How is this article "damaging" to "their reputation"? The article is well sourced with proper citations from major business journals and news outlets, which is where the information came from. Have you contacted those media outlets to inform them that their reporting was wrong? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:18, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
References to LDS Church name change reverted[edit]
Please provide context why you removed the name change I applied to the Saint Peter page. The name of the church referenced is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. According to their public style guide, references to them as the LDS Church are incorrect. Also references to their members as Mormons are also discouraged. Here is the public style guide. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/style-guide. Changes occurred on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Peter. Revision number 874115708
Wikipedia is an independent encyclopedia. Our concern is factual information, not pleasing institutions. However, you will see that the edits I made did not refer to them as LDS Church but Latter-day Saints. As for "Mormons" being discourage, I recommend reading Mormons, which states that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are encouraged not to refer to themselves as Mormons, but gives no teaching on what those outside the Church are supposed to do. Mormonism also encompasses other bodies outside of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:04, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I want to know the reason why you removed my edit. DizzinessOfFreedom (talk) 03:32, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, Breitbart is not recognized as a credible source. It also gave incorrect information. She was awarded a Pontifical Knighthood, being made a Dame Commander of the Order of St. Gregory and the award was not given to her in connection to her work for women's reproductive rights, but for her work as a government official. She happens to support abortion, which may have caused controversy, but that is not the same claim. If there is/was controversy regarding her award, this needs to be cited with credible references that are not from a political opinion and commentary website. As far as categories such as "Liberal theologians" and "Anti-Modernism" goes, those are orphaned categories. They are not connected to any other categories on Wikipedia. Furthermore, they are too vague. What is "liberal"? It has different definitions depending on the context, and who decides what a "liberal" theologian is? "Anti-Modernism" has the same issue. It's too vague. Is it Anti-Modernism in the Catholic Church? In Christianity? In visual art? In architecture? It's not specific and does not improve the quality of the article. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:39, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It did not say in the article that the medal was given to her because she was an a pro abortion activist, but that it was given to a pro abortion activist. I cited another source. DizzinessOfFreedom (talk) 03:45, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lilianne Ploumen is a Dutch politician who has done activism work regarding women's reproductive health. She is not notable because of her activism. There was no mention as to why the award was given or who she is, other than a "abortion rights activist". This implies bias. Catholic News Agency is a reliable source, but you didn't use the article ([1]) to explain the backstory or the reason for the award, which would clarify the incident's supposed controversy:
"Responding to requests of clarification, Paloma Garcia-Ovejero, deputy director of the Holy See Press Office, said that “the honorific of the St. Gregory the Great Pontifical Order that Liliane Ploumen, then Minister for Development received in June 2017, during the visit of the Dutch Royals to the Holy Father, is part of the diplomatic praxis of the exchange of decorations among delegations during official visits between heads of state and government to the Vatican.”
It explains why/how such honours are given and that they are not endorsements and have no connection to any activism or pro-abortion policies Ploumen was behind. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The source of Bishop Fellay calling him a modernist is in the article. It wasnt in the edition summary. You need to look first before making such claims. DizzinessOfFreedom (talk) 03:36, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. You've been adding a lot of International Debutante Ball entries to articles where, as far as I can see, they have no place being. I've reverted the adds on articles that I was previously involved with, but thought I should ask you what your position was before I reviewed the others. Cheers, Bromley86 (talk) 01:19, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think, as long as we maintain their names on the article for the IDB, it is okay to remove it from their individual articles.--Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ebenezer Lutheran Church (Greensboro, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ssт✈(discuss) 14:41, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As was explained before on this article, you do not need to convert to be received into the Anglican church. You just turn up at the service and join in. It is not the same as more Catholic Christian denominations. DrKay (talk) 16:35, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As I explained, that is not the case. People can and do convert to the Anglican Church from other denominations, as seen by many categories established on wikipedia. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can self-identify as a convert, but you do not have to officially convert. That is the point. DrKay (talk) 06:45, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. You have performed four reverts within 24 hours on a biography of a living person. DrKay (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion nomination of Cozart-Coley House[edit]
Hello Willthacheerleader18,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Cozart-Coley House for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey[edit]
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you for starting this article. I hope you don't mind, but I added the article to Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride 2016/Results, which tracks new and improved LGBT-related content as part of an ongoing Wiki Loves Pride campaign. If you create or improve other LGBT articles between now and the end of June, feel free to update this page with your contributions. Thanks again! ---Another Believer(Talk) 00:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering if you could help me figure out some particulars concerning the Danish honour system, Order of the Dannebrog. According to its Wikipedia page, the class "Grand Commander" is reserved to "persons of princely origin", namely "Royals with close family ties with the Danish Royal House." However, I've found a source for the Danish vice admiralA. H. Vedel that lists him as a "Knight Grand Commander." I have not found anything explaining such a title. Could you help me research this end? It's possible the the actually title Vedel held was simply lost in translation by the producer of the source. Thank you for hearing me out! Indy beetle (talk) 08:29, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I couldn't help but notice that you appear to be going through articles about US towns to see if they mention the name of the person they are named after, then you're adding the name to the infobox. The problem is, often the name listed in the article is unsourced, and could be incorrect. I reverted your edits to Hillsborough, North Carolina and Zebulon, North Carolina. Before continuing, could I suggest you go back and check all the edits you've made to be sure they are in fact correct and properly sourced? Thanks a lot. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The information I added to the infobox was already sourced in the article, but per your request I have copied the (already provided) links and used them again as references in the infobox. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge[edit]
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Hi, I'm Robvanvee. Willthacheerleader18, thanks for creating Ballet Zürich!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. It could use a few more footnotes in the history section. Otherwise nice work!
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Robvanvee 13:44, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I see that you reverted my change to the infobox on the Delta Chi Xi page. The reason that I removed them is that an entry with a free label will not be properly displayed if there is not a label to go with it. So if a free_label value is added to indicate what those three things are, I'm just fine with it.Naraht (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi I saw that you reverted my edit. The use of "House of" is exclusively reserved for Royal dynasties in English. I am in the middle of correcting a certain number of pages including the Cavendish family. Please read House of for more information. The term "House of" has unfortunately been made popular by the series game of Thrones. On my mother's side the family is descended from a certain number of aristocratic families and none use the term "House of". Once I have managed to move the Cavendish family page to its correct title I will correct this page. --Domdeparis (talk) 09:12, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 10[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Indermaur, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Tyrol and Mauer. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Invitation to take a look at our first article[edit]
Hi!
We are students writing an article on Tiler Peck as part of our class Academic Discourse and Writing at Tec de Monterrey.
Since you are an experienced Wikipedian and have interest in these kinds of topics, we would like you to know if you could take a few moments to take a look at the article and give us feedback. Thank you for your time. --Fernanda Nova Rodarte (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Barbo von Waxenstein (family), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Italian. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:56, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sassona Norton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Willthacheerleader18! Follow the Wikimedia LGBT user group on Twitter at @wikilgbt for news, photos, and other topics of interest to LGBT Wikipedans and allies. Use #wikiLGBT to share any Wiki Loves Pride stuff that you would like to share (whether this month or any day of the year) or to alert folks to things that the LGBT Wikipedan community should know. RachelWex (talk)
For more information about Wiki Loves Pride, → click here ←.
