. It doesn't give a 2nd or 3rd 5 month warning. I've asked Firefly if they could have the bot give out 5 month warnings no matter how many times it's been given out before but the bot still doesn't do this and I don't know why this can't be arranged. Maybe if you could also recommend it to them, my suggestion might get more support. It's not unusual for an editor to have to go to REFUND 2, 3 or even 4 times when their drafts keep getting deleted every six months. For a handful of editors who produce a lot of drafts (like in the hundreds), it can be tricky to keep track of which ones are close to their expiration month so I wish Firefly Bot would give out regular 5 month notices even if they have already been given out once.
But I am surprised that I didn't leave a personal message to you. I usually add a personal note when I see that the draft creator is an admin or a long-time editor but I'm playing catch-up today with the time change and I guess this slipped by me. I don't like posting template messages like this to experienced editors but there is typically anywhere from 150-225 drafts and User pages expiring each day (although it can get up to 400+ drafts) and so handling them all in a timely way can get a little mechanical just due to the numbers. Hey man im josh helps out on weekdays but it's just me on the weekends now that Explicit seems to have semi-retired. Luckily, unlike vandalism, BLP- or copyright-violations, old drafts are not an urgent issue to deal with and I get to them when I get to them. Liz Read! Talk! 22:34, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Oops, indeed it did. I guess I also didn't realize how long it had been since I started that draft. No worries on the lack of a personal note. Hard to know at a glance who created something, especially with the volume of draft expirations. It does seem that a second set of reminders would be helpful. Not sure how taxing it would be to the bot, but I'll raise it with Firefly. Thanks again for the explanation. Star Mississippi 23:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Abandoned RfA

Hi Liz, I recently did some idle rummaging around WP:Database reports/Unfiled RfAs and noticed WP:RFA/Ronjohn, which someone tagged for speedy deletion in 2021 and which you then untagged because the criteria didn't apply. However, you also asked Ronjohn whether he'd be okay with deletion at User talk:Ronjohn#Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ronjohn 2, to which he both emphatically and belatedly answered last November. Technically, that does count as a U1, no? Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 15:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Shahram ebrahimi

Hi dear friend.[1] New resources added. Check it out خاچی (talk) 05:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

ME to forestall G13 status – an interesting wrinkle, re: copy attribution

Thanks for being on the lookout for some of my close-to-expired drafts and saving them from oblivion, such as these two saves at Draft:Grievance politics. In the case of this draft, I've merged everything I care about into Grievance politics and am content to let it go, and was going to G7 it to save you wasted effort in the future. But then I noticed this edit summary with copy attribution naming the Draft page, so in theory, now it *mustn't* be deleted! But that puts us in a quandary, because of course it will be/should be deleted.

I've raised this interesting case in discussion at WT:Copying within Wikipedia. You may be interested in that discussion, and your feedback there would be appreciated. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Short articles?

I just read your point that articles being short is not a valid reason for deletion. I'm still pretty new to Wikipedia so I humbly ask about how to proceed with extremely short articles. Given that stubs exist, if an article is too short, shouldn't it be a stub? Or are there exceptions where a proper article can be as short as a stub? Or is it that maybe the recommendation for an AfD only failing because of size should be to transform into stub instead of delete?


Thank you in advance! Irecorsan (talk) 06:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Rev del requested

On User talk:Shahabali839898 All three of this user's edits after Dan's creation of the talk page (with a declined review message) were a copyright violation of worthax.com (specifically https://www.worthax.com/2023/01/patimat-rasulova-bio-wiki-wife-height.html and likely other worthax pages as well) and was a partial recreation of this user's sandbox (db-copyvio nom'd by me) and of their identical draft (db-g12 nom'd by Dan). Talk page Rev dels requested for these three edits. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 07:24, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Zinnober9,
Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I took care of it earlier today. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Lynne Carter

Are we absolutely sure this isn't a reverse copyvio? I'm pretty sure the New York Public Library doesn't have forks of Wikipedia articles. It's just this article has been around with the plagiarised text, for over a decade. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 23:39, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ritchie333,
The content had been in the article since it was created in 2011. Do you think NYPL would use Wikipedia content to describe their collection without attribution? I'm not sure but I think I have more faith in the NYPL curators and a Wikipedia editor. I'm not against restoration but, as I said, this content has been part of the article since it was created and it forms a large part of the article. What do you think? Liz Read! Talk! 00:04, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
It looks like a G12 to me, and I deleted it as such. I just noticed it was on the main page and nobody spotted it. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:09, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, Ritchie333, I only came across this article after reading about a terrible B-movie from the 1960s where they mention that Carter was in the film, playing a woman. I was curious about a person being a drag artist in the 1950s and 1960s since it was more unusual then and then I wanted to read more so I was looking at the references to read more about his life. Then I saw the exact language surrounding the cause of his death in both places so I did a page check. So, it's just a random sequence of events that caused me to even notice and tag this article. I always tag G12s and don't delete the articles myself because I'm not sure about instances when the copyright violating content can just be removed (with some revision deletions) but it didn't seem like that was possible here. Too bad, I hope we get another article on this fellow. Liz Read! Talk! 00:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

New Article Submission Problems

{{You've got mail}}

New Article Problems

In August of 2022 I finally took the plunge and submitted my very first article. I crafted it to be almost identical to [[List of federal political scandals in the United States]].  When I submitted it, there were no red flags on my sandbox.

Six months later, an automated filter box appeared saying it had detected [[Deprecated sources]]. I checked and found I had used none of the listed 47 depricated sources listed. And none of them showed up in my sandbox, just the warning. I asked for help at the [[Help Desk]] where two editors were baffled by the use of the warning, but one editor mentioned 8 references which he considered questionable, but not deprecated, so I removed them to be safe.

However, when I asked for more examples he declined, but suggested I redo the templates for all the references, and now I see my sandbox article has been flagged with 125 consecutive references for [[Template:Cite news]], when their seems to be nothing wrong with the previous 1500 references.  I also checked [[Citing sources]] which states, ‘While you should try to write citations correctly, what matters most is that you provide enough information to identify the source. Others will improve the formatting if needed.’  Is that right?

I have rechecked for Deprecated sources and made sure all of my references are alive and complete.  Is it absolutely necessary for new article submission that every reference be perfect? Can you help? Johnsagent (talk) 07:33, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

  • New bundle partners:
    • Newspapers.com
    • Fold3
  • 1Lib1Ref January report
  • Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Remove perm

Hi Liz, I don't have enough time or energy to do new page patrolling any more, and I can't imagine NPPing any time soon. Can you please remove the perm from me? — Qwerfjkltalk 20:36, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Qwerfjkl,
 Done Thanks for all of your continuing help on the project! Liz Read! Talk! 20:42, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

File:Theme from Shaft by Isaac Hayes US single rainbow crescent variant.png

Hey again. I'd like to have this file undeleted and then taken to FFD again. I asked around at WP:MCQ, and one disagree with me about its copyright status. As I figured, FFD is the safer venue to re-discuss it. George Ho (talk) 08:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, George Ho,
 Done Glad to help. Liz Read! Talk! 15:05, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Category deletion

Hello Liz, may I ask you why you have deleted Category:Use_Hiberno-English_from_November_2012? I don't think it is a maintenance category and it's not empty either. Thanks --RonaldH (talk) 22:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Recent category speedy deletion noms

Hi, I thought I'd explain here in a bit more detail why I have removed the speedy deletion tag from 7 categories I recently created. The reason is that the categories aren't empty, the pages just havent shown up yet. For Primitive Irish, there's ᚛ᚑᚌᚐᚋ᚜; for Laz, there's Abu River; for Innu, there's Akamassiss; for Alutiiq, there's Alas'kaaq; for Karelian, there's Alavoine; for Alemannic German, there's Alemannisch; and for Classical Mandaic, there's Alf Trisar Šuialia. The pages just haven't shown up in the categories yet. Thanks, greyzxq talk 12:20, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Undeletion or Draftify request

Hey Liz, you have deleted the page Akkaldhamayile Pennu few days before. The person who raised many deletion points User:Akevsharma has been confirmed as a sockpuppet and has been blocked few days before. So the discussion might be manupulated by him in some form and you can some IP votes in that discussion which says delete, which might be from his side. I request you to undelete the page Jayaram Kailas as the discussion might be manupulated and this is the case or you may draftify it as I wish to work on the article Christopheronthemove (talk) 18:11, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Christopheronthemove,
I don't think Akevsharma unduly influenced that AFD discussion on Akkaldhamayile Pennu, if anything, you were bludgeoning the conversation. I also think it's interesting that you thought an IP editor's opinion was suspicious when they had just become active as you jumped into AFD discussions immediately after creating an account yourself which is what led to you being investigated as a possible sockpuppet. As for Jayaram Kailas, you should ask Joyous!, the admin who closed that AFD discussion as I'm not going to overrule another admin's decision to delete an article except for in rare situations.
Of course, you can always file an appeal at Deletion review if you think a deletion was done improperly. But it can be much simpler to just start a new version of the article from scratch than going through the existing bureaucratic channels. Liz Read! Talk! 17:13, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Megan Elizabeth Euker

Could you temporarily restore this article? I have some concerns related to the creation and acceptance of Megan Euker, and restoring this article would help me explore them. BilledMammal (talk) 11:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

I see Megan Euker has now been deleted at AfD (I started exploring this issue a few weeks ago and did not notice the AfD); would you be able to restore that article as well, to draft space or my user space, temporarily for the same reason? BilledMammal (talk) 11:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, BilledMammal,
I like to accommodate reasonable requests like yours but I'm going to have to say No for two different reasons. First, the draft was deleted at the request of the draft creator who is no longer active on the project. It seems odd to ignore their request to delete an article they created. As for the main space version, I'd like to request that you ask Randykitty, the admin who closed this recent AFD discussion. Given your experience on Wikipedia, I'd restore this page to Draft space if I had closed the AFD but I don't like to revert the actions of another admin except for in rare situations, like an AFD decision is being reviewed at Deletion reivew. I don't know their policy on article restoration but if you make a reasonable request, I'm sure they will consider it.
Sorry not to be able to satisfy your requests. Liz Read! Talk! 16:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for considering the request, and for your explanation of why you cannot do so; would you be able to briefly compare the two articles yourself, and tell me whether they were similar at any point? BilledMammal (talk) 16:47, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, BilledMammal, I'm about to head out and so I'll have to do this later. It's tricky looking at deleted articles, I can only easily look at one version at a time, it's not as easy as moving through different edits on an existing article and looking at each version of an article, it would be time-consuming and challenging to look at every single version of a deleted page, depending on how many edits there have been. But I'll look at the final version before deletion or blanking and let you know.
If I might be so bold, what are you trying to discern here? Liz Read! Talk! 17:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
There is no urgency.
From what I could determine and what I can recall, Draft:Megan Euker was started by an SPA called Mameoppenheim (talk · contribs). Shortly afterwards, they started a second version, Draft:Megan Elizabeth Euker. They completed and submitted that version, but it was rejected by AfC; they then spent a while attempting to change that decision before giving up and requesting deletion of the draft under G7.
Hours later a new editor came along, another SPA called Atiori Zronkri (talk · contribs), and started composing a draft in their sandbox - I had not noticed this sandbox work prior to writing this post. A day later, they submitted the draft to AfC. Two minutes later it was accepted by a user called TruthGuardians (talk · contribs).
TruthGuardians acceptance is what caused me to notice it; the editor came to my attention last year after an ANI post regarding concerns about covert canvassing; at the time I looked into it, and became concerned that meatpuppetry or sockpuppetry was taking place, and filed an SPI. The SPI found no relation, but I believe it only considered sockpuppetry, not meatpuppetry.
Last month, several members of that group of editors popped up on my watchlist, to take a shared position against a proposal on Talk:Michael Jackson. When looking into their contributions, as part of asking Blablubbs if they could take a second look at the report (they were, understandably, too busy), I came across a few other unusual activities; this rapid acceptance of a draft being the most suspicious.
What I am trying to determine is whether undisclosed paid editing was involved in the creation of that article, and if so whether Atiori Zronkri and Mameoppenheim are unrelated, meatpuppets, or sockpuppets. By looking at Draft:Megan Elizabeth Euker I was hoping to determine whether the article submitted as Draft:Megan Euker was a fresh attempt, or a rehashed version of the initial attempt, which I believe may shed some light on how related those two editors are.
I am also trying to determine how TruthGuardians was involved; I don't consider a two minute AfC turnaround based solely on chance to be likely, particularly considering that 209 articles were submitted on that day, that TruthGuardians does not review many AfC's, and that AfC more broadly was severely backlogged, and that it takes more than two minutes to review an AfC submission. It also might shed more light on what I thought of as the initial issues with the broader topic of Michael Jackson; if TruthGuardians is involved in undisclosed paid editing in regards to Megan Euker, then it could indicate that UPE is going on, on a much larger scale and time frame, on that topic. This would differ from my initial thought, that it was merely a group of dedicated Michael Jackson fans.
Having reviewed the topic further, I am also concerned by some of the editors who !voted keep in the Megan Euker AfD; Carinco Tuck (talk · contribs) was an SPA who created Leo Liu; it was deleted after two AfD's, with the first being flooded by new accounts, and at least one editor expressed concern that Carinco Tuck had an undisclosed financial stake in promoting the topic.
Myna50 (talk · contribs) has a more extensive contribution history (primarily small gnomish edits), but the overlap with Carinco Tuck is suspicious; their first contribution to AfD for almost a year, and their second ever, was to !vote "Keep" at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rex Dane, an AfD that Carinco Tuck did the same on - Carinco Tuck has only voted on three AfD's, and Myna05 five, so the chance of this being a coincidence seems low.
The third keep !voter, LocomotiveEngine (talk · contribs) is less suspicious; they voted in three AfD's, for their first and last time, in the space of 16 minutes. It could have been just that they discovered AfD, contributed, and then left.
My apologies for how extensive this reply is; whenever I look at anyone associated with group it feels like I'm going down the rabbit hole. It's possible that I'm seeing something where there is nothing, but I don't think so - if I was prone to that I think I would find it outside this group as well as inside it, but I don't. BilledMammal (talk) 18:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)


Guild of Copy Editors March 2023 Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors March 2023 Newsletter


Hello and welcome to the March 2023 newsletter, a quarterly digest of Guild activities since December and our Annual Report for 2022. Don't forget you can unsubscribe at any time; see below. We extend a warm welcome to all of our new members, including those who have signed up for our current March Backlog Elimination Drive. We wish you all happy copy-editing.