Category:Colbert family, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. JDDJS (talk) 18:28, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion nomination of Prince Constantine-Alexios of Greece and Denmark[edit]
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
Regarding your recent edit at Greensboro massacre. Thought you might wish to see a discussion involving that subject. It took place on my Talk page, so it's unlikely you would know that it was being discussed.
Per your revert, stating that I "want to develop the idea that white juries inherently favor Nazis and the Klan" is a mistaken view on your part... just like I might be mistaken to say that you are attempting to whitewash the article. -Location (talk) 22:15, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I assume good intentions on your part, which is why I said IF you wanted to develop that line of reasoning, it should be done in the body of the text. I do not assume good intentions on the part of the Chicago newspaper writer. He went out of his way to try to paint the jury decision (if not also the jury members) as racist. It is an inflammatory bit of writing. More yellow journalism than professional journalism. But you were only citing words from the article, which is quite fair in our world. But it does misrepresent the events. The "journalist" had only one reason to mention an all-white jury... to infer some form of racial prejudice. The article was rife with that innuendo, but came up short when it came to supporting facts. Both the jurors and the prosecutor who carried the case for the State support the contention that politics was the deciding factor. If you wanted to say that a Southern jury decided against communists, I think you would be on solid ground, with a good bit of supporting evidence. But all-white...? Why? Gulbenk (talk) 23:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I re-read the Chicago Tribune article more carefully and while I don't believe it to be be yellow journalism, it is clearly an opinion piece and you are correct that it should not be cited the way I placed it in the article. (I did not notice the first time about that it was in the "Perspective" section.) It looks like Charles Madigan, who typically does have a left-of-center POV, thought that the jury should have decided the case differently and he drew attention to the view that many blacks - in context with other contemporary cases - viewed the system of justice as racist. And you are correct that the unnamed author for The New York Times used described the jury that way without any context leaving the reader in infer something from innuendo. I imagine a lot could be written on the various POVs regarding the jury and the verdit (e.g. it does appear as though jury may have disliked communists more than any like or dislike for the Klan[2]). Anyway, my apologies. -Location (talk) 02:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Willthacheerleader18, If you have a different point of view, I would like to understand it. Gulbenk (talk) 01:22, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I reverted your edits are 1)a very low level minor league hockey team's cheerleaders are not notable for the introduction (the team has not played yet, hence the lack of a body) and 2)your source is an dance class website that makes no mention of the cheer squad. The Thunderbirds' own website makes no mention of a cheer squad so I see no reason for it to be included here, even if you citation was better. (It would also be odd for as even most NHL/AHL/ECHL teams do not have a cheer team, they typically have "ice girls" which can be a dance team but often just come out at intermissions and sweep the ice and interact with fans.) I should also note that based on your edit content, region-based edits, and user name, if you have any affiliation with the organizations you are editing, you absolutely MUST read WP:COI. Yosemiter (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did not contest your removel the second time, so I see no reason for this post. The website I used did indeed reference the team. However, I understand that it is not considered notable enough for an article. My username is from when I created this account over seven years ago. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 19:48, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Usually if I remove info twice, I try to explain why per WP:BRD, so this post was as much for me as it was for you. The source/dance class website had one mention for the Thunderbirds, but as I said, there was nothing there about the squad. A news article or a team article about the cheerleaders would have been better. Yosemiter (talk) 21:12, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice Naylor-Leyland until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A page you started (Emma Thynn, Viscountess Weymouth) has been reviewed![edit]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Wikipedia editor Abishe just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:
Hello Willthacheerleader18: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 06:40, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix.
Hello Willthacheerleader18: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Abishe (talk) 04:31, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
Disambiguation link notification for December 28[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lady Mary Charteris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Lady (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
While I have thanked you for this edit, I just realized right afterwards that one of the two sources used, Women's Wear Daily, is actually a credible and reliable one, and we should probably incorporate material from it into the article. Daniel Case (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liam Riley until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Cssiitcic (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Lady Kitty Spencer, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Edwardx (talk) 23:40, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Willthacheerleader18. I ran across EJ Johnson while searching for usage of celebritynetworth.com (which is generally unreliable for biographical per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_207#www.thefamouspeople.com). Looking the article in more detail, it looks almost like it came from a previously deleted article, but I'm not seeing any log entries for past versions. Did you make it from scratch? --Ronz (talk) 03:58, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. You probably saw that I remove the jimmyjazz.com reference as well due to reliability concerns. Looks like there are plenty of far better ones to draw from regardless. Thanks for your work. --Ronz (talk) 04:38, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also please note that the replacement text in Transfeminine exactly(?) duplicates article Sex and gender distinction (which has been around in same form over a year), so methinks the IP was not "on the good side".
Also, plagiarism to or fro WP in ext page [3] and, apparently, several others (on balance, they are 'quoting' WP?)
I believe very little at first glance here. 'Vandalism' as a judgement cannot be just what meets the eye, but what the page histories and user contributions reveal. Useful side effect of checking out the user contributions is cleaning up all the other badnesses executed, when indeed they are vandals.
Anyway, I'm going to revert your revert of the other revert of ... Arrgh! Shenme (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Do not edit my information again, I have done my research me and 49 others discussed adding that info. Im a lieutenant in local law enforcement in NC and have also done my own personal research. Thanks Mwhitley2x (talk) 22:25, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea to what you are referring. If it is about information in an article you have contributed to then I would suggest you include a link to it. I would also like to remind you that no article on Wikipedia "belongs" to anyone, so any information is not "yours". All editors on Wikipedia can contribute to any article. Your rank in local NC law enforcement is irrelevant. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:11, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I went back and looked through my edits to find what you were referring to and realized you are upset because I reverted an edit you made on Figure Eight Island. The information you added to the article was not cited with any references. On Wikipedia, material that has no credible source can be removed at any time from an article. I highly doubt you consulted 49 individuals about adding one sentence to an article. And even if you had, you should provide a reference with proper citation. Policy stands with me on this. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kitty Spencer, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
Hello friend, I hope you are fine. You are right to point out that few of these models and celebrities are linked to the Storm Model Management through reliable, third-party sources. So I have removed all of those who aren't. Please don’t add again without reliable and authoritative third-party sources. I know you will agree, because just above on this page, your talk page, you wrote to another editor: "The information you added to the article was not cited with any references. On Wikipedia, material that has no credible source can be removed at any time from an article." Thanks and best regards, George Custer's Sabre (talk) 05:52, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Carl von In der Maur you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Auntieruth55 -- Auntieruth55 (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I swapped the pages, now its your turn to go in the field. go! go! go! lol —usernamekiran(talk) 21:04, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I restored everything. I apologise for the mess again. See you around :) —usernamekiran(talk) 21:22, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! Sorry, I was away from the computer. No problem, it was an easy fix! Thanks again! :) -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Raleigh, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page
Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Trinity Anglican Church, Raleigh until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969TT me 02:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for edits and pages regarding post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.
You reverted a challenged edit on Melania Trump. That violates the editing restrictions which state: "You must not reinstate any challenged (via reversion) edits without obtaining consensus on the talk page of this article." Please be careful and use the talk page to seek consensus for contested material. Thank you.- MrX 🖋 11:03, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 17[edit]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Leah Guey. Since you had some involvement with the Leah Guey redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Onel5969TT me 14:30, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm RonBot, a script that checks new non-free file uploads. I have found that the subject image that you recently uploaded was more than 5% in excess of the Non-free content guideline size of 100,000 pixels. I have tagged the image for a standard reduction, which (for jpg/gif/png/svg files) normally happens within a day. Please check the reduced image, and make sure that the image is not excessively corrupted. Other files will be added to Category:Wikipedia non-free file size reduction requests for manual processing. There is a full seven-day period before the original oversized image will be hidden; during that time you might want to consider editing the original image yourself (perhaps an initial crop to allow a smaller reduction or none at all). A formula for calculation the desired size can be found at WP:Image resolution, along with instructions on how to tag the image in the rare cases that it requires an oversized image (typically about 0.2% of non-free uploads are tagged as necessarily oversized). Please contact the bot owner if you have any questions, or you can ask them at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. RonBot (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I will not stop creating the single Ligon Flynn Red Link in the Figure Eight Island article. Per WP:Red Link, there is no problem with having Red Links for articles that are either forthcoming or should be. Ligon Flynn actually happens to be a noted architect, with a distinctive architectural design imprint, a storied, award-winning career. A study conducted in 2008 showed that red links helped Wikipedia grow, and keep articles from being orphaned from the start. So please stop stripping the Red Link from the article. Thanks. 842U (talk) 10:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it because it was dubious. Pope John XXIII already has a Papal infobox which has information regarding his sainthood already. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:12, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked temporarily from editing for Edit-warring at Rachel Yeoh and Michelle Yeoh (socialite). The edit-warring was all the more unacceptable because you posted a warning about edit-warring to the other editor involved, making it clear both that you are aware of Wikipedia's edit-warring policy and that the dispute in which you were involved was an edit-war. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:19, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.
I understand that engaging in an edit war is against Wikipedia policy and I will not do it again in the future. I was attempting to prevent another editor from continuously making disruptive edits, and on the two occasions I reached out to admins for help I did not receive any, including a request for third-party intervention because the situation was not "discussed on the article's talk page", due to the fact that the other editor refused to engage with me on the talk page despite my multiple requests. Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 20:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Which only deepened the disruption and made you also an edit warrior. It is not up to admins to step into every content dispute. You need to articulate the steps to take short of seeking an admin intervention.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:31, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Frame until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheLongTone (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antioch United Methodist Church (Roaring Gap, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:38, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Baptist Church (Madison, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:39, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Church of Christ, Scientist (Raleigh, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillyer Memorial Christian Church (Raleigh, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Trinity Episcopal Church (Greensboro, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:41, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. —DIYeditor (talk) 06:41, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
imho, all 7 subjects just above are valid. Not merely my opinion; I ran careful WP:BEFORE searches and have added WP:RS to most of them. But I'm gonna have to make time to, you know, do stuff people actually pay me to do for the next few days, so I do hope that you will do whatever you see is necessary to bring them up to snuff. Cheers!E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and thanks again for all your help with improving the articles! I will do what I can as well. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 23:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
since you are the only other genuine contributor there wanted to check from you on your conclusion. The only sources are self published. I have a strong feeling that this article is a hoax, Wikipedia rules are strictly applied to WP:BLP and even if there was a one off chance that this person is indeed genuine royal and not a hoax, notability is not WP:NOTINHERITED. So please re consider your !vote. If you are still undecided on taking a stand, you can ignore my comment, cheers. --DBigXrayᗙ 16:08, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary Santangelo until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AniMate 03:30, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
{{u|Willthacheerleader18]]... so sad for these article... I don't know that Nomination because I'm no active on wikipedia at that time, Btw your are my idol...Once, you have rescue... one of my created royal article... So, love from Myanmar <3. Thanks Hninthuzar (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Nora of Oettingen-Spielberg until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 06:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Willthacheerleader18... so sad for these article... I don't know that Nomination because I'm no active on wikipedia at that time, Btw your are my idol...Once time, you have rescue... one of my created royal article... So, love from Myanmar <3. Thanks Hninthuzar (talk) 09:23, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A year ago, you were recipient no. 2097 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:43, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Using proper titles for Ethiopian royalty and nobility[edit]
Please adhere to the proper titles for Ethiopian nobility and royalty. H.I.H. is reserved for members of the royal family by blood not by marriage. Also, the male descendants inherit the title of prince but "princess" is not inherited nor is it automatic at the point of marriage, but rather it is bestowed by the emperor at his discretion after (1) a woman of the royal family comes of age or (2) when a woman is married into the family. This is solely at teh discretion of the Emperor. There are many members of the royal family who have not been bestowed the title and are direct descendants of a crowned monarch. These mistaken appropriations are the application of western views of monarchic structure to a much older Ethiopian monarchy. Please see the below information available on Wikipedia on "Ethiopian aristocratic and court titles" which outlines the proper uses of titles and honorifics.
Imperial and royal titles[edit]
Negusa Nagast[edit]
Emperor Tewodros II of the Ethiopian Empire.
The Negusa Nagast (Ge'ez: ንጉሠ ነገሥት nəgusä nägäst, "King of Kings") was the Emperor of Ethiopia. Although several kings of Aksum used this style, until the restoration of the Solomonic dynasty under Yekuno Amlak, rulers of Ethiopia generally used the style of Negus, although "King of Kings" was used as far back as Ezana.
The full title of the Emperor of Ethiopia was Negusa Nagast and Seyoume Igziabeher (Ge'ez: ሥዩመ እግዚአብሔር; "Elect of God"). The title Moa Anbessa Ze Imnegede Yehuda ("Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah") always preceded the titles of the Emperor. It was not a personal title but rather referred to the title of Jesus and placed the office of Christ ahead of the Emperor's name in an act of Imperial submission. Until the reign of Yohannes IV, the Emperor was also Neguse Tsion (Ge'ez: ንጉሠ ጽዮን, nəgusä tsiyon), "King of Zion"), whose seat was at Axum, and which conferred hegemony over much of the north of the Empire.
The Emperor was referred to by the dignities of the formal Girmawi (Ge'ez: ግርማዊ, gärimawi, "His Imperial Majesty"), in common speech as Janhoy (Ge'ez: ጃንሆይ janihoy, "Your [Imperial] Majesty, or lit. "sire" ), in his own household and family as Getochu (our Master in the plural), and when referred to by name in the third person with the suffix of Atse (effectively "Emperor", i.e. Atse Menelik).
All formal speech concerning the Emperor was in the plural, as was his own speech; Haile Selassie, for instance, referred to himself in the first-person plural at all times, even in casual conversation and when speaking in French (however this was not the case when he spoke in English, in which he was not fully fluent).[2]
Negus[edit]
Main article: Negus
King Haile Selassie of the Solomonic dynasty.