Election results: In our December 2022 coordinator election, Reidgreg and Tenryuu stepped down as coordinators; we thank them for their service. Incumbents Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo were returned as coordinators until 1 July. For the second time, no lead coordinator was chosen. Nominations for our mid-year Election of Coordinators open on 1 June (UTC).

Drive: 21 editors signed up for our January Backlog Elimination Drive, 14 of whom claimed at least one copy-edit. Between them, they copy-edited 170 articles totaling 389,737 words. Barnstars awarded are here.

Blitz: Our February Copy Editing Blitz focused on October and November 2022 requests, and the March and April 2022 backlogs. Of the 14 editors who signed up, nine claimed at least one copy-edit; and between them, they copy-edited 39,150 words in 22 articles. Barnstars awarded are here.

Drive: Sign up now for our month-long March Backlog Elimination Drive. Barnstars awarded will be posted here after the drive closes.

Progress report: As of 12:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 73 requests since 1 January 2023, all but five of them from 2022, and the backlog stands at 1,872 articles.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Baffle gab1978, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis and Zippybonzo.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Review of Deleted page Maria Horne

Hi Liz,

I was part of the group that wrote articles for youth climate activists from Africa and was sad to see the deletion of Maria Horne from Wikipedia. Please could you give some context as to why, even though I did read some of the deletion reasons. And would it be possible to improve the article and request it to be restored? Thank you! Rosesuccess7 RoseSuccess7 (talk) 14:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, RoseSuccess7,
The reasons for deletion are all present in the AFD deletion discussion that is linked to the deleted article. I sometimes will restore the article to Draft space if you have found some additional sources that address the problems brought up in the AFD but if this is moved back to main space without getting approval from an Articles for Creation reviewer, it will just be deleted again. If you want your own copy of the article, I can email it to you if you have email enabled. But I just can't just revert an AFD deletion decision upon request. Liz Read! Talk! 16:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Please would you consider restoring to draft space so it can be re-edited accordingly and go through the proper approval process and review for Articles for Creation? I can see why the deletion occurred and hoping to make the necessary edits with additional sources to avoid this happening again. Thank you. RoseSuccess7 (talk) 17:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Just as a follow up, if a draft cannot be restored, I do have email enabled. Thank you. RoseSuccess7 (talk) 23:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello Liz, I am circling back on this. Thanks. RoseSuccess7 (talk) 19:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, RoseSuccess7,
I appreciate you circling back as I have a lot of traffic to this overly long talk page and can lose track of messages. I've restored this article to Draft space and you can find it at Draft:Maria Horne. Please work through AFC because if it you move it directly back to main space, I think it will be tagged for deletion again. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 19:40, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

John Savile, 1st Baron Savile (second creation)

Sorry to keep bothering you about deletions, but John Savile, 1st Baron Savile (second creation) was not eligible for R3, because This criterion does not apply to redirects created as a result of a page move, unless the moved page was also recently created. This was found via Wikipedia:Database reports/Possibly out-of-process deletions#Not recently-created, which oddly-enough does not explicitly look for this scenario but instead was confused by the use a WP:PAGESWAP making it appear that the redirect was 10 years old. * Pppery * it has begun... 14:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

It is an implausible redirect because the term "John Savile, 1st Baron Savile (second creation)" isn't likely to be searched. That alone makes it elligible for R3. Wikilawyering it won't change the outcome. It has already been deleted before, btw, and also: WP:Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. R3 makes perfect sense for deleting a redirect under these circumstances, whether or not it was "moved". btw, it wasn't moved main->main, it was incorrectly moved from Draft to main. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:29, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Procedural disputes aside, surely the title the article has had for 13 years is likely to be searched? * Pppery * it has begun... 15:31, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Not really. How many would search for John Savile and use the phrase "second creation"? Plus 1st Baron Savile, all together? That is what makes in implausible. As for being here for years, that doesn't really matter, lot of junk doesn't get caught for years, there are millions upon millions of pages here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, I'm not sure what to do here. Technically, you are correct, * Pppery *. I saw this page move in the Move log and didn't look closely enough into the circumstances of the move to see that this article has been at this page title for years. But I also think it is a terrible page title and one unlikely to ever be searched for. I will see if there are any links to this deleted page.
Also, sorry for how long this talk page has gotten, I stopped archiving messages when a bot was doing so incorrectly and it will take some time to take care of it now. But it is hard to navigate so I'll do it sometime this week. Liz Read! Talk! 16:28, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
I slept on this for a day to make sure I wasn't making a hasty, emotional response, but I sill see a fundamental misunderstanding of deletion procedures in need of correction here. Wikipedia's deletion policy is not based on consequentialism, but instead based on adherence to process. Hence, the argument you are using, that you are refusing to undelete the page because you think it should be red, is improperly comingling your role as an admin with your opinion as an editor, and an undeletion is necessary.
I'm not just saying this because I'm a stickler for deletion process, but because I'm genuinely not convinced that, had the proper protocol been followed and an RfD started, it would have closed as delete - RfD regulars generally give a lot more weight to keeping {{R from move}}s than you and Dennis Brown do.
I don't care enough to take this to DRV, but I'll leave that as something to ponder ... * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, * Pppery *,
Well, I'm also left with a question. I see other admins on that list as ones who have made deletion mistakes. But I only see you coming to my talk page to point out my errors. Why is that? Liz Read! Talk! 02:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Not true. See User talk:Less Unless#Piotr Napierała, User talk:Charles Matthews/Archive 47#Thomas Lister, 2nd Baron Ribblesdale, User_talk:Kaiser matias#2021–22_Kazakhstan_Hockey_Championship. User talk:Paulmcdonald/Archives/2023/January#Chance Odolena Voda, Special:Diff/1127086384, User talk:Cyrius#تراجم_شعراء_السودان. Remember that not every entry in the database report is actually problematic, and sometimes I decide for whatever reason that a problematic entry isn't worth challenging. I may be slightly more inclined to challenge your deletions because of you thanking me for doing so in the past, but I'm definitely not targeting only you. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
  • For me, it all boils down to utility and the outcome if you have a more detailed discussion. The redirect is so implausible, again, WP:BURO comes to mind. So even if an action isn't within the exact letter of policy, but it is within the spirit, and the outcome would be the same regardless, I tend to just move on. You see CSDs also get deleted as "test pages" for various reasons that don't really fit ANY criteria, but the page obviously needs to be speedy deleted. Same idea. To me, this is a tempest in a teapot, as the exact number of people that will now no longer find the main article because that particular redirect page is deleted, is exactly 0. Not saying WP:IAR was necessarily written for things like this, but the principle still applies, that we generally don't drag things through extended discussions if the outcome is obvious, as the utility is not. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Eva Vlaardingerbroek (2nd nomination)

Hi, I think you made an error in judgement with relisting. It should have been closed as no consensus to delete. You are never going to get universal consensus to keep on a website of mostly left wingers to want to keep her article. Notability has clearly been demonstrated in the sources written about her and the people who want to delete are clearly ignoring this.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:17, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Two minutes??? re Draft:Seclusion and restraint practices in the U.S. education system

Are you kidding me? I shouldn't get a notification about an abandoned draft at 11:48 and then get it deleted at 11:50. What can anyone do at that point? Is the system broken or are you quickly deleting these without looking? ɱ (talk) 15:57, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

@Hey man im josh: Pinging for your input as well. ɱ (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I know you're going to take the opposing side and just say 'deal with it at WP:REFUND/G13' or similar. Shouldn't there be a period, several days to a week, that a user can act on their talk page notice before an admin swoops in to delete? ɱ (talk) 16:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Ɱ, I understand how this can be frustrating. Is there any reason you didn't make a minor edit after being notified a month ahead of time by FireflyBot here? Hey man im josh (talk) 16:03, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
I didn't see that one, I usually ignore bot messages. And it seemingly was auto-archived after 2 weeks, which is my mistake. ɱ (talk) 16:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
We all miss things from time to time. For what it's worth, some of my G13 nominations often sit for hours at a time and other times they'll sit for just a few minutes. It's always dependent on the timing of admins reviewing the nominations. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:09, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
I'm sure Liz will undelete even though you didn't ask very nicely, were notified a month beforehand, and had six months to make any edit to prevent its deletion. ––FormalDude (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
To be honest, when I'm deleting G13 without Hey man im josh's help, draft creators don't get any advance notice at all. But all you have to do with G13s is to request restoration and so that's what I've done. You can also ask Firefly to have their bot send 5 month warnings every 5 months...currently, they send a warning message once but not a second or third time. Liz Read! Talk! 16:12, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks all. Could there be an automated system for a delay, or could admins delay when the G13 nominator puts the talk page notice on? (Look before you leap?) This has happened to me quite a lot. How can I make FireflyBot notify more Liz? ɱ (talk) 16:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ɱ,
I don't think a delay would work because either a) admins like me are skipping the tagging and doing deletion directly and b) when regular editors tag expiring drafts tag CSD G13s, they show up immediately in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as abandoned drafts or AfC submissions immediately and admins who patrol CSD categories wouldn't know not to delay deletion or for how long they should wait.
I think the only help in this situation is if Firefly Bot was to notify draft creators every 5 months which the bot only currectly does once. I've asked Firefly if the bot could notify draft creators every 5 months regardless of whether they editor has already received a 5 month notice before but I don't know how complicated it would be to change the bot's operations. You could post a message on their talk page making a request for this, I know that Star Mississippi just posted a recent request for this to happen as well. I've asked before about this but maybe the suggestion just needs more support. Liz Read! Talk! 18:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mustafa Babanli

Hi Liz, this Afd hasn't been closed properly for some reason. scope_creepTalk 17:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, scope creep,
Admins and editors who close deletion discussions use a tool called XFDcloser which handles all of the steps but it looks like an editor here tried to close this discussion manually and didn't use the correct templates. I didn't know how to "fix" what they had done so I just reverted it and reclosed it.
You might have noticed that we are a little short-staffed for admins closing deletion discussions so they might not all close on time until we get more admins to return to helping out in this area. People seem to burn out on doing this task, both as closers and discussion participants. Thanks for letting me know about this one. Liz Read! Talk! 18:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anindita Ghose

Hi Liz, this discussion was NAC-closed, and I have commented on the closer's Talk page with a request that it be reopened so an admin can close it. I also wanted to bring this to your attention because I often see you offering kind guidance and feedback to editors, and potentially so you could reopen and close the AfD. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 05:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Beccaynr,
I haven't been spending as much time at AFD as I have in the past but I'll give this a look. Typically, we like to wait to see if the editor reverts a NAC close if there are problems rather than overruling them unless there are some major problems. It's how closers learn to be better at what they are doing. But I'll take a look. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Liz Read! Talk! 05:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Liz, and I am happy to wait for their response - it was after I realized how new they seem to be to the AfD process that I thought of asking for your assistance particularly for offering guidance. Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 05:24, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

CSDs

Thanks for clearing out all those G5 CSDs. If they'd been articles I'd have done it myself, but templates aren't my usual stamping ground - I was worried that just straight-up deleting them myself might break stuff elsewhere. Teamwork is a wonderful thing! Girth Summit (blether) 23:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Girth Summit,
I hope you are kidding me. I don't delete templates because they can be transcluded into articles and the only reason I went ahead with this deletion was that I saw you tagged them and thought you had made sure that there would be no complications from their deletion! Oh, well. I guess if there were repercussions from these template deletions, some template editor would have already come to my talk page to tell me that I acted like an idiot. Liz Read! Talk! 00:24, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, no - I tagged them rather than deleting them myself for that reason, templates are a bit of a mystery to me. FWIW, I think that most, possibly all, were only transcluded to one page apiece - they were mostly sidebars for individual politicians, if I remember correctly. Hopefully there will be little disruption, and they can be undeleted if anyone asks for it (I'll be happy to help with that if anyone comes to you complaining!). Girth Summit (blether) 12:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Derek Williams (musician)