A Negus (Ge'ez: ንጉሥ nəgus, "king") was a hereditary ruler of one of Ethiopia's larger provinces, over whom collectively the monarch ruled, thus justifying his imperial title. The title of Negus was awarded at the discretion of the Emperor to those who ruled important provinces, although it was often used hereditarily during and after the Zemene Mesafint. The rulers of Begemder, Shewa, Gojjam, Wollo, all held the title of Negus at some point, as the "Negus of Shewa", "Negus of Gojjam", and so forth.
During and after the reign of Menelik II virtually all of the titles either lapsed into the Imperial crown or were dissolved. In 1914, after having been appointed "Negus of Zion" by his son Lij Iyasu (Iyasu V), Mikael of Wollo, in consideration of the hostile feelings this provoked in of much of the nobility in northern Ethiopia (particularly Le'ul Ras Seyoum Mengesha, whose family had resented being denied the title by Menelik), who were now technically made subordinate to him, instead elected to use the title of Negus of Wollo. Tafari Makonnen, who later became Emperor Haile Selassie, was bestowed the title of Negus in 1928; he would be the last person to bear the title.[3]
Despite this, European sources referred to the Ethiopian monarch as the Negus well into the 20th century, switching to Emperor only after the Second World War- around the same time the name Abyssinia fell out of use in favour of Ethiopia in the west.
Le'ul[edit]
Le'ul (Ge'ez: ልዑል lə‘ul, "Prince") was a princely style used by sons and grandson of the Emperor. It conferred upon its holder the title of Imperial Highness. The style first came into use in 1916, following the enthronement of Empress.Zewditu
Abeto[edit]
Abetohun (Ge'ez: አቤቶሁን abētōhun) or Abeto (Ge'ez: አቤቶ abētō) -- Prince. Title reserved for males of Imperial ancestry in the male line. Title fell into disuse by the late 19th century. Lij Iyasu attempted to revive the title as Abeto-hoy ("Great Prince"), and this form is still used by the current Iyasuist claimant Girma Yohannes Iyasu.
Ras[edit]
Ras (Ge'ez: ራስ, translit. ras, lit. 'head', compare with Arabic Rais) -- One of the powerful non-imperial; historian Harold G. Marcus equates this to a duke. The combined title of Leul Ras was given to the heads of the cadet branches of the Imperial dynasty, such as the Princes of Gojjam, Tigray and the Selalle sub-branch of the last reigning Shewan Branch.
Bitwoded[edit]
Bitwoded (Ge'ez: ቢትወደድ, translit. bitwädäd, lit. 'beloved') -- An office thought to have been created by Zara Yaqob who appointed two of these, one of the Left and one of the Right. These were later merged into one office, which became the supreme grade of Ras, "Ras Betwadad". Marcus equates the style to an earl.
Lij[edit]
Lij (Ge'ez: ልጅ, translit. ləj, lit. 'child') -- Title issued at birth to sons of members of the Mesafint, the hereditary nobility.
Men's military titles[edit]
Further information: Ethiopian military titles
Dejazmach (ደጃዝማች däjazmač, "Commander or General of the Gate") -- a military title meaning commander of the central body of a traditional Ethiopian armed force composed of a vanguard, main body, left and right wings and a rear body.[4] Marcus equates this to a count. The heirs of the "Leul Rases" were titled Leul Dejazmach to elevate them above the non-Imperial blood Dejazmaches.
Fit'awrari (ፊትአውራሪ fit’awrari, Commander of the Vanguard) -- a military title meaning commander of the vanguard of a traditional Ethiopian armed force. Marcus equates this to a baron.
Grazmach (ግራዝማች grazmač, Commander of the Left wing) -- a military title meaning commander of the left wing of a traditional Ethiopian armed force.[4]
Qenyazmach (ቀኛዝማች qəñazmač, Commander of the Right wing) -- a military title meaning commander of the right wing of a traditional Ethiopian armed force.[4]
Azmach (አዝማች azmač, Commander of the Rearguard) -- a military title meaning commander of the rearguard of a traditional Ethiopian armed force. This was usually a trustworthy counselor and the leader's chief minister.[4]
Balambaras (ባላምባራስ balambaras, Commander of an Amba or fortress) -- these could also be commanders of the guards, artillery or cavalry of a traditional Ethiopian armed force, basically a man entrusted with important commands.[4]
Women's honorifics[edit]
Nigiste Negestatt - "Empress Regnant" (ንግሥተ ነገሥታት nígəstä nəgəstât) (in her own right) Literally "Queen of Kings," or "Queen of Queens," or "female ruler of an empire." Zewditu (reigned 1917–1930) was the only woman to be crowned in Ethiopia in her own right since ancient times. Rather than take the title Itege, which was reserved for empress consorts, Zewditu was given the feminized version of Nigusa Nigist to indicate that she reigned in her own right. She was accorded the dignity of Girmawit ("Imperial Majesty") and the title of Siyimta Igzi'abher (ሥይምተ እግዚአብሔር səyəmtä ’əgziabhēr, "Elect of God"). She was commonly referred to as Nigist "Queen". The 1955 Constitution of Ethiopia excluded women from the succession to the throne so this title was effectively abolished.
Itege (እቴጌ ’ətēgē) "empress consort". Empresses were generally crowned as consorts by the emperor at the Imperial Palace. However, Taytu Betul, consort of Menelik II, became the first Itege to be crowned by the Emperor at church rather than at the Palace. Her coronation took place on the second day of the emperor's coronation holiday. Menen Asfaw became the first Itege to be crowned by the archbishop on the same day and during the same ceremony as her husband, Haile Selassie. The Itege was entitled to the dignity of Girmawit ("Her/Your Imperial Majesty").
Le'elt (ልዕልት lə‘əlt) "Princess". Title came into use in 1916 upon the enthronement of Zewditu. Reserved at birth for daughters of the monarch and patrilineal granddaughters. Usually bestowed on the wives of "Leul Rases" as well as the monarch's granddaughters in the female line upon their marriages. The notable exception to the rule was Leult Yeshashework Yilma, Emperor Haile Selassie's niece by his elder brother, who received the title with the dignity of "Highness" from Zewditu upon the princess' marriage to Leul Ras Gugsa Araya Selassie in 1918, and then again from her uncle upon his coronation in 1930 with the enhanced dignity of "Imperial Highness".
Emebet Hoy (እመቤት ሆይ ’əmäbēt hōy, "Great Royal Lady") --Reserved for the wives of those bearing the title of Leul Dejazmach and other high ranking women of Royal blood.
Emebet (እመቤት, "Royal Lady" ’əmäbēt) --Reserved for the unmarried granddaughters of the monarch in the female line (they were generally granted the title of leult upon marriage), and to the daughters of the "Leul Rases".
Woyzero (ወይዘሮ wäyzärō, Dame) -- Originally high noble title that over time came to be the general accepted form of address for married women in general (Mrs.). It was still awarded by the Emperor on rare occasions in the 20th century to non-royal women, and sometimes with the higher grade of Woizero Hoy (Great Dame).
Woyzerit (ወይዘሪት wäyzärit, Lady) -- Originally high ranking noble title for unmarried women, now the general accepted form of address for unmarried women in general (Miss). It was sometimes awarded with the added distinction of Woizerit Hoy (Great Lady), but only to widows.