Hi,

I'd like your assistance with Draft:Derek Williams (musician) which you deleted as author requested. Per some information in this note, the text of the draft was reused by another editor to create Derek Williams (musician) and does not have attribution to the original author. What would be the best way to repair this? My thought was to undelete the draft and redirect the draft with a note about the copying on the talk pages. Or would a history merge be more appropriate? -- Whpq (talk) 17:40, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Whpq,
That sounds like a plan or, to be honest, no alternatives to your idea come to mind. I will leave it to you though since Draft:Derek Williams (musician) has over 2,000 edits to the page! It's going to take several restorations to bring it all back. It's been deleted several times and restored so I don't know how far back you need to go for attribution but it might be easier to just restore the entire history. I see a lot of drafts every day and I've never seen one with so many edits to the page, even ones that have been moved from main space through AFD closures.
Just curious, did the editor of the main space article create it before the draft article was deleted? Or did they find the article on a Wikipedia mirror site? Liz Read! Talk! 21:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I suspect the editor of the main space article grabbed it from User:Chrisdevelop/sandbox, but the draft had other editors doing copyedits and other changes to the content so I think the draft needs to be restored for proper attribution. -- Whpq (talk) 22:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

request of complete deletion

Hello, i am here to request a complete deletion of my account, the edits and pages I have made, and every trace of this account’s existence due to concerns of personal safety of my own and those around me. I understand that there is a certain level of difficulty so if you cannot agree to this request please tell me other solutions to my problem. Thank you very much I would very much appreciate your help. Lucaspig HK (talk) 04:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Lucaspig HK,
I'm sorry that you've come to this decision but I understand, editors leave the project for all sorts of reasons. Unfortunately, your contributions to the project can not be erased. I think your best bet is to change your username so that instead of being attributed to "Lucaspig HK", they would be attributed to a user like "Vanished Contributor 38s9Cd83(#l9". So, none of your edits would be attributed to you.
You can change your username on the English Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Changing username but that information is archived, if you truly want this to be anonymous, contact a global renamer through email and make the request. You can find a list of global renamers at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_renamers. Be sure when you make the request to ask that there is no redirect left from your current account to your new account, this would leave a trail for any curious folks to see what your new anonymous account is named.
I hope this helps. I know it has for other editors. You can find more information about all this at Wikipedia:Courtesy vanishing which is basically what you are requesting. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 05:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help I appreciate it very much Lucaspig HK (talk) 05:08, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Links to the deleted William A. Starrett page

Hey Liz. I know the William A. Starrett article was deleted, and usually that would be a good reason for removing redlinks to the deleted article. However, unlike articles that were deleted at AFD, this article was deleted mainly because of copyright violations, and I do think he's at least marginally notable. Some sources such as this, this, this, and this do mention him with some level of detail. Do you mind if I re-add some of the redlinks you removed, e.g. on the 40 Wall Street or Empire State Building articles? Epicgenius (talk) 17:15, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Epicgenius,
Oh, I don't mind at all if you revert my edits unlinking their name. When I was starting out as an admin, I was instructed to remove all red links from article subjects that were deleted, which XFDCloser does as well, so that's my habit. And since these recent ones were from articles written by an editor accused of violating copyright guidelines, I didn't think the articles would be restored. But if you disagree, let's talk about it. I've been a little pro-active about this and maybe I should ease up on removing the red links from subjects whose articles might be rewritten by a policy-abiding editor. Let me know what you think. Liz Read! Talk! 18:38, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response. I figured that you were probably removing the links using either Twinkle or XFDcloser. I was thinking that, since the article was deleted for potentially being a copyvio (rather than because it wasn't notable), keeping the red links may encourage someone else to rewrite the article within the bounds of policy. It's not a big deal for me - I was just wondering whether you thought Starrett actually was not notable, or whether you were just unlinking the page because it was deleted at WP:CP. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

The article was recreated and in going through the pain in the ass of searching for links to Starrett, I found the discussion here. While I can't judge the merit of the copyright issues that may have existed, the question of notability is unambiguous, and could readily be gleaned by reading the mentions in all of the places where he was being systematically unlinked. As the primary builder of the Empire State Building, there is hardly a question of notability. In situations like this, where an article is being deleted for copyright issues and where a basic search would demonstrate both notability AND the strong likelihood that the article would be recreated, leaving the red links not only avoids wasting time but actively assists in the process of recreating an article and reconnecting it to the rest of the encyclopedia. Alansohn (talk) 02:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Alansohn,
Well, it's been a lot of copyright violating articles deleted lately and I don't have a good way of knowing which ones might be recreated in the future. But I'll be more conscientious about this and be less aggressive in removing the red links. Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
There is a great way. Look at the article. Look at the sources that were in the article. Look at the other Wikipedia articles where the article you're deleting is mentioned. Look at this edit, where the result of your action was that the entry was removed from a list. Consider the situation BEFORE starting a mass unlinking effort. Understand that your actions have string potential negative consequences that are difficult to undo. Alansohn (talk) 02:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
For context, the deletion was in the context of the WP:DCGAR business, which is as a depressing a tale as you'll find on Wikipedia. Scores and scores of articles are getting nuked on WP:PDEL grounds. Many of these articles may never be created again, because no one else is going to dig as deep into now-obscure 19th century American commercial history as DC did. (Starrett is a bit of an exception, in that he is more recent and more well known. My involvement is that I ended up passing it for GA, although in retrospect I should have dug deeper into this one than I did.) I for one would like all of the obliterated DC articles to be kept as red links, because if nothing else it will serve as a reminder of how badly both DC and his reviewers failed over a prolonged period of time. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Wasted Time R, that's how I was looking at it. I sincerely doubt many of these articles will ever be recreated again. Alansohn, I didn't go on a "mass unlinking effort", I just saw what articles were being recently deleted as copyright violations, many from the the Doug Caldwell Copyright investigation efforts and removed some red links. I said I'd be more conscientious and I don't think it is fair to suggest that my activities are damaging the project. Do you also have a problem when XFDCloser removes every link from deleted articles at every AFD that closes as "Delete"? Because that's what happens there. I don't see how may actions are different than the unlinking that happens with every single AFD or PROD deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 03:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Liz, I just saw this discussion related to the other discussion; to my knowledge, all of the articles I have sent through WP:CP are notable, because those that aren't have been submitted instead via AFD, quite intentionally. Those I have sent to WP:CP can all be assumed to be notable or I would have gone elsewhere (AFD). So I can see why some are upset about the WP:RED issues. And WTR's point is valid: DCGAR should go in to the Wikipedia history books as an indicator of the epic failure of the GA and DYK processes. Well, except there are many just like DC that precede him (Billy Hathorn and others I won't name), but I digress ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:07, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

U5

I agree with you on the over-enthusiastic U5 taggings and would like to collaborate with you on those I find questionable. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Mike wishes Liz was on IRC -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
There was one just now with just the infobox person, but infobox user has even more spaces. I watched it and now it's gone. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Deepfriedokra, I've had no luck with IRC. I don't even know how to assign myself a name. Is there a special admin channel or just a general channel?
I'm on my phone right now at a friend's house but I can look into this when I get back to my laptop. You know, March Madness, and all. Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for scrolling all of the way down this absurdly long talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 00:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Longer than EEng? Yes, but I'll need to look up the info. There are hoops -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 01:35, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

IRC

#wikipedia-en-admins is the admins only channel

You can request access at Wikipedia:IRC#Pending requests for access to channels.

It gives the option of creating a "cloak". You will need a cloak.

Best -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Deepfriedokra,
Just a couple of questions. That page says I have to register a nickname before making a request for access but it seems strange to type in their suggested string with a password and email address into a regular IRC chat box. And what is "a cloak"? Is that the same as ones username? The two examples shown in the existing requests don't make it clear what it is or what it is for. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 16:27, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Oh, I don't know the answers to any of that. Perhaps JJMC89 can help. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The initial IRC chat box that you see is likely the one interfacing with the IRC server itself. Yes, it may feel weird to enter the username and password in plain text, but that's how IRC was initially setup back in the 90s. However, you may want to explore authenticating via SASL (I personally uses Hexchat (configuration instructions)), which eliminates the need to enter the password in plaintext after the initial setup.
the purposes of the clock is to verify your registered account to other users of IRC. you can read more about cloaks at m:Cloak. – robertsky (talk) 17:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
I ueuss I'm too simple for a lot of that. Once I was granted access, I just logged on with Chrome -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:30, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Kyrgyz Khanate

Hi Liz! I think the 16th-17th century (circa 1510-1680) Kyrgyz Khanate article was probably quite legit [2][3][4][5][6][7], although it was indeed a bit inflated and mainly serviced by a sockpuppet/IP from... Kyrgystan. It's a bit sad to see a rather important part of Central Asian history vanish, just because of sockpuppet stuff... Is there a way to block the sockpuppet without killing the article? Couldn't we just protect the article from this recurring single-purpose "newcomer"? पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 05:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, पाटलिपुत्र,
You certainly didn't give me much time to respond before deciding to take this case to Deletion review. I get a lot of traffic on this talk page and typically respond to a group of messages once or twice a day, I don't drop everything to respond to each message as soon as it is posted. But my response now is irrelevant as the fate of this article will be determined at the Deletion review. In the future, I suggest giving an editor or admin at least 24 hours to respond before escalating the situation further. Thanks and I hope the deletion review can respond to your concerns about this article. Liz Read! Talk! 17:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Merging of Adobe Photoshop Elements and Adobe Photoshop pages

Hi Liz,

This is around decision of merging Adobe Photoshop Elements and Adobe Photoshop pages. I wanted to let you know that these pages should not be merged or redirected as these are two separate products designed for two separate types of users with different user needs.I wanted to let you know that both the pages should exists independently.

Some Wikipedia users told that AFD has decided to merge the Adobe Photoshop Elements and Adobe Photoshop pages and have asked me to contact you in case I think it is not correct. I don't know who provided this wrong information to you all. Please let me know how to get it corrected? Also, I was not part of any AfD discussion so feel free to invite me next time so that I can provide accurate information around Adobe Photoshop Elements. Here are two product pages for your reference: https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop-elements.html https://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop.htm

Let me know if you need any official information related to Adobe Photoshop Elements to get this corrected. Sharmavikas2k (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Liz, FYI, here is that user's declaration of being an employee of Adobe. —C.Fred (talk) 12:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Fred.
Liz, if you want, I can have communication via my official company ID as well. I am providing the accurate information in the best interest of my company and Wikipedia users. This wrong redirection has been brought to my notice by users of Adobe Photoshop Elements. Sharmavikas2k (talk) 12:31, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Also updated my userinfo page with employer info. Sharmavikas2k (talk) 12:47, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Sharmavikas2k,
Sorry for the delay. I'll look into the circumstances of this further today. Liz Read! Talk! 17:41, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
The page has been protected at ANEW. There's nothing to "correct" unless you decide to revisit your closure @Liz. Star Mississippi 18:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Liz,
Any update on this issue? Sharmavikas2k (talk) 05:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Also, I wanted to let you know that the reason stated for merging is not correct. There is lot of independent coverage available for Photoshop Elements. Sharing some links for your reference:
Press reviews
https://www.macworld.com/article/668172/adobe-photoshop-elements-review.html
https://me.pcmag.com/en/photo-editing/15677/adobe-photoshop-elements
https://www.adorama.com/alc/adobe-photoshop-elements-2023-review/
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/best-photo-editing-software,review-1972.html
User forum
https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-elements/ct-p/ct-photoshop-elements?page=1&sort=latest_replies&lang=all&tabid=all
Social
https://www.instagram.com/photoshopelements/?hl=en
https://www.facebook.com/PhotoshopElements/
https://www.youtube.com/@photoshopelements Sharmavikas2k (talk) 05:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
@Sharmavikas2k By definition, at least half of those links are not independent. Adobe's website cannot be independent, nor can its social media. The reviews are all that could be considered. —C.Fred (talk) 12:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
@C.Fred I provided Adobe links as evidence that Photoshop and Photoshop Elements are distinct products intended for different types of users, which is why they should have separate Wikipedia pages. This demonstrates that even from the company's perspective, these two programs serve different purposes and require distinct documentation.
Here are some more non-Adobe links which can be considered independent:
https://www.idownloadblog.com/2022/09/29/adobe-photoshop-premiere-elements-apple-silicon-support/
https://www.macstories.net/news/adobe-updates-photoshop-elements-and-premier-elements-with-apple-silicon-support-and-new-features/
https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/adobe-adds-ai-magic-to-photoshop-and-premiere-elements/
https://www.lifewire.com/adobe-elements-2023-software-pushes-ai-for-easy-faster-editing-6745230
https://www.macg.co/logiciels/2022/09/photoshop-et-premiere-elements-2023-rempilent-une-annee-de-plus-sur-mac-et-pc-131721
https://www.apfelpage.de/news/adobe-stellt-neue-version-von-premiere-photoshop-und-premiere-elements-vor/
https://www.educba.com/photoshop-vs-photoshop-elements/
https://www.capefearnetworks.com/adobe-photoshop-elements-vs-adobe-photoshop-creative-cloud-which-is-right-for-me/
Product comparisons
https://www.g2.com/compare/paintshop-pro-vs-photoshop-elements
https://www.saasworthy.com/compare/adobe-elements-vs-paintshop-pro?pIds=5300,32037
https://www.capterra.com/p/233260/Photoshop-Elements/
YouTube user reviews
YouTube_user_review - cG8RW_MsDno
YouTube_user_review3- iT8noghKBMI
YouTube_user_review_3 - mWIlagBcYkI
If you could specify the particular information that would be useful to the committee, I would be happy to provide it. Please let me know what details are needed so that I can ensure that the information I provide is relevant and helpful. Sharmavikas2k (talk) 15:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Kyrgyz Khanate

Hello Liz! Thanks for deleting this article for me. I had seen it in my watchlist for a while and upon the most recent sockblock of the article contributor, I noticed basically all of the most recent changes were by socks. So I kept going back and only saw socks, so I checked the article creator and what do you know the creator is a sock themself. I wasn't exactly sure if G5 was appropriate so after a brief discussion on the Discord server i Decided that I should just G5 it and see what the admins decide. The article topic is most likely notable but I'd say that this was a case of WP:TNT in which there was no useful edit history since it was full of socks. So thank you for deleting it cause, uh, I wasn't even sure if that was the right thing to do. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Also the device I'm using right now doesn't seem to like your user talk page so feel free to reply to this on mine. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Blaze Wolf,
I'm sorry about this talk page. Someone set it up to be automatically archived which created havoc in my talk page archives (discussions were randomly added to pages for different months and years) so I stopped archiving until I could get it straightened out and it hasn't been a top priority until this week. Sorry that its size is overwhelming your browser. I welcome you to comment at the Deletion review (mentioned below) to give your side of the story. Liz Read! Talk! 17:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for Kyrgyz Khanate

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kyrgyz Khanate. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Hi Liz, I'm just trying to rescue what can be rescued (my previous message above). Best पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 16:48, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Oh, पाटलिपुत्र, thanks for letting me know. Liz Read! Talk! 17:11, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Liz! An idea... could you simply restore the content of the Kyrgyz Khanate article in my User space (such as my Sandbox), so that I can at least work on it, check the sources, and try to salvage what is salvageable? Best पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, पाटलिपुत्र,
While I ordinarily have no objections to doing this on request, this is a complicated situation and right now the article is in the middle of a deletion review. I need to check in at the review and see what the participants are saying. Liz Read! Talk! 04:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft Undeletion Request

Hello, I recently have been redrafting a new article in my sandbox that one of my friends left off a few years ago. If you could restore the draft Ubuntu Cinnamon so I can see if I missed anything, that would be great. Thank you. SparrowSparrow (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SparrowSparrow,
 Done That's an easy request to fulfill. Good luck with your articles. Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Cloth of St Gereon

You're doing it AGAIN!!! Doesn't it TELL you something when there are a whole lot of links to a deleted article? Who deleted it, when, and why? Johnbod (talk) 04:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Johnbod,
Do you expect this article to be recreated again in the future? You can look at the deletion summary at the top of Cloth of St Gereon to see which administrator deleted the article and the reason for this deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 04:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I do, or it certainly should be, and probably will be. Certainly deserves a redlink. Johnbod (talk) 04:22, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) it appears to have been Justlettersandnumbers following a tagging] by SandyGeorgia. They were pretty much the only edits after yours in 2020 @Johnbod. Star Mississippi 02:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Of course I can't see that link, nor remember what I did in 2020. This is supposed to be a Doug Coldwell article. Once again I had no notice of the impending deletion, despite watchlisting it! Just like Lithophane, now back up & getting 70 views a day. Was it you who found the Internet Archive version of that? I tried but couldn't find it for this. Johnbod (talk) 05:15, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Johnbod, I deleted that as part of a massive copyright clean-up, a week after it was blanked and listed at WP:CP – during which time anyone who wanted to could of course have rewritten it. If you like, I can restore the structure of the page (images, references, categories, infobox and so on, but not the running text) either in your user space or in draft space, in mainspace with an {{inuse}} tag on it, or otherwise email you the markup text – your choice, just say the word. But is it really helpful to shout at people (particularly when you've got the wrong person)? Hi, Liz, Star Mississippi! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
No, Liz is the right person to complain about her systematic removal of the links to deleted articles. This came up in the Lithophane section above, when her defence was "As for the red links, I was "instructed" when I was a beginning admin to remove red links from deleted articles that were unlikely to be restored and, by its nature, articles which are copyright violations will never be restored." Spot any flaws in the logic there? Yes, please let me have the skeleton and my text if possible, at User:Johnbod/Gereon (just start it). Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
That's done, Johnbod. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
As he is an experienced FA writer, I'm guessing Johnbod won't be making use of the kinds of sources that drove most of DC's edits (eg, Anzovin, Steven, Famous First Facts 2000, item # 3084, H. W. Wilson Company, along with that Kane "First facts" book). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
@Johnbod mine and I think @Justlettersandnumbers' point is that Liz didn't do anything on the Cloth... article. So you're all caps and exclamation pointing the wrong admin. If by your own admission you don't know who deleted it, why are you saying Liz did something "again"? Star Mississippi 15:45, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
If I am understanding correctly, Johnbod is not complaining so much about the copyvio delete, as about WP:RED (that is, leave the links, since almost all of these articles do meet notability and could be recreated in spite of the copyvio). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Indeed. Johnbod (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Yes. But Liz didn't delete (or even touch) this article per any log I can see. So I'm not sure what his issue with her is. Or why reaching out to any admin necessitates all caps and exclamation points. Star Mississippi 16:04, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
The article had gone by then, without me being aware. But her 5 removals of the links came up on my watchlist. Johnbod (talk) 16:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Johnbod I'm unsure what you mean about "no notice ... despite watchlisting", as there is a seven-day wait at WP:CP after tagging. Also, after the January AN, hundreds of articles and editors were notified of the WP:DCGAR on February 9, so the cleanup should be pretty widely known by now.
On finding the internet archive versions, I want to recommend against that. Having now read almost all of DC's content, the problems are so far beyond copyvio that starting fresh is almost always a faster way to rebuild an encyclopedic article. He simply had faulty research methodology along with poor writing and organization, and when digging in to the sourcing of his content, one often finds blatantly wrong information along with the oddest choices of what to include, apparently in a rush to expand and get DYK and GA credits, along with no sense of encyclopedic writing. I've now watched half a dozen editors try to fix his content by cleaning up what was there, and in every case, they could have written five new articles in the time they spent (unsuccessfully) trying to clean up one DC article. Even his use of archaic sources has rendered inaccuracies in quite a few articles; digging up any local news story that is a hundred years ago, while seemingly unaware of the need to locate more modern sources, seems to have been his research method, once he chose an article to expand based on a book of fun first facts. I recommend not using his version as a starting place for recreating encyclopedic content. It is just too hard to tease out the source-to-text integrity, undue attention to fun facts, poor writing, contradictions from newer sources and his own COI along with the copyvio issues. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:08, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I mean "no notice ... despite watchlisting"! This kangeroo process allows articles to disappear without its watchlisters being warned. Are you seriously suggesting I should watchlist the vast WP:CP? No. Obviously some notification should be added to the articles. I'm well aware of the issues with DC articles, but apparently I wrote some of this myself, perhaps 50,000 edits ago. Johnbod (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
@Johnbod your edits were not substantive. But you'd have seen this edit by @SandyGeorgia on your wishlist, so I'm really not sure what your frustration is here. We all miss edits. You've been offered a path to get the structure back. Star Mississippi 15:54, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Ok, another link I can't see! My wishlist and my watchlist are very different things! Johnbod (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
I can't see it either, but it is surely the link to where I sent the article to WP:CP, which would show on your watchlist (in most cases, pronouncedly so, as they involve deleting a big hunk of content). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
It is indeed that edit @SandyGeorgia. Fingers moving too quickly, but yes I meant watchlist @Johnbod. Star Mississippi 16:21, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Johnbod, I intentionally put up a limited number of articles a day at WP:CP, so it hasn't been "vast" (and particularly not considering the enormous amount of notification that happened on 9 February). I don't believe there will be many more deletions coming up, as I suspect we are now down to the much harder work of teasing out bad or copyvio edits from articles that others have substantially worked on, so they can't be sent to WP:CP. If you want to browse those that are still at WP:CP to discover if there are any you have worked on, you can see Category:Wikipedia pages tagged for copyright problems. If I come across anything else you may have worked on, I will be sure to ping you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Johnbod (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
See my post earlier on this page about the separate WP:RED problem; I have quite intentionally sent the few DC articles that don't meet notability to AFD rather than CP (well, not me, since I don't really speak AFD, but others have sent them). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
This page is 296,897 bytes long! I've looked through the last 450 edits (back to 2 Feb) & can't see it. Do you remember when or what it was about? Johnbod (talk) 16:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Johnbod, here you go, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks - how right you were. When you find yourself working through this list (some are on a template, most not), deleting links to Europe's oldest (or 2nd oldest) tapestry, you ought imo to realize something isn't right, whatever they told you at Admin Hogwarts. Johnbod (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Archive your page

I archived your page for you and you reverted it! What's the problem Liz, the page is massive! It was just very difficult to scroll down on my ipad and leave a message, took absolutely ages. Your page is well over 600,000 bytes! I have started a thread at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). Not a criticism of you personally as many of the AFDs only have two or three comments and I agree that they need more of a consensus. I think the real issue is that we need to generate more interest in AFDs in the first place and reduce relisting articles and reducing the bloat of the listings.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

It's crashing my mobile browser loading it. ɱ (talk) 18:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Dr. Blofeld and Ɱ,
I'm sorry, I'm sorry. What happened is that someone (not me) set up an automatically archiving on my bot on my talk page last year but the bot randomly moved discussions to different archives that had no relationship to the months and years when they actually happened. So, those talk page deletions were rolled back. I have to go through my archived talk pages and straighten things out, a very tedious task. But I will take care of it this week and catch up. My apologies. Liz Read! Talk! 18:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I've moved off several months' worth of messages to a temp User page and I'll spend time sorting out what goes where another day. I hope this helps. This page gets a lot of traffic. Liz Read! Talk! 18:52, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, smaller devices really can't handle it! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Talk:German American (resolved but still interesting)

Hi Liz, re this conversation you had with The Earwig about your deletion of the "German American" redirect back in 2021: the plot thickens considerably ... neither of you seemed to have checked the talk page! In normal cases the talk page would've just been a redirect but here it was left behind from a move from "German American" to "German Americans" back in 2015, due to a cut-and-paste move to "Talk:German Americans" by 70.23.161.113 back in 2006. As a result, the talk page had 497 deleted revisions worth restoring and six years of archived discussions from 2010 to 2015 (which I've now restored to Talk:German Americans/Archive 2). I also restored the offending edit to the "German American" page that started this whole mess off, to make it easier to figure out what actually happened. I've straightened everything out but I thought I'd give both you and The Earwig a heads-up here. I found this situation because yesterday I made my highest number of edits ever, 1434, mostly due to dealing with contributions by AlexBalder01 (which I know you saw Liz because of the thanks note). I went to check out my deleted edits from my previous record of at least 1,270 edits in a day ... and that's when I found the "Talk:German American" page and kinda flipped out! Graham87 07:51, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Category:Articles needing subsections

Hi, would you be able to undelete Category:Articles needing subsections? It was a tracking category and should have been tagged with {{Possibly empty category}}. Cheers, MClay1 (talk) 11:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MClay1,
 Done I took care of this earlier today. Liz Read! Talk! 05:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Ponniyin_Selvan:_II

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ponniyin_Selvan:_II resulted in a DELETE, which you closed and deleted. A new user has created the article again Ponniyin Selvan: II, despite there being a draft under development at Draft:Ponniyin Selvan: II. I could not figure out if there is a speedy delete criterion I could cite to request SPD, so I am turning to you to seek help/assistance.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 14:59, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

The editor who created this new version has apparently done a cut-and-paste from the draft to this article and has started to link every cast and crew member to the article. Suggest that if/when the article is deleted that it be salted until the draft is accepted.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 15:19, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Never mind. Another admin took care of speedily deleting the article.  — Archer1234 (t·c) 19:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Archer1234,
I apologize for not addressing your request in a timely manner. I get very busy with different tasks and sometimes I don't check my talk page until the end of the day. Liz Read! Talk! 05:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raditya Adi