Important regional offices[edit]
Bahr negus (ባህር ንጉሥ bahər nəgus, "ruler of the Seas") -- King of the territories north of the Mareb River, and as a result the most powerful office in medieval Ethiopia after the Emperor himself. As a result of the revolts of the Bahr negus Yeshaq and the self-determination of Medri Bahri in modern-day Eritrea in the later 16th century, this office lost much of its power. Although men are mentioned as holding this office into the early 18th century, they were of little consequence.[citation needed]
Meridazmach (መርዕድ አዝማች märəd ’azmač, "Fearsome Commander" or "supreme general") -- This title is related to "Dejazmach" or "Kenyazmach" above. Beginning in the 18th century, this came to denote the ruler of Shewa until Sahle Selassie dropped it in favor of the title of Negus. Later revived in 1930 in Wollo for Crown Prince Asfaw Wossen.
Mesfin Harar (መስፍነ ሐረር mäsfinä ḥarar) --Duke of Harar. Hereditary title created in 1930 for Emperor Haile Selassie's second son, Prince Makonnen. (The wife of the Mesfin was properly titled Sefanit, but was more commonly referred to as the Mesfinit). Upon the death of the Prince, his son Prince Wossen Seged was elevated as Mesfin Harar and would currently be second in line in the line of succession if Ethiopia were still a monarchy after Prince Zera Yacob.
Nebura ed (ንቡረ እድ nəburä ’əd, one put in office through the laying of hands") -- civil governor of Axum reserved for the clergy. Also called Liqat Aksum. Because of the historical and symbolic importance of this city, the rules of precedence promulgated in 1689 ranked the Nebura ed ahead of all of the provincial governors. Indeed, when the title was granted with Ras Warq (the right to wear a coronet), it was higher than even the title of Ras. Although a civil title granted by the Emperor, it was usually bestowed on a clergyman due to Axum's status as the holiest site of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church within the country.[5] The title of Nebure ed was also granted to the administrator of the Church of St. Mary at Addis Alem, founded by Menelik II west of Addis Ababa. However the Nebura ed of Addis Alem was much further down the hierarchy than the Nebura ed of Axum, and was not accorded the Ras Warq.
Tigray Mekonnen (ትግራይ መኮንን təgray mäkōnən) -- governor of the province of Tigray. Under the rule of Emperor Yohannes IV in the late 19th century, the Tigray Mekonnen briefly became responsible for the territories once controlled by the Bahrnegus, and became the most powerful governor of Eritrea.
Wagshum (ዋግሹም wagšum) -- governor (or shum) of the province of Wag. The Wagshum was a hereditary title, and these rulers traced their ancestry back to the imperial family of the Zagwe dynasty.
Shum Agame -- Governor of Agame province of Tigray, and hereditary in the family of Dejazmach Sabagadis Woldu, a major figure of the Zemene Mesafint (Era of the Princes) period. Ras Sebhat Aregawi, a longtime rival of the family of Emperor Yohannes IV was one of the more famous of the Shum Agame.
Shum Tembien (ሹም ታምብየን šum tambyän) -- Governor of Tembien district of Tigray. Emperor Yohannes IV was the son of Shum Mercha of Tembien.
Jantirar - Title reserved for the males of the family who ruled over the mountain fortress of Ambassel in Wollo (now Debub Wollo Zone). The title of Jantirar is among the oldest in the Ethiopian Empire. Empress Menen, consort of Emperor Haile Selassie, was the daughter of Jantirar Asfaw. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.22.61.38 (talk) 02:47, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This conversation belongs on the article's talk page, not here. Your continous edits from various IP addresses has been nothing but disruptive. Wikipedia is not a source, so we do not base edits off of information in other articles, but from independent reliable sources. The sources used in the article back my edits. Makonnen also styles herself as H.I.H. Princess Ariana Austin Makonnen. Furthermore, the monarchy of Ethiopia was deposed and the last emperor is dead, so he is unable to "bestow" the title of princess. Is it up to the Crown Council now? If you can find a source that counters this information, then we can add it in. But for now, the sources contradict your edits. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:45, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This is my first time trying to use the "talk" feature. I didn't know that there was a difference between the article's talk page and this talk page. My edits have been few and far between, but I did inform others that references to valid outside sources and inside sources are being undone and wikipedia is ascribing rank in a way that is disrespectful to others. There are many women who are BY BLOOD unable to use the title Princess because they did not come of age before the monarchy was deposed. In the absence of an emperor there are no new princesses. None of the wives of the men in the royal family have been bestowed the title of "Princess". There are instances that a woman may be referred to as "princess" as a courtesy, but this is in no way an official title. There are many people trying to dispel miunderstandings like this. The link that you cited is from a former employer who was provided the information from an outside source that likely got it from Wikipedia, which is the only place where she is referred to as H.I.H Princess Makonnen. The website that you listed as a reference will be corrected after the holidays, as the person responsible for such edits is off. We were assured that it would be corrected posthaste with the sincerest apologies for the confusion. Independent reliable sources are available that define the terms. http://www.ethiohistory.com/aristocratic-and-court-titles-in-ethiopian-history and http://enacademic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/1222077#Women.27s_honorifics for example expressly define the term princess in the Ethiopian context as a bestowed title that is not passed automatically to people within the royal family, let alone those outside of the bloodline by marriage. Though the title has been said to be used casually by people referring to the spouse of a prince of the blood, the spouse is not actually a princess unless the title is granted to her. Is it up to the Crown Council now that the council is in exile and the monarch has been killed? No, the Crown Council will not nor has it taken on the role of bestowing monarchic titles onto people. Can you imagine the political implications if they were to do so? The sources are here and many others are available that identify what an Ethiopian princess is. Your application of the title is outside of the valid cited material here. Think of it this way. This is not the first man in the royal family to be married, yet none of the other women are titled as "HIH" nor "princess". Mrs. Makonnen is a lovely lady, but she is no greater than the other wives in the royal family. She is only different because she is the first black American to marry into the family and so the American media paid attention to her. This doesn't give her the right to titles that other women who have supported the family as wives and mothers decades before her do not have. Passing reference to someone as a "princess" as a courtesy for the sake of her husband is not the same as claiming that this is her rank/title. Please stop referring to her as having the official title of Princess until a monarchy is reinstated and it can be bestowed by the appropriate party. This is the best way to ensure accuracy and respect for those who are in the family and have more of a right to call themselves a princess, but do not out of respect for the title and know that they cannot just assume titles because the West sees it as inherently theirs for the taking. I hope that you see my point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.223.5.124 (talk) 04:31, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bethany C. Meyers until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Melcous (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not clearly. It was added without sources and without explanation here. No albums to verify, so keep it out. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If I provide reliable sources (which his article already does) then I can add it as I see fit, thank you. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In reading the policies of Wikipedia, I think one of the underlying concepts is that the entries should contain fact and not fiction. The simple fact is that Greece has no royalty. Therefore, even having a category called Greek Royalty is fictive. The category could accurately be called former Greek Royalty and any entries there would then be factual as to the historical figures who occupied positions of royalty during the time that Greece had royalty.
I was, therefore, surprised to find entries giving titles to people such as “crown prince” or “crown princess” of Greece. This implies, by the definition of crown prince, that this person would be next to acsend to the throne. However, there is no throne to acsend to in Greece. While Pavlos was crown prince when he was born, he is no longer the crown prince because there is no longer a kingdom where he will ascend to the throne. I see the term “crown prince“ as a job description so I would be OK with his Wikipedia entry being titled former crown prince of Greece. Just as his wife is certainly not the crown princess of Greece. She was not even born into this title. She is simply married to the former crown prince of Greece. And their children could be accurately described as the sons or daughters of the former crown prince of Greece or, alternately, grandsons and granddaughters of the former king of Greece.
I would not expect Wikipedia entries to give people inaccurate titles. If someone was the CEO of IBM 30 years ago, his Wikipedia entry would certainly indicate he was a former CEO. This is no different.
To call people prince or princess also implies some sort of accreditation by the country their title is associated to. There is certainly no such accreditation forthcoming from the country of Greece. If the former crown prince wishes to use his Danish Royal lineage, where royalty still exist, that would be accurate. But the Greek titles are not. People can call themselves whatever they want but their entries in Wikipedia should reflect who they actually are. Willthacheerleader18 changed my edits to the entries stating that they did not conform to the policies of Wikipedia. I disagree. He said the titles are included as a courtesy. Encyclopedias are not designed to be courteous. They should be accurate. They should not propagate myths. And, just because “the press” uses the royal titles, as Willthacheerleader18 pointed out, is no good reason for Wikipedia to do so. Any press that covers these people is, frankly speaking, probably not representative of the highest level of journalism. He also gave examples of other people who use titles that are meaningless. I think his example is a good one but for the opposite reason of what he intended. All those fictive titles should be changed. If the people’s passports don’t say “Crown Prince of Greece” or “Christoph Prince of Schleswig Holstein” their Wikipedia entries should not either. To be a member of a defunct royal house is to be a member of nothing. The historical fact that these people’s relatives were royalty is important to note but for Wikipedia to continue to propagate titles generations after they lost their legal standing and meaning is inconsistent with the stated pillars of the organization. Since Wikipedia is the first place people tend to go these days for facts, they should get them. The use of “former” and “descendant of” are fine and accurate descriptions. This egalitarian organization should not be used as a PR tool for descendants of ousted royals to perpetuate mythical titles.
I have an educated opinion and Willthacheerleader18 does too. But I don’t agree that his is actually more valid than mine. I find it insulting to have my edits changed without a discussion. His opinion was interesting but in no way definitive.
There is a category for Greek royalty just like there is for French, German, Russian, etc. even though these kingdoms and empires are also no more. As I stated on your talk page, Pavlos was crown prince at birth. No one will succeed him in that title, he was born a crown prince while the monarchy was still in power. If someone were a CEO of IBM, the article would refer to them as a businessman who served as CEO from a specific date to another specific date. I did not change your edits, another user did. I simply thought I should explain WHY they were changed, as that user did not reach out to you. You do realize the argument you are making against me (to a third party?) is on my talk page, right? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 28 January 2019, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2019 Jolo Cathedral bombings, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:58, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Halo Willthacheerleader18, saya lihat artikel-artikel Anda banyak yang belum di-interwiki-kan ke Wikidata & saya sudah meng-interwiki-kan ke Wikidata seluruh artikel yang sebelumnya belum di-interwiki-kan ke Wikidata tersebut. Mohon lain kali agar Anda sendiri yang meng-interwiki-kan artikel buatan Anda ke Wikidata karena hal tersebut dapat membantu orang untuk mengetahui apakah artikel tersebut sudah dibuat di Wikipedia bahasa Indonesia atau tidak.
Elliot2496 (talk) 19:21, 30 January 2019 (UTC) Thomas did not attend Eton school. He is an old Harrovian.[reply]
Elliot2496 I have moved your comment down to the bottom of my talk page for organizational purposes. I assume you are referring to information in the article for Thomas van Straubenzee. This conversation belongs on the article's talk page. I will move it there. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've been trying to correct the Carolyn_Bessette-Kennedy and John_F._Kennedy_Jr pages
Please be aware that both John and Carolyn are alive and well and references to their death need to be updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rightlaugh paul (talk • contribs) 16:18, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Rightlaugh paul, This information is false. You have been warned already not to add this information back into the article. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:22, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I G7ed my draft of Caroline Vreeland because God know when I was ever gonna get around to it, so thanks for making that page. One less to worry about. Trillfendi (talk) 00:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know, Jos Charles wasn't a Lammy nominee at the 28th Lambda Literary Awards, to which you added her earlier today — she got her nomination at the 29th Lambda Literary Awards, where her name was already listed under the appropriate category. You can see this list on their website if you need confirmation. Bearcat (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You just created this article with completely Wikipedia:Bare URLs? I noticed you have over 20,000 edits in the mainspace. Have you considered using complete inline citations? A loose noose (talk) 19:25, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I usually go back later in the day and fill them back in, which is what I was planning on. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 19:35, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's poor form to recreate pages that were deleted after a deletion discussion. Wikipedia:Deletion review is used when 'significant new information has come to light since a deletion that would justify recreating the deleted page'. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:46, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Celia Homeford embarrassingly, I was unaware of deletion review so thank you for bringing it to my attention. From now on in creating articles that had previously been deleted after nomination and discussion, I will approach it this way. In fairness, it is now 2019 and Lady Amelia Windsor was deleted in 2015, Lady Marina Windsor was merged in 2017, and Chantal Hochuli was deleted in 2013. Since that time, as the articles' sources show, there has been significant coverage on all three subjects over the past few years. Regardless, you are right to inform me of deletion review. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:06, 5 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't undo the revisions to the article without explaining your reasons. I have explained in detail why the revisions were necessary in the talk page. The next time you do it will be locked to editing. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JD143726 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I explained my reasons on the Knock Talk page. Banal sociological analysis that can be applied to ANY apparition should not dominate this page. I have also included a link by a prominent scholar on the eschatological significance of the apparitions for Catholics. Please respect this. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JD143726 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thyra von Westernhagen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:13, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rebecca Indermaur until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Appreciate you actually notifying me this time of the nomination for deletion. You should sign these things though. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 13:15, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, Willthacheerleader18, and welcome to Women in Red. I see you have already created a large number of women biographies but now that you are an "official" member of our project, I hope you will be inspired to create many more. You may find it useful to look through our Ten Simple Rules. Please let me know if you run into any problems or need assistance. Happy editing!--Ipigott (talk) 12:09, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 8 March 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tessa Ganserer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tessa Ganserer is the first openly transgender person to serve in a German parliament? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tessa Ganserer. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Tessa Ganserer), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Thank you for Tessa, and the many others! She is also featured on Portal:Germany. I would have loved this image to appear on the Main page today, instead of the horse: a woman smiling openly, and openly experienced. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Katherine Greek Orthodox Church (Burlington, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Reywas92Talk 23:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church (Jefferson, North Carolina) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Reywas92Talk 23:50, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First off "singular 'they' pronouns" is not part of proper English in my view and clearly as the Wikipedia page for the 'singular they' also states that "It has been commonly employed in everyday English ever since then, though it has become the target of criticism since the late-19th century." Which seems to suggest I am not the only one, perhaps if you had decided to go to "English 101" as you so eloquently put it. Then you would've known that too. Also, I would like to add that the character in the show is not non-binary and in fact has transitioned into a male character and soooo maybe change that... Unless you think it is vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swobniarsodot (talk • contribs) 18:51, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"in my view", exactly. Your view. It is part of proper English. It does not matter what your opinion on the matter is. More importantly, you violated Wikipedia policy. The article is about the actor themself, not the character, who has not transitioned into male but identifies as non-binary and uses singular they pronouns (not female pronouns, as you've insinuated), as the sources suggest. The information you added was not only incorrect, it was unsourced. You have already been warned by another editor for your edits, which appear to be vandalism, and you will be reported if you do so again. Wikipedia articles are not for you to express your opinion. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"Watson plays the role of gender non-binary character Susie Theo Putnam" - these are your own words not mine. Which clearly says that the character NOT the actor is non-binary and he has transition from female to male... Swobniarsodot (talk) 11:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My words? Those are the words in the article based off of the information in the provided sources. Click the links. If the character has transitioned, we need a source to back that claim. Wikipedia information has to be sourced. I am talking about the fact that you changed the pronouns of the actor themself, which were incorrect. You violated policy and were warned. Don't do it again. End of discussion.-- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