Hello @Liz:, I want to work on an article in Draft: Raditya Adi, I ask you to move the Raditya Adi article to the Drafts room, so I can fix it the article. and can I ask your help to help me work on Raditya Adi's article in the Draft room and improve the article. Mr.boy77 (talk) 04:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mr.boy77,
I spend a lot of time on Wikipedia but I spend it on doing administrative tasks, not working on draft articles. If you have specific questions about editing on Wikipedia, I encourage you to bring them to the Teahouse. If you want help on the subject, I'd browse through WikiProjects (see Category:WikiProjects by topic) and go to the related WikiProject talk page and see if anyone is interested in helping you out. You can also look over Wikipedia:Articles for creation as it offers some guidance. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 05:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
hello, @Liz:
I'm asking for help, can you restore the Raditya Adi article because I think the article meets the requirements. Mr.boy77 (talk) 06:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Mr.boy77,
If you think it is ready, you need to submit it for review to Articles for Creation. If you move it directly back into main space, the article is likely to be deleted as it was deleted through an AFD discussion. Get an AFC review and approval first. There aren't any shortcuts here, even if I was to agree to do this for you, the article most likely would be tagged for deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 17:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
hello, @Liz: can you help me to edit Raditya Adi's page in the draft room, because previous articles have also been made in the draft room. and the article has been accepted and has been moved to the main room, for some reason Raditya Adi's article which was moved to the main room has been deleted because it was created by a blocked user. Mr.boy77 (talk) 05:02, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Mr.boy77,
I just read over the AFD where I said I'd restore this article to Draft space. Is that what you are asking to be done? Liz Read! Talk! 05:09, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, @Liz: thanks for taking the time, thanks for responding to my message, I just made an article in the draft room Draft:Raditya Adi is it ready to be moved to the main room.
Thank you Mr.boy77 (talk) 07:04, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Vandal asking to be blocked

Literally, per Special:Contributions/Guangzhong92. BilCat (talk) 07:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Blocked in the meantime. BilCat (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I just saw that Materialscientist got to him before I saw your message. I just got up an hour ago! Liz Read! Talk! 17:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
No worries. I'm usually not up until around this time myself, but was a little early today. BilCat (talk) 17:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)


Quick question about CSD'd redirect

Hi Liz. I noticed that you recently deleted Wikipedia:CHEWINGGUM as a redirect to a nonexistent page. Looking through the history of related pages, the page that the redirect previously pointed to appears to have been moved to User:Veverve/Unsourced information is not valuable, so I would like to ask if it would be possible to restore the redirect and simply retarget it to the new location.

Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:22, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Red-tailed hawk,
Well, I'm not going to restore a redirect from Project space to User space. I don't think it's a good idea. Unless it is a redirect from Draft space to main space, I don't think cross-namespace redirects are useful. I mean, who will use Wikipedia:CHEWINGGUM or even know about it? Who will know CHEWINGGUM and what it stands for? Who is trying to get to this User page and use this redirect? Liz Read! Talk! 04:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
My understanding is that the creator of the redirect would. There are some cross-namespace redirects for userspace essays, such as WP:PLAGUE, and I don't see why this one would be deleted on its merits had it simply been retargeted. In any case, another user has re-created the redirect, so my request is moot. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:25, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at 1AmNobody24's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

1AmNobody24 (talk) 08:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

@Liz Still waiting for a reply. 1AmNobody24 (talk) 07:35, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Duendita

Hi, can you restore Duendita to draft? I think there are enough sources out there to demonstrate notability. Thriley (talk) 13:24, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Thriley,
I've done as you requested. The reason I tagged it didn't really have to do with the references, it was there no substance to the article that explained how this artist met our notability standards for musicians. There has to be more to an article than citations, there should be some biographical information and some description of their work. Good luck with it. Liz Read! Talk! 21:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! I meant to expand it after I put it into main space. Forgot all about it! I’ll do that in draft. Best, Thriley (talk) 17:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Delinking geographic place names

Hi, I noticed that you've still been delinking deleted place names from lists instead of removing them entirely, even when the place doesn't exist or doesn't meet the criteria for the list/template. For example, this edit left "Saline, Utah, a ghost town" in a template, which is factually incorrect as it's actually a railroad siding that does not belong in the template at all. Could you please consider taking the time to delete these inappropriate entries after you close the AfD, since they can be quite time consuming to track down after the fact? –dlthewave ☎ 18:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, dlthewave,
I just typed out a very long message which I'm removing to leave the more succinct, "Yes, I'll try". Liz Read! Talk! 21:29, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I appreciate that. This really only seems to be an issue with geography stubs. I know that taking a moment to check these links might feel like a bit of extra work, but it plays a huge role in eliminating these erroneous "populated place" listings. –dlthewave ☎ 12:48, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Category:Roman Catholic cathedrals in the Bahamas

Hi, the category is not empty, just a user [8] without any explanation vandalized the categorization to leave it empty. [9] --Warairarepano&Guaicaipuro (talk) 14:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Dembeni page

Hey Liz,

You deleted a page I was working because it was in a weird location (I think.) It was supposed to be a sandbox page but I must have accidentally switched something. Is there any way you can revert the deletion? I need the page for a school project so I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks, Brendan Brendansoloughlin (talk) 14:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Creating User:Brendansoloughlin/Dembeni (Archeological Site) - Wikipedia Brendansoloughlin (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm a talk page lurker... Do you mean the draft at Draft:Dembeni (Archeological Site)? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:06, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Yes that's it! THank you I couldn't find where it went Brendansoloughlin (talk) 15:09, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
You can always take a look at your contributions via the link near the top of any page, or the deleted ones from a similar link on the contributions page. - UtherSRG (talk) 15:12, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
You had moved it from User:Brendansoloughlin/Dembeni (Archeological Site) to User:Dembeni (Archeological Site), which was invalid. Liz then moved it from the user namespace to the draft namespace. (I then moved it again to lowercase dab.) - UtherSRG (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Faria Abdullah -- G4 check?

Greetings. As you were the admin who had salted this article, I thought I would inquire directly. The article has been recreated by an EC user--their edit summary indicates that this was a translation from the corresponding article on Telugu Wikipedia, but given that their creation incorporated an AfD tag linking to the discussion on one of the previous iterations of the article, I wanted to check to see if this was actually a mere copypaste job which merited a G4 speedy. As always, thank you for your time and hard work. --Finngall talk 18:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

My mistake--the AfD tag was applied subsequent to the creation (by a matter of mere minutes) by another user. Still, I'm curious as to whether G4 is applicable, given the history of the article. Thanks. --Finngall talk 18:39, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
UtherSRG took care of it--G4 speedied, and the protection upgraded. Have a good day. --Finngall talk 20:23, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Finngall,
I fear that UtherSRG pays closer attention to my talk page than I sometimes do. I'm not surprised that they responded to your inquiry. I think I should have a "UtherSRG Appreciation Day" on their RFA anniversary. Liz Read! Talk! 20:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Work was slow yesterday so I had some free time. XD - UtherSRG (talk) 10:37, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


Query

Hello, Jc37,

I see you blocked Uni3993 and I just came across Francoabagnale and think they might be a block-evading sockpuppet but I wanted to check with you first. Liz Read! Talk! 05:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi.
My apologies for the late reply.
From I can tell, in the interim, it looks like the former has been socking, and the latter has been globally locked.
Nice spotting.
I hope you're having a great day : ) - jc37 23:40, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Thousand Year Old Vampire

Hi Liz, you deleted an old version of this draft in 2022 but a new draft was recently created and was approved at AFC today. Is there anything in the old draft that is not in the new article that could potentially be useful? BOZ (talk) 20:20, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, BOZ,
They look similar to me but since this was a simple CSD G13 deletion, I just restored the draft. The page is still a redirect to the main space version but you can look at the page history and see if the references are similar. I hope this helps! Liz Read! Talk! 20:27, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
It does, thank you! Are you able to do a histmerge or should I request one at a noticeboard or something? BOZ (talk) 21:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Ghero

Hello Liz, could you please Email me the contents of this abandoned draft? Much thanks, Tulsi 24x7 05:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Tulsi,
Would you prefer this to be restored? I don't think the content would be helpful for you, it only consisted of two userboxes declaring a COI. There was no article content or references. Still want it? Liz Read! Talk! 00:55, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
No. I think there is no point in restoring the draft if there was no content. Thank you for looking into it. Kind regards, Tulsi 24x7 02:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Liz, I'd like to request you to please move User:Tulsi/Ghero to Draft:Ghero without leaving a redirect. Much thanks, Tulsi 24x7 02:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Liz. You have new messages at Sdkb's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

{{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:44, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Unsalt

Please unsalt Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2023, as it is known now where it will be hosted. Ricciardo Best (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ricciardo Best,
This article was draftified through an AFD discussion and has been recreated several times which is why the page is protected. The way to overcome this obstacle is for the draft article, Draft:Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2023, to receive approval from an AFC reviewer. Then the protection can be lifted and the draft article moved over to main space. Liz Read! Talk! 00:37, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

About Category:Military alliances involving Albania

The category was speedily deleted under criteria C1. Now the category is not empty anymore (for NATO), could you consider undelete the page? —— Eric Liu（Talk） 20:37, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Eric Liu,
Categories that are deleted only for being empty are restored upon request. You can either ask me (which you did) or go to WP:REFUND. I have restored the category for you. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 00:34, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

BADNAC

Hey can you have a look at this? Seems like a badnac, the editor's noms are equally curious. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Connected UK Lightburst (talk) 00:17, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

I messaged the editor on their talk. Also here is an example of a deletion rationale as nominator. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turn It Gold Lightburst (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Lightburst,
I have reverted their closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Connected UK. Thanks for spotting this. It was clearly not suitable for an NAC closure. Did they close any other deletion discussions?
As for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turn It Gold, I see plenty of inadequate deletion rationales when I look over the week's AFDs. I've editors, very experienced editors, just put "Notability" as a reason and that's all! But I agree that it's not a good sign. Unfortunately, we need more editors both to review and investigate AFDs and admins to close them as well. I think folks can get burned out by all of the disagreement at AFDs but we still do have a small group of regulars. Thanks again. Liz Read! Talk! 00:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Article Recovery

{{You've got mail}} This is my first time writing an article. I completed the article in my sandbox. It had 43 different references and is not offensive, so I don't think it violated anything. I followed an article how to move the article from the sandbox to publishing. I believe where I went wrong, is on the move form, when changing the name of the article, the default was "User". I wasn't understanding that there was a dropdown menu that I may have had to change. So, I believe instead of changing the Title from "Awoodfin/Sandbox" to "Eli Mosley", I changed it to User "Eli Mosley" who doesn't exist. The log said it automatically deleted the article because that user didn't exist. I REALLY hope I can get it back as I worked very hard on it. Please Help! Awoodfin (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Awoodfin,
It's not uncommon for new editors to move drafts to the wrong namespace. Since this page was an actual draft article, I moved it to Draft space. You can find it at Draft:Eli Mosley. If this happens again, just look at your Contributions page and you can find out where an article was moved to if there isn't a message on your User talk page. So, the article wasn't deleted, it just didn't belong in User space unless it was a draft you were working on in your own User space.
I encourage you to submit it to Articles for Creation for review, they can often spot problems you don't see. Their goal is to prevent the article from being deleted if it is moved to main space so it frequently useful to get their feedback. Good luck with the article! Liz Read! Talk! 19:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Undeletion request of Dingtone

Hello, would it be possible to restore the Dingtone page? I recently noticed that it was prodded for being promotional, an issue I can address. Thanks in advance. Xickybhai (talk) 06:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Xickybhai,
 Done Good luck with the article! Liz Read! Talk! 19:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ponniyin Selvan: II

Hi. You closed this two weeks ago, and then the draft was moved into mainspace, Ponniyin Selvan: II, seems to be against the consensus. Onel5969 TT me 12:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, onel5969,
Well, reviewing the AFD, the main space article was tagged for deletion because it was a cut & paste of the draft version and the movie hadn't been released yet. So, I sent the article back to Draft space and asked for it to be submitted to AFC. I don't there is a question about it eventually being a main space article it's just how to manage that given that the film is still not released yet and the past AFD. Liz Read! Talk! 19:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion review for 198 (number)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of 198 (number). Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Regards, TechGeek105 (his talk page) 23:30, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TechGeek105,
Thank you for the notification. This doesn't always happen with deletion reviews and its appreciated. Since you are not challenging my AFD closure, I really don't have an opinion on whether or not this article should be restored. I will let you know that I notified the editor who nominated the article for deletion about the deletion review because they might have information they can add to this discussion. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 01:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

G13/REFUND bounce

Sometimes I feel like I should just run through the impending G13's and make a minor edit to all of them so that none come to REFUND. Would be less work than actually doing the delete & restore... XD - UtherSRG (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, UtherSRG,
Well, there are any where from 150-250 drafts that expire every day and I'm guessing that less than 5% are restored again. Most of the drafts I delete are from an editor who comes to Wikipedia one day, creates an account, starts a draft, and then leaves and never comes back. What we have to do is to get editors to pay attention to the 5 month notices they get from Firefly Bot that TELL them that their draft will expire in a month. Editors only get this message the first time a draft is due to expire but if editors would act when they get this message at 5 months, then they wouldn't have to head to REFUND a month later to ask for the draft to be restored. But y'all do good work there! When I was a regular at REFUND a year or two ago, I found it one of the more pleasant administrative tasks compared to blocking and deleting. It's just unfortunate when you restore a draft and six months later, the same editor shows up again to get it restored when they never worked on it after the first restoration! Liz Read! Talk! 22:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Expiring drafts