actually i changed that too.. Its pretty clear even in season one... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swobniarsodot (talk • contribs) 15:36, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A topic that you had commented on previously has come up again. Specifically, there is a new discussion here about using an Infobox royalty or nobility for Lady Louise Windsor. If you could possibly provide a comment there, that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your help! -- Blairall (talk) 01:27, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for starting Mary Day (dance teacher). I can't find any reliable sources that verifies her middle name, Henry, or otherwise. If you can find a quality source, please add it or correct the article(s): hopefully the name isn't an invention of Wikipedia. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. I wanted to thank you for your significant contributions to 2019 UNCC shooting. Could you please view this (at the bottom) and help me out to prevent this article from being locked due to edit warring. Thanks, EDG 543(talk) 19:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sarah Culberson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kposowa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. It appears your talk page is becoming quite lengthy and is in need of archiving. According to Wikipedia's user talk page guidelines; "Large talk pages become difficult to read, strain the limits of older browsers, and load slowly over slow internet connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page exceeds 75 KB or has multiple resolved or stale discussions." - this talk page is 152.4 KB. See Help:Archiving a talk page for instructions on how to manually archive your talk page, or to arrange for automatic archiving using a bot. If you have any questions, place a {{help me}} notice on your talk page, or go to the help desk. Thank you.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoë de Givenchy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Edwardx (talk) 13:18, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating Carlo von Zeitschel! I edit here too, under the username Lopifalko and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
All of the sources apart from cvzcontemporary.com and thepeerage.com are only passing mention so do not contribute to establishing notability.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Lopifalko}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Please take a look at WP:CIT and WP:CITE on how to format references and footnotes.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alana Bunte until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Hitro talk 07:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Onel5969 and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Lei von Habsburg-Lothringen, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.
Remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
Click Publish Changes button.
But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.
If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Onel5969}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lei von Habsburg-Lothringen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969TT me 03:08, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't cite those awful websites. They are prima facie unreliable. Note how they don't even cite sources. There are a few sources on Wuna, and this one is from a very decent press. I happen to know a thing or two about Boniface, and there is no "Christian tradition" that has her as his sister. There may be a few late medieval rumors somewhere, but if that is so, those need to be cited properly, and not as "tradition", rather as legend. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Seriously. I don't want to warn you via a template, but this is serious. YOU are the one who should argue that your sources are in any way acceptable. Drmies (talk) 01:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Threatening me when you are the one edit warring. Rich. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:48, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BRD is just an essay, though it is a useful guideline. WP:RS, however, is a pretty serious content guideline. Drmies (talk) 02:06, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Charlotte of Monaco (1719 – 1790), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CASSIOPEIA(talk) 07:16, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tobacco Road Dance Productions until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Onel5969TT me 18:37, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess_Keisha_Omilana until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MVaughnn (talk) 01:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nadja Malacrida has been nominated for Did You Know[edit]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. Nadja Malacrida, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 12:01, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Caroline Daur for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
Hello TomCat4680, I replied on your talk page, as you suggested, but it appears you deleted it. I cannot contest the deletion for the article because it was deleted in under two minutes of having been nominated by you. Is it possible to take this to AFD instead? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@TomCat4680, You deleted my post on your talk page, not the article. I could not respond to you on the article's talk page, as it was deleted. The article was deleted at 15:26 by Anthony Bradbury. You nominated it at 15:25. That didn't give me time to contest the speedy deletion. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If you still think the person is notable enough for an article, go ahead and re-add it. I'll leave it alone, but someone else might re-nominate it for deletion. TomCat4680 (talk) 16:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@TomCat4680 Thank you. Is there a way I can access a version of the article prior to deletion? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No it's gone. Just re-build it from scratch. TomCat4680 (talk) 16:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Or you could take your case to WP:DRV. ミラP 02:34, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 12 October 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nadja Malacrida, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Nadja Malacrida said in a Vim advertisement that it was "no use having new ideas of decoration if you have old ideas of dirt"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nadja Malacrida. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Nadja Malacrida), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate.
If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Chua until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. - ChrisWar666 (talk) 02:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Louise of Anhalt-Dessau (Q1876675). Since you had some involvement with the Louise of Anhalt-Dessau (Q1876675) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. --Tavix(talk) 03:46, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Charlotte of Monaco (1719 – 1790), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 3[edit]
You've been reverted twice now at Beatrix von Storch. Please follow WP:BRD and raise your concerns at the article Talk page. I see that you've been warned five times before about BRD; please take consensus seriously, and discuss your desired changes instead of trying to force them. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 21:37, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, although I do not understand your removal of the actual legal name and a wikilink to another article during your revisions, so I have restored those. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:41, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whether you understand or not, does not give you carte blanche to insist on your version, when two other editors have already called you out on it. I have reverted you again, and I'm requesting again that you observe WP:BRD and take your concerns to the article Talk page. You're not a newbie, you know that we seek to achieve consensus through discussion, and not force things via edit warring. Mathglot (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはWillthacheerleader18たちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！ フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE! ミラP 02:59, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In the article about the Marchioness of Lothian, you note John Henry Newman as being "of Dalkeith". There was a similar reference in the article on St David's Church, Dalkeith. I'm not aware of any particular connection between Newman and Dalkeith, and the article on Newman does not suggest any - but have you come across a source that suggests that there was?George Burgess (talk) 15:56, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@George Burgess: While I have made edits and additions to the article, I am not the original author and I do not believe I ever added any information about Newman. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sumika Boyrachasya until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Usedtobecool☎️ 08:22, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On 23 January 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Kesewa Aboah, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that fashion model Kesewa Aboah is descended from British nobility? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kesewa Aboah. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Kesewa Aboah), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
David's public profile in Perth Western Australia some years ago was as a criminologist' and not 'psychologist'... JarrahTree 04:55, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I just used what information the sources provided. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 04:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ahah - that is a major issue with editing wikipedia... but then wont start that one, will never get off.. cheers JarrahTree 05:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 14[edit]
An article you recently created, Miriam, Princess of Turnovo, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 11:39, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Li until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 03:38, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Miriam, Princess of Turnovo, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
An article you recently created, Adelphia Plantation, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 02:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tumurbaatar Enkhtungalag until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 10:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
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.