Hi Liz. I saw your comment on DGG's talk page and it reminded me that I'd seen him say a few times that he was worried that nobody would continue his work on rescuing drafts after he was gone. You said you've been working on the back-end of draftspace lately too: do you think there would be any value in some sort of 'WikiProject Expiring Drafts' to make sure that doesn't happen? – Joe (talk) 07:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

@Joe Roe: you could try suggesting this at WP:WikiProject Abandoned Drafts. You may get no response, but it's an overlapping concern so worth a try. – Fayenatic London 15:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Joe Roe,
Sorry for the delay in responding to your post. I seem to either respond immediately to messages on my talk page or I wait until the end of the day to reply.
I don't think the problem rests in "saving" promising drafts. SDZeroBot does a great job producing lists of expiring drafts and highlighting the ones that are of a better quality than others. In fact, besides DGG, until lately, Curbon7 was delaying deletions of promising drafts as they are easy to spot and just a minor edit will prevent a G13 deletion.
I see two problems, one of quantity and one of the demands for the talent of content creators. First, as I replied to another comment above, there are typically 150-250 drafts that expire daily (although if you look at User:SDZeroBot/G13 soon, next week we have a day with over 600+ drafts expiring). It's a lot of drafts to go through, either to review or to tag/delete. And that is every day of the week. If you look at the G13 soon list, you'll see the most promising drafts at the top of the page and those that are unsourced at the bottom of the list. So, even though there are lots of drafts expiring daily, it's easy to find the better ones thanks to SDZeroBot.
The bigger problem is what happens next. So, you delay a speedy deletion for six months. Then what happens to the article? I frequently see them on the list in another six months. Someone has to take the delayed drafts and actually improve them into main space articles and we have few editors who want to spend their time doing that. Since I look at hundreds of drafts each day, I do know there are a few editors who will spend their time improving other editors' work but I think most editors want to create their own drafts and work on them. It's easy to delay deletion (I usually do this to a few drafts every day) but converting these drafts to articles is a larger hurdle and I'm not sure there is an easy solution to this. If I see a really outstanding draft, I have brought it to the attention of a relevant WikiProject and I hope some editor gets intrigued and polishes it up. But I don't know of another way to bring them to our content creators' attention. I especially would like to bring some drafts to the attention of Women in Red but they have such a long list of articles they are working on, I think my request would get lost.
Any help on this would be helpful to the project! Liz Read! Talk! 02:43, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Page moves by Muhammadfaizulmujtaba

Hello Liz: I believe this is the first time we have interacted, so nice to meet you! Muhammadfaizulmujtaba (talk) has continued to move their userpage, this time into the Project namespace. It is located at Wikipedia:Khangran wala shergarh okara. I was wondering if you could move the page back, as I don't want to create unnecessary cross-namespace redirects. Just looking at the moves made, it might be good to explain the difference between the article and Wikipedia namespaces. Thanks, Schminnte (talk • contribs) 12:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

I've moved the page back. Possibly they want it moved to Draft... - UtherSRG (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Schminnte (talk • contribs) 15:32, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Red Sea Brine Pool Microbiology

Hi Liz - As a longtime Wikipedia editor, I certainly appreciate other editors improving content. I have also been an instructor in Wiki Education for many years and have overseen the creation of many new Wikipedia pages. I am sure I have a lot more to learn, but am puzzled why this page was moved to Draft status: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Red_Sea_Brine_Pool_Microbiology. This is the first time that I have had a web page moved to draft status; based on content; I don't understand the decision to move it. It is well referenced and pulls together many sources of material to highlight an important microbial ecosystem. We had considered adding the content to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine_pool, but it would make the page rather unbalanced, as the new page is a deeper dive into a very unusual (indeed unique, based on current knowledge) microbial system. Please let me know your thoughts, and if you think something specific needs to be done to restore the page. Best regards - ~~curt99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curt99 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz - I thought I would add a bit more. I am wondering if the reason for moving to a draft is because of the lack of cited secondary sources. In the case of this page, and much (if not most) of the "scientific" Wikipedia, material is primarily drawn from primary sources. This is because for many areas of study, there are no suitable secondary sources. This does not mean that the material on a Wikipedia page is not notable. Rather, it is that many areas of science move quickly, and it can take decades (if ever) for reviews to be published. Hence, well sourced content summarizing the literature, but not interpreting it, is an incredibly valuable aspect of the Wikipedia ecosystem ....Curt99 08:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Me, again. Do you have any objections if I move the article back to Mainspace? Curt99 18:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

- As there were no objections, the article was moved to mainspace. Thank you. Curt99 08:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Requesting undeletion of draft

Hello Liz, I saw your notice on my talk page about the deletion of my draft article for Slipgate Sightseer. I would like to request its undeletion, as I have found better sources for it. Could you do this, and if not, could you relay me to somone who could? Thanks, Unijorse Unijorse (talk) 02:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Unijorse,
Can you provide me with a link to the deleted page? Then I can see why it was deleted. If it was just an expired draft, you can either go to the administrator who deleted the draft or go to WP:REFUND and request restoration. Liz Read! Talk! 02:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
It was an expired draft. I think it is Draft:SlipgateSightseer Unijorse (talk) 02:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Unijorse,
 Done It is Draft:Slipgate Sightseer. Good luck with it! Liz Read! Talk! 03:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch! Unijorse (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Liz. 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.Doug Weller talk 07:27, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion notices

Hey Liz, do you think you can maybe just give a single notice for your deletions at User talk:Danidamiobi‎? The page is so completely bogged down in templates that they may not be able to even access their own talk page when they return to editing.-- Ponyobons mots 22:28, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ponyo,
You're right. I work a lot with expiring drafts or other pages in Draft space and it's rare for a situation like this to happen, where there are dozens and dozens of pages eligible for speedy deletion and these were all blank pages. When it's identical issue, I can go into automatic mode with Twinkle. Now, I've reverted all of my notifications to the page and left them a personal message. Thank you for the reminder. Liz Read! Talk! 23:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! I was going to create a subpage and move the notifications there, but it was last Friday afternoon and there was a glass of wine with my name on it, so I logged out for the day instead.-- Ponyobons mots 19:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Ponyo,
I hate that they have cut back on overtime. Can't blame you for choosing the wine. Liz Read! Talk! 19:31, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hi, you deleted my sand box. Why did you do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chloponyart391 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Chloponyart391,
You don't have a "sandbox", deleted or undeleted. Your only deleted edit was User:Chloponyart391/Mumuye people which was a broken redirect to User:Mumuye people where you mistakenly moved your draft article. This is a nonexistent editor page. So, I moved the draft tp Draft:Mumuye people. You can find your work there. Please do not try to move your draft to main space until it has been reviewed by an Articles for Creation reviewer.
If you have questions about editing on Wikipedia, please bring them to the Teahouse. And please sign all of your talk page comments with four tildes ("~~~~"). And adding a header to each new discussion helps your comment to be seen. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 19:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

2023 Central American and Caribbean Games Articles

Hello, I hope you are well,

I am sending you this message, since I would like to ask for support, since I do not know how I can report a war of movements and editions by a user.

I have been working on the articles related to the 2023 Central American and Caribbean Games for months and I have made all the modifications that have been requested, but absolutely all the articles without distinction have been moved to Drafts or have been eliminated without any mention, they all have the references necessary and the notoriety is given for being the temporary continuation of other CAC Games.

The truth is disturbing because all these movements come from a single user, and I am only contributing to something that has been done in other editions of these games and the truth is that I am tired of it.

Please if you can support me I would appreciate it. Taqueishon (talk) 17:48, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Taqueishon,
In future cases, you need to supply more details so it's clear what the dispute is about. But in this case, I have posted a message to the editor to not target your work and I thought that would bring an end to it. Is it still continuing or are you concerned about the articles already moved to Draft space? If a page was mistakenly deleted, please supply a link to the page so I can see what the reasoning behind it. Regarding the games, it might be a matter of TOOSOON, as these games get closer, they could have more coverage that would allow them to be moved back to the main space of the project. Liz Read! Talk! 19:09, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Template talk:North Sea operations 1939–1945

Thanks for deleting this, I haven't done a campaignbox for so long that I forgot how. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Keith-264,
Glad I could help. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Aegean Oil

Hello, I've been trying to clean up the promo and primary refs from Aegean Oil. I've been meeting fierce resistance and I've realized its become a slow moving edit war. I think these SPA accounts and IPs are related and have a COI with the subject. [10], [11] plus multiple IPs [12].

I’ve stopped editing the article, until this gets resolved; they won't even allow maintenance tags in the article and have just promo/primary refbombed the article. Any suggestions on how to proceed would be helpful. I've been adding clear edit summaries so my edits are reasonably easy to understand.  // Timothy :: talk  02:23, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TimothyBlue,
I'm used to seeing your work on AFDs, you certainly put in a lot of time on the project. It doesn't sounds like the edits are disruptive, if they were, that could result in article page protection but that's usually not how we deal with slow edit wars. Have you approached any of the accounts on their User talk pages? It doesn't seem like the article talk page is being used either. We usually advocate and encourage communication before resulting to sanctions. You could also take this to COIN but you really need to have solid evidence to prove your argument.
If it was me, and this is just my approach, I would stop working on the article and return in a week or two (or longer). If they are SPA accounts, they often work intensively and then move on after a while. They rarely stay around for the long-term. This isn't necessarily the ideal way to resolve a conflict but you are a long-term editor and have longevity on your side. Liz Read! Talk! 02:52, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
I see you have already been to COIN (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 196#User:Yioryiosaek21). I'm surprised that your query didn't get any response. You might revive it and repost it on the main noticeboard. I don't spend any time on that noticeboard but there used to be a core group of editors you regularly participated there. Has it gone quiet?
I also see you have posted warnings at User talk:Yioryiosaek21 but you might write a non-template message trying to initiate a conversation. Liz Read! Talk! 03:01, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I think reposting to COIN and letting this settle down is a good idea; I will post to the users pages also to invite them to the discussion. COIN is usually pretty good, I think this might have just slipped through the cracks. I was going to try and spend some time helping out there, mainly to increase my skills for NPP, AfD. Greetings from Los Angeles,  // Timothy :: talk  03:38, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Launchballer/Matty Healy

Point taken regarding {{db-afc-move}}. However, having actually read WP:G4 properly, I must say I don't think it applies either; that criterion only applies to "sufficiently identical copies"; deleted versions of the article focused on the band, and my userspace draft makes a point of focusing largely on him (to the point that its section about his career with The 1975 is probably too short). Its last AfD was nearly two years ago, and there has been significant coverage since, for example of his appearance on The Adam Friedland Show (which, so far as I can tell, does not involve any other member of The 1975). Am I missing something?--Launchballer 07:51, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Jerry Newport

Hi Liz,

This article was deleted by you as a soft delete at AfD, and I am wondering if you could restore it to my userspace so I can work on it. My initial search found support for WP:GNG/WP:BASIC notabilty for this 'superstar in the world of autism' (LAT, 1995), public speaker and author (CBS, 2004), (Publishers Weekly, 2006), whose "unconventional romance was turned into the 2005 Hollywood film Mozart and the Whale" (Guardian, 2014). One aspect I would like to puzzle out is whether and how to write an article about both Jerry and his wife Mary, because at least based on my initial search, they seem to have relatively equal news coverage, while Jerry may have wider coverage on GScholar. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 01:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz, fyi, I followed the link in the AfD closing comment and had the article restored to my userspace. Cheers, Beccaynr (talk) 15:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Eagle-Herald G13

Hi Liz, you declined the G13. If you see the history, the last two edits although attributed to a human, are script-run - script-assisted date audit and style fixes per MOS:NUM, and they run two minutes before the 6-month period for G13 eligibility. Jay 💬 16:17, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Jay,
Regarding Draft:Eagle-Herald, I don't think it matters whether or not an editor uses a script or not. It's human edit vs. Bot edit. All I know is that Explicit frequently delays deletion in this way for drafts created by Florida Army and Thriley so this was not a suprise to see him make a minor edit to this draft to postpone CSD G13 deletion. Liz Read! Talk! 16:22, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kibu Denis

@Liz:, Why did you relist Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kibu Denis? There is clear consensus to keep (also, BeanieFan11's comment is essentially a keep vote), and the only delete vote (which was way before the last few keep votes) comes from a user with double standards (e.g. his most recent article, created a month or two ago, was Serhii Korovayny, which is nowhere near the standards he requests of other users articles) questionable deletion nominations (e.g.Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Božo Broketa), and bizarre contradictions (e.g. voting delete for this player while voting keep for Felipe Ortiz (footballer), a player with way less sources). I feel if this were the other way around, with keep and delete swapped, this article would certainly not be resisted... Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 22:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Das osmnezz,
I saw three editors advocating Keeping this article and two advocating Deletion. If it had been reversed, I would have still relisted the discussion again. But, I'll be honest, I probably tend to relist discussions more than other closers and on a discussion where the breakdown of editors' opinions and arguments is basically 50/50, I like to see a stronger consensus for either Keeping, Deleting, Merging or Redirect before taking action.
I have been brought to Deletion review several times for what was seen as introducing my own opinion into a closure when the divide among editors is evenly split so I really need to see a strong consensus before closing. Opinion doesn't have to be unanimous but I won't close an evenly divided discussion and I see two choices, leave a close discussion for another admin to close or relisting the discussion. There are other closers who will make difficult closures but I do not relish going to Deletion review any more than I need to which has led me to seek a solid consensus before closing a discussion. It has also led me to ease up on closing discussions at AFD and spending less time there.
I also see a no-win situation when two or more editors come up against each other in discussion after discussion, where the same arguments are put forward on articles on a certain subject. What we really need is to have more editors participating in AFD discussions so it is not the same handful of editors going head-to-head over and over again. And although I tend to weigh the opinions of very new editors less than experienced editors, I can't discount the opinion of any particular editor unless it is clear they are not taking the discussion seriously and are just posting a generic response.
I'm sorry you are disappointed by the discussion relisting but that doesn't mean that the discussion will last another week, any admin or experienced, uninvolved editor can close the discussion as soon as they perceive a consensus exists. So, the discussion could close today or tomorrow if another admin sees what I didn't see. Liz Read! Talk! 22:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)


Lady Slim

Hello. I am very sorry that you deleted the article that I wrote about Lady Slim. Yes, there were no sources in English on the Internet, but in the article itself I indicated quite a lot of sources in other languages that could be translated using auto-translation. This artist is the first from Azerbaijan who declared himself as a drag queen in his country, which is unique for this article. this article could be useful for lgbt studies and the like.Futurolog21 (talk) 04:07, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Futurolog21,
Please provide a link to the deleted page/article so I can see why the article was deleted. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 04:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lady_Slim&action=edit&redlink=1 Futurolog21 (talk) 07:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Just want to make sure that the proper route for me would be to start a new deletion discussion or is there a way to re-open the initial one? --CNMall41 (talk) 20:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Brian_Kennedy_(Producer)

Hello, I believe you deleted my bosses account for information you think is incorrect, mainly him not winning the Grammy. Here is an article explaining the qualifications of winning a Grammy https://naras.a.bigcontent.io/v1/static/producer_definitions_final_to_awards_03_01_2019 . That means if a producer works on more than 50% of the album they get the physical award statue. Per the article, “All producers (and others) eligibly credited on a GRAMMY-winning recording will be acknowledged with GRAMMY certificates” which Brian has. Also, here is the Disturbia Wiki where Brian Kennedy is clearly listed and talked about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disturbia_(song)2603:8001:9502:3712:C8D4:8615:7BF1:C28A (talk) 14:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Request to have a look at my ANI

Hello. Could you have a look at this ANI I opened 3 days ago Veverve (talk) 18:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Temporary Undeletion

Could you temporarily undelete my draft on honnegers feed mill, this way I can copy my work onto my own website, that way I can atleast retain the work I put in, but without it being on wikipedia. ADHD Ginger Boi.#ALM2M [[User:ChiserYT|ChiserYT]] ([[User talk:ChiserYT|talk]]) (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, ChiserYT,
When you come to a user talk page to talk about an article, you need to provide a link to the page you are talking about. I need to see why it was deleted. You also have a very confusing signature. Liz Read! Talk! 23:02, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Draft:Honeggers Feed Mill , sorry bout that, i was on mobile and trying to select and copy paste is a nightmare. ADHD Ginger Boi.#ALM2M [[User:ChiserYT|ChiserYT]] ([[User talk:ChiserYT|talk]]) (talk) 18:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
hello ADHD Ginger Boi.#ALM2M [[User:ChiserYT|ChiserYT]] ([[User talk:ChiserYT|talk]]) (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

"This template is not to be used in article space"

Hello, Liz. 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.

Aloha Liz,

I hope your day is going well! I am working part of the BIOL 454 class at UH Manoa, and I recently published our article: Alan M. Friedlander However, I have this error when i view the page "This template is not to be used in article space" and was hoping for some clarification. Please let me know when you can, Mahalo! Brandon N, Haolekoa (talk) 00:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

(by talk page watcher) @Haolekoa: Aloha. This error appeared due to the wikiedu template at the top of your article, this template is only valid outside of Mainspace and therefore the message appeared. However, since you moved it, it has been moved back to Draftspace (I note the convo you had with Jéské Couriano (talk · contribs) on IRC), so the message has disappeared. But at least you know why that happened - RichT|C|E-Mail 00:39, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
  • On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive.
  • Article patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Sign up here!
  • There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Zelenskyy Prod

Please restore the articles, 2022 visit by Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the United States and 2023 visit by Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the United Kingdom. The Prod was just for the oddly titled foreign visits during the war article. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 01:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Oh I was just coming to ask if we could restore 2022 visit by Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the United States!l. The coverage inspired an article I worked on (namely Winston Churchill's address to Congress (1941)) so I'm emotionally attached LOL jengod (talk) 03:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, WikiCleanerMan and jengod,
I'm sorry for the delay in responding. I think those articles were deleted because they were turned into redirects to the article that was PROD'd. So, are you asking for them to be restored, prior to the redirection? I don't see that as being a problem but I want to be clear on what you are requesting because they were not articles that were PROD'd. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 05:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
@Liz Yes please restore last versions of those two articles prior to the redirect. I think an automated process deleted them because they were redirects to a page that did not exist (the combo page that was proposed for deletion and then deleted). THANK YOU! jengod (talk) 08:19, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Yes, restore prior to the redirection. My PROD made it clear why I tagged that article that shouldn't have been created. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 22:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, WikiCleanerMan and jengod,
Finally got to restoring these two articles. I reverted them to the edit just prior to redirection. I guess you can take it from here. I'm sorry the articles were off the project for a few days. I don't think they should have been redirected in the first place. Liz Read! Talk! 05:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
No worries, and thanks for all you do! jengod (talk) 05:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

About an article awaiting approval

Hello,

The article on this page had been created with few resources, but has improved a lot since then. I believe that it meets the necessary criteria. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kirsten_Neusch%C3%A4fer

She is currently running in a world wide competition and has a large chance of winning. We want the page to be up if/when she does. 4 months is too long of a time for that. Can you please take a look and help us out?

Thank you in advance Egezort (talk) 19:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Egezort,
Looking at Draft:Kirsten Neuschäfer, I can see that it was submitted on January 18 and it was reviewed that very same day. I can not tell when it was resubmitted. I think you should give it at least a week or two before getting anxious about the review. If you have questions about the review that was done, it can help if you go to the Help page at Articles for Creation or go to the talk page of the reviewer with any questions. But can you tell how long ago it was resubmitted? I don't think most reviews take 4 months, it's just said to lower expectations. Most drafts are reviewed much quicker than that. Liz Read! Talk! 05:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello,
I don't know about the resubmission, but I can see that a lot of improvements have been made in March and April when I look at the edit history. Would a resubmission now help fix this? Because it has been a long time since then too. Egezort (talk) 01:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
You do not need to resubmit it and shouldn't as that doesn't move you ahead. It will be reviewed when an editor decides to, but please take note of the comments left and edits made. Star Mississippi 20:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
@Egezort and @Iercan I took a look at draft because I noticed this discussion (Liz's talkpage is on my watchlist) and did some cleanup. It appears there has been some off-wiki discussion based on Egezort's comment here which is fine (is Ms Altınay an editor here?) but as far as I can tell, simply participating in 2022 Golden Globe Race does not infer notability given most other participants in the 2022 race and the 2018 race do not have article about them unless they have won other notable races (or some other claim to notability). Therefore, I think notability hinges on her winning the race or at least finishing it thus I left a comment rather than declining the draft given the race is ongoing. Of course I could be mistaken and another reviewer may disagree. With all this said, I am at awe with the skill and fortitude her and the other sailors possess. What a feat! Best of luck to them. S0091 (talk) 21:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Ms Altınay isn't an editor on Wikipedia, but she is my teacher who has been very supportive of my projects on Wikipedia. She introduced @Iercan and myself.
As for notability, I believe that given her previous successes that she could merit notability, though I'm not too knowledgeable on the details of what constitutes notability and what doesn't. What I primarily care about is that the checking process can be done swiftly. Egezort (talk) 21:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @Egezort. I am glad both you and lercan have support. As far as things happening "swiftly", please see WP:NODEADLINE and do take the time to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's notability guidelines. There is no claim to notability outside this race and also need to mindful of WP:BLP1E. As you know, editors are volunteers so do what we can, when we can and as things interest us. You yourself do not frequently edit here. S0091 (talk) 21:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I am more active on Turkish Wikipedia and I am well aware that editors can take their time to do stuff. I myself have benefited a lot from that mindset. When I said that I cared that the process be done swiftly, I wasn't implying any kind of blame on any editors, however since the race will have been concluded soon, I believe that this page could be prioritised. This is of course at the editors' discretion. Egezort (talk) 22:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
@Egezort I didn't take anything as you implying blame so apologies if anything I said came off as if I thought you were. At the end of the day, AfC reviewers pick up drafts randomly and/or based on what interests them. There is no mechanism to prioritize one over another nor would that be fair. Some get picked up quickly while others sit. In this instance, your note here did get at least one AfC reviewer to take a look at it, me, and I did some cleanup and additional sourcing but was not comfortable accepting for the reasons I stated above. I don't want to take up Liz's talk page anymore so will leave it at that. S0091 (talk) 22:47, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Herb Society of America has been accepted

Herb Society of America, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 04:37, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Dr vulpes,
Thanks for letting me know. I believe I just submitted a draft I came across but it's still nice when one passes through AFC and gets approved. I appreciate the notice. Liz Read! Talk! 06:28, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism/deletion of The Gray Area

I am not on Wikipedia, really do not pay attention to "attention," and have only just created this account after learning of your destructive actions, but I learned tonight that you wantonly deleted the page for my award-winning audio drama, The Gray Area, in July 2022. Your claim for deletion was "non-notability." But if this is the dubious metric with which you decided to erase a show that has received considerable media attention, a show that has been prominently featured on other radio programs, and that has been used to teach classic stories in classrooms, then why do audio dramas that have a comparable audience reach still have Wikipedia pages? It seems clear that you acted less on actual notability and more from a place of overrreaching subjective criteria. There are plenty of works of art that I'm not fond of, but I would never delete or gainsay their existence. To do so would be akin to aligning myself with the vandals who destroyed the Great Library of Alexandria. So I am writing here to give you the benefit of the doubt and with the hope that this was a misunderstnading or a mistake. Please restore the page. There was no reason whatoever to destroy it. Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Grayareapod (talk • contribs)

Hello, Grayareapod,
Can you stop with your ranting long enough that we can have a civil conversation? I did not decide the grounds for deletion of this article, The Gray Area, it was tagged for deletion by another editor and that was their deletion rationale. I'm an administrator and I just carried out the deletion after a week had elapsed without anyone contesting the deletion tagging. Wikipedia has several deletion processes and this article was deleted through a Proposed deletion. That means that the article can be restored upon editor request. Is this what you are requesting? Because I can do that or you can go to WP:REFUND and ask for the article to be restored there. Let me know. Liz Read! Talk! 04:20, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Please know that if the article is restored, it can be tagged for a different deletion process, called Articles for Deletion where the article would be discussed for a week. But this would leave you some time to address the concerns that led to the article being deleted the first time. Liz Read! Talk! 04:23, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply, Liz. As I said, I am not on Wikipedia, have only just started steeping myself in the somewhat arcane deletion process, and now understand that the Proposed Deletion tag was added -- by user unknown and not by you. My apologies if I came across as accusatory, but, when seven years of hard labor is destroyed in an instant (and for some arbitrary reason), I'm sure you can understand how it can come across as a shock. You were only following protocol. I would greatly appreciate it if the article could be undeleted. If you could do that, well, let me know where to send the champagne! If there are any additional concerns, I am happy to have people who know Wikipedia far more than I do address them and help you out. Many thanks! Grayareapod (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Roxanne Fontana

Hello, please. I discovered this morning that the article Roxanne Fontana which has been up for 9 years was deleted by you a month ago. I was logging in to make a new edit and discovered this. Please may I ask you to restore the page, or can we discuss this? The reason cited as conflict of interest that I may be the person, or work with the person, or represent this artist. I do not. Please how may I get the article republished. Thank you. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

I can understand that since my User name is Brooklyn Smith, and Roxanne Fontana is a writer from Brooklyn there may be that suspicion. However, I am a male and not from Brooklyn nor do I live there. Thank you. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Brooklyn Smith,
There are several different types of page deletion and that determines whether or not the page can be restored. Can you provide me with a link to the deleted article page? Just type the exact name of the article surrounded on both sides with two sets of brackets like this: [[Article name]]. Then it will show up as a red link in this discussion. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 21:01, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Roxanne Fontana Thank you. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 21:06, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Brooklyn Smith,
Okay, well that is a pretty straight-forward link! Sometimes there is a middle initial or a stage name. It just speeds things up if you supply it rather than having me search for the page. Unfortunately, the article was deleted through a deletion discussion, please read it over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roxanne Fontana so you can see why some editors decided that the article should be deleted. The nominator did what sounds like a thorough search for sources and wasn't even sure if she was a real person.
My question for you is can you locate some significant coverage of her and her music that weren't already in the article? If you do have access to some new sources, then I can restore the article in Draft space and you can work on improving it. Whenever you think it is ready, it will need to be submitted to Articles for Creation for review and, hopefully, approval. If you simply move the article back into the main space of the project without improvements, it will just be deleted again.
So, the decision among editors who evaluated the article had nothing to do with any perceived conflict-of-interest of you or anyone else but the failure to find reliable sources that indicated she had a notable career. It'll take some work on your part to get article up to Wikipedia standards but if you are willing, I can start that process. I will say that there are plenty of existing articles that don't meet those standards especially if they were created years ago when standards were looser than they are today. But once an article is nominated for review at AFD, all of the sources are evaluated. Also, I should mention that the bar is higher if it is a Biography of a Living Person, we have to be extra careful when writing about living persons due to the impact an incorrect fact or, worse, personal interpretation, could have upon their life and career.
If you have questions about Wikipedia's deletion processes or its polices, like BLP, please bring them to the Teahouse where editors are there to assist others. Any way, let me know how you would like to proceed. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for this. The first thing that I absolutely must say is that the editor that you are quoting (yes, I have read the complete discussion) also stated that there was nothing on Google. That is completely false. There are over 5 pages that list Roxanne Fontana, her music, her film involvements. So that statement and other statements of that particular editor were wrong. Had I seen this discussion, I would have immediately pointed that out. The editor absolutely did not do a thorough search. They also stated that they found "some videos". There are pages and pages of videos of Roxanne Fontana, put up by her record label as well as fans. The total number of views of all of these videos exceed 20,000. All of the sources were reliable. However, some of the history, for example the cover of 'Downtown' Magazine, is no longer in print, which one of the editors in the discussion rightly pointed out. I make it my duty to always source, and I have never been flagged on any edits, and I have made many edits over the years.
Yes, please, if you can supply me with the original article, and I can add and edit and submit for review. Can you tell me how long this process will take? If it gets nominated for deletion again, I will be glad to enter the discussion, and would keep track of the page, obviously, after having gone through this time-wasting experience. Please let me know.
Some links that are on Google:
https://thelosangelesbeat.com/2018/01/american-girl-an-interview-with-roxanne-fontana/
https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/rob-rossi/episodes/RockerMike-and-Rob-Presents-Roxanne-Fontana-episode-15-e1ka9bi
https://internationaltimes.it/phantasmagorgy-roxanne-fontana/
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm11063291/
https://www.shindig-magazine.com/?p=884
https://louderthanwar.com/roxanne-fantana-phantasmagorgy-album-review/
Tangentially, here is a link I just discovered myself. There are many reviews of this new book that is out. Roxanne Fontana is not only in the book, she is actually front-and-center on the cover of the book, just under the title! I'm glad I found this and other reviews of this book. Thank you! Brooklyn Smith (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Respectfully, I am waiting to hear back from you. I have replied to you as you requested in regards to going forward on this matter. Please. I can see that you have not been on this page much over the past week, and hope you are well. I am anxious however to get this article back up. Please reply soon so that I may work on this. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 08:35, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Liz, in patiently waiting for your reply, I looked at the talk page of the two editors who decided to take this page down. I was astounded to see the unprofessional attitude that was exhibited towards this article calling it "stupid", and that someone should take a "machete to it" if the person WAS notable. They seemed to have a real feast destroying my article, based clearly on their opinions, unprofessional 'attitude', and blatant disrespect for the artist and my article. Saying that none of the citations was legit, borders on libel regarding the sources that were noted. I urge you to please have a serious look at Roxanne Fontana's history and send me the article that was deleted with any advice on improving it that makes sense. Those editors also said that claims in the article were "fake" and "far fetched". None of THAT is actually TRUE, and it is a bad stain on Wikipedia to come to such conclusions with no evidence, and with the evidence that the truth was written via the citations. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Liz - You may find the RFU discussion helpful. Cheers! - UtherSRG (talk) 02:23, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your work. I misunderstood in our conversation. This led me to believe that the article had been heavily edited before it was deleted, causing the nomination for deletion. I understand now that this was probably not the case. However, the original reason for the nomination, according to Liz, was not the reason for ultimate deletion. Yet the reason cited is factually unfounded. A shame. Brooklyn Smith (talk) 07:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Cite error: The named reference :9 was invoked but never defined

Aloha again Liz,

I hope your day is going well. This question is in regards to: Draft:Alan M. Friedlander . We have the error "Cite error: The named reference :9 was invoked but never defined", and I double-checked everything wih the citation formatting and it looks good. The citation was also referenced more than once in the article. I'm not sure how to fix this and any input would be appreciated. Mahalo! Haolekoa (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI re category:history of greenbrier county, West Virginia

It's totally cool if Category:History of Greenbrier County, West Virginia has to go in the bin, but just FYI I created it while trying to shine up Draft:Imperial Smokeless Coal Company. If that gets promoted to mainspace then poor empty category will have a friend. jengod (talk) 01:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2023

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Bad Boy (upcoming film)

Is it possible for you to restore this article in draft space at Draft:Bad Boy (2023 film)? There's new sourcing with a release date now [13][14] and I wanted to work on it until its release in a few days. Was deleted a few months ago after a discussion. WikiVirusC(talk) 00:46, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Indiscriminate Nominating articles for speedy deletion

Hello I would like to know why you are nominating my articles for speedy deletion when you clearly don't know anything about the field which the article is related to and are not qualified to do so. --Tgec17 (talk) 04:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Firstly, please read WP:OWN. There are no articles on Wikipedia which are "your" articles. Second, do not assume that you know the expertise, or lack thereof, of other editors here. Liz can advise you as to the specific reasons why the articles in question were nominated for deletion, but you may want to fundamentally rethink your approach to the matter. General Ization Talk 04:26, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
By my articles I'm clearly refering to the ones I created without claiming ownership, I think you are quite rude to respond in this defensive manner and I wonder why you are even responding considering you are not related to this matter.--Tgec17 (talk) 04:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
I think you are quite rude to tell another editor they "clearly don't know anything about" the subject of an article you created, and to demand that they explain why they have nominated them for deletion when the reasons for each nomination have already been clearly explained in multiple notices on your Talk page. General Ization Talk 04:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Tgec17,
I reviewed those brief article and didn't believe that the sources supplied indicated any notability or a credible claim of significance. If these individuals were notable, maybe that should be more evident in the article but in one of the articles, it merely stated that the nobleman witnessed a document being signed. We don't have articles for every person present during the signing of an important document. And General Ization is correct, these are not "your" articles. I noticed them because they were on the Move log after you moved them into main space. I think this was premature on your part as they need more work. But I tagged them, and you have contested the deletion and we'll let a third party assess the situation. I prefer to do this rather than deleting an article tagged A7 myself.
Thanks, General Ization for coming to the defense of a fellow editor. But I have become used to editors coming to my talk page who are angry with admin decisions I've made. In this case, I was just acting as an editor. But thank you again. Liz Read! Talk! 04:41, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Firstly stop being pretentious with the "thats not your article thing. Secondly perhaps you should take the consistent complaints about you as an indication that you don't know what you're talking about and stop nominating articles you know nothing about for deletion. If you understood the significance of what being a Tenente meant in 12th century Spain you would not nominate it for deletion. Alas the arrogance and the ignorance of people like you is a serious blow to the access of historical information. --Tgec17 (talk) 04:50, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Good Morning

Hello ! First of all, I want to thank you for the fact that you, as an experienced Wikipedia contributor, considered it necessary to remove the AFD tags from the page Lady Slim April 19 . But unfortunately the next day again AFD tags were added to the same page by the same user who added this before. I decided to inform you about this so that you, as an experienced participant, consider it please. Is it allowed after the afd tags are removed immediately on the next day to again activate the same tags on the same page? I want to reiterate that this article is not promotional, it may be useful for LGBT research and rights in Azerbaijan. This is one of the reasons why I added it to the english Wikipedia. Futurolog21 (talk) 06:55, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

21st Digital Century

Could i convince you to put the article back to draft? Trade (talk) 16:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Regarding draftspace

Hello user Liz, thank you for reminding about the former draft-space I worked on, unfortunately I have no interest on it currently. ⭐️ Starkex ⭐️ 📧 ✍️ 20:27, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

AfD

Liz, this reasoning basically results in everything in Portland being considered notable. Valereee (talk) 12:29, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Consider Category:Restaurants in Los Angeles, a city of 3.8 million, vs. Category:Restaurants in Portland, Oregon, a city of 650,000. 92 in LA, 155 in Portland. This is what this reasoning is doing to our assessment of notability based on The Oregonian. Valereee (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Liz? Valereee (talk) 10:32, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
I disagree with your reasoning. Subjects still need SIGCOV from independent sources. And if you read over the AFD you'll see that other editors disagree with your understanding of what constitutes "local" coverage and what degree of coverage is necessary. As closer, I was summing up what I saw as the consensus from other editors. I have closed AFDs on similar subjects, some as "Delete", some as "Keep", some as "Redirect", based on the arguments presented. I'm sorry that you are dissatisfied with the outcome of this particular discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 16:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
If we consider coverage of Portland in The Oregonian (which is based in Portland) to be non-local, and because of that to support a claim to notability without any other sources outside the local area, we are now basically declaring that every restaurant in Portland that has ever been covered by its local newspaper is notable. Lucier was open for 7 months.
I believe this is a misinterpretation of NCORP. Would you consider reopening that AfD? Valereee (talk) 18:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Valereee, no one is saying every restaurant in Portland that's been covered by The Oregonian is notable. That's a gross misrepresentation of the argument being made by folks who believe in-depth coverage by a regional publication helps establish notability. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
AB, and I agree it helps. But there are 61 sources for Lucier and they all seem to be Portland media. If no one outside of Portland was discussing this restaurant, why would we think it was notable? I checked the first non-local source I came to, and the restaurant is only one on a list. I just want to see sigcov outside of Portland media. That's literally all I'm looking for. Valereee (talk) 15:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I don't know what else to say. To me, Lucier is very clearly notable. Not that you gave me a heads up, but I see there's now a discussion re: The Oregonian and NCORP, so we'll see how that goes... ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:29, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I knew you'd get there, but I did go back and forth...pointy? Helpful? BTW, great job on Owamni. Valereee (talk) 16:52, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I dunno. I don't love or agree with some of what you've said over there, but I'm glad some sort of discussion has more editors weighing in on this issue. I don't agree with how you've suggested editors are voting to keep just because a topic's been covered by The Oregonian, when that's not true (or at least not how I'd describe the position of editors who disagree with you).
I also don't like that you flag me as a concern simply because there are way more restaurant articles for Portland than select major cities. That's ridiculous! I'm sure many more entries could be created for those cities, and many of the Portland restaurant entries flagged for deletion have been kept. Clearly my work's not as problematic as the picture you paint.
Doesn't matter, I'm glad the discussion's taking place and I'll be following along. I've got no problems with you, we just disagree here and that's ok. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:16, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
I was actively trying not to flag you as a concern (hence my waffling on even notifying). I don't think you are a concern. I think the interpretation is a concern and that you are completely well-intentioned. Valereee (talk) 17:27, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

User:Abryn/sandbox3

I think there is some confusion. This is a former userpage of mine, and I put a speedy delete tag for deletion as housecleaning. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 07:19, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Deletion q

Liz, In reverting a series of undiscussed page-moves, I ended up leaving behind the Mair_Kshatriyas_/_Rajputs redirect. Is it speedy deletable under some criterion? If not, I'll just leave it alone. Abecedare (talk) 18:22, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Resolved. TJRC tagged it with R3, which appears to applies. So I went ahead and deleted it. Abecedare (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Abecedare, I also tagged Mair Kshatriyas, but for some reason Twinkle encountered an authentication error of some kind, and did not update the creator's user page, so you may not have seen it. TJRC (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, TJRC. Deleted. Next time I'll take better care to uncheck the "Leave Redirect" option when undoing such moves; will create less of of such cleanup work. Cheers. Abecedare (talk) 20:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Not at all a problem. Lots of progress gets made via teamwork! TJRC (talk) 20:15, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Categories

Hi, I believe you are the user who left me a message in my Talk Page about Categories recently. If so, I have left a message here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:American_journalists_by_ethnic_or_national_origin#How_is_this_category_defined?

as well as here at the HELP DESK (same message), since it seems Category Talk Pages aren't watched by many editors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#Regarding_an_apparent_ambiguity_in_the_way_a_Category_name_is_worded_at_%22Category:American_journalists_by_ethnic_or_national_origin%22

I am wandering if you could look at the Help Desk question and see if you can contribute and answer as you seem to work on Categories quite a bit and might better understand what I am posing there. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 03:58, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liz/Archive_48&oldid=1168757570"