@Nice4What:, I didn't get a notification, but I saw on the article's talk page. Thanks for letting me know! :) -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:10, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 3[edit]
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
"Black Barons" stays a userpage until you can get better sources than just 'what they say about themselves'. Check notability criteria at WP:MUSIC. Good luck. DS (talk) 17:14, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DragonflySixtyseven: If you take a look at the sources I used from their website, you will see they are PDFs from independent sources, mostly Swiss newspapers and magazines, talking about the band's career. The coverage is independent from the band. -- 17:59, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Neville, 11th Baron Braybrooke until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Reywas92Talk 07:46, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 21:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Katelyn Clampett and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Katelyn Clampett, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18!
Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! MurielMary (talk) 10:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
On 29 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Carole Baskin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the age of seventeen, Tiger King subject Carole Baskin used llamas for a lawn-trimming business? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Carole Baskin. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Carole Baskin), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myka Meier until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Manujaineshwar (talk) 15:55, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary von Habsburg until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Surtsicna (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and thanks for all your contributions! I am just letting you know that I have redirected Boxley House to Madison,_North_Carolina#History, because it doesn't indicate how the house meets WP:GNG or WP:NBUILD. I found a few local news articles, but nothing that indicates the house is particularly significant. If you disagree, feel free to restore the article and let me know why you think it's notable. I am happy to discuss this further or take the article to AFD if you would appreciate more community input. Best wishes, Eddie891TalkWork 00:30, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Chantal, Princess of Hanover, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. PatGallacher (talk) 00:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it because I contested the speedy deletion on the talk page, as I thought was protocol. Was that not correct? My apologies if so. Thank you for notifying me about the nomination for deletion. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:23, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Sofía, Duchess of Calabria until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Surtsicna (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Adelphia Plantation, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.
You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.
Thank you for your attention. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:48, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. scope_creepTalk 07:36, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
@TheHotWiki, Excuse me? I think you're confusing good faith with vandalism. Hardly a reason to threaten with a block. I didn't realize the information was not accurate. I also only performed one edit with which you disagreed with, and reverted. I never edit warred with you or objected to your reversion. Good grief. I suggest you sit down and take a chill pill. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings...you have a very good understanding of Wiki policies and have also voted at Afd's for many Royalty related articles. I would appreciate if you could provide your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tripura Sundari Ammani. VocalIndia (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dabney Mercer until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Umakant Bhalerao (talk) 14:18, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for November 7[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited India Oxenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lifetime.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk! 14:06, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Ivy Getty, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DGG ( talk ) 02:37, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MurielMary was:
This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Insufficient evidence of independent notability (independent from her famous relatives).
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ivy Getty and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Ivy Getty, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notability would come from coverage of her career, and most of this section is sourced to coverage which does not meet Wikipedia standards.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Mccapra}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Warren (fashion designer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, are you aware thepeerage.com has been deprecated? It looks like several other sources in Maria-Anna Galitzine are also very obviously not suitable for a BLP (like this blog). I will be going through and removing those refs and unsupported content. JoelleJay (talk) 04:29, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holly Glasser until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Katelyn Clampett, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 08:23, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Abbyjjjj96. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gigi Gorgeous, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 16:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
--Rosiestep (talk) 18:49, 26 February 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]
Just one more month left of Women in Red's Women in Africa contest[edit]
Thanks for signing up to Women in Red's Women in Africa contest. An update, now that we're two months in: over 100 articles have been created in January and February! Please help make the final month of the contest a success too :) Dsp13 (talk) 14:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 17:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nats Getty until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article on Fay Webb-Gardner may interest you. It was just created earlier this month and is in need of some good attention. -Indy beetle (talk) 08:49, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Ivy Getty, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 25[edit]
The Wikimedia LGBTQ+ User Group is holding online working days in May. As a member of WikiProject LGBT studies, editing on LGBTQ+ issues or if you identify as part of the LGBTQ+ community, come help us set goals, develop our organisation and structures, consider how to respond to issues faced by Queer editors, and plan for the next 12 months.
We will be meeting online for 3 half-days, 14–16 May at 1400–1730 UTC. While our working language is English, we are looking to accommodate users who would prefer to participate in other languages, including translation facilities.
Hi! Are you okay with looking over an article I've worked on: Cueva de las Manos? The Wikiproject monuments page doesn't seem to be active and I was wondering if you were interested. Thanks! Tyrone Madera (talk) 22:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Durham Debutante Society Logo.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Durham Debutante Society Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Can you please clarify why you reversed my edit of the wikipage of Alexander_Tschugguel?
Someone (I hope, not he himself?) keeps refering to him as a "Baron" and such, for which there is no source (I dare you to provide one!) and which is absolute nonsense because there is no contempory Austrian nobility. There cannot be. It has been abolished. By federal law.
Please refer to the talk page for a explanation if you need it.
I and others have pointed this out repeatetly and even referenced the federal law in which nobility was abolished and the wielding of titles made punishable in the discussion page of this article. Seeing that you refer to yourself as Swiss, I assume you understand German and that you are able to read the orginial reference. There was even a brief explanation in the article history, so I assume it was intentional. Somewhat ironical, the law in question was even referenced in the original version as to say "Here is a source that proves that the previous sentence is factually incorrect".
So why did you reverse the edit? If you are convinced of his nobility, I challenge you to provide an explanation with sources that provide a legal basis for his titles (or a reference where he calls himself "Baron")or otherwise accept the edit.
P.S.:
Please note that the acceptance of fake nobility is a political act as it questions the Austrian republic.
Clearly, this is inappropriate for the wikipedia.
Also I am not sure if you are in-partial to this issue given that you are clearly very fond of nobility articles.
Nothing wrong with that in general - this just happens to be the wrong category.
If a name is worth including in the lead, it's probably worth making a redirect from it: I've created both Philip Cottington Ludwell III and Philip Cottington Ludwell to point to the two of them. Helps the reader who has the full name, and without the redirect some future careless editor might accidentally create a duplicate. Thanks. PamD 19:08, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On 14 May 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anna von Wattenwyl, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Colonel Anna von Wattenwyl went to jail in Switzerland because of her work for the Salvation Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anna von Wattenwyl. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Anna von Wattenwyl), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concepción Cochrane Blaquier until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk! 14:49, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why these were changed, so maybe you can help me understand. Examples are this edit to George Washington Custis Lee where you changed [[Category:Lee family of Virginia|George Washington]] and this edit where you changed - [[Category:Lee family of Virginia|Henry]] to Henry Lee I. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:21, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Shearonink, I am trying to alphabetize the category by given names to make it more easy to navigate. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:26, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok....but when I click on these piped Categories it just takes me to the main Cat page...isn't the html ignoring that pipe to a specific sub-name? I confess, am still confused. Shearonink (talk) 17:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it recategorizes them by first name instead of last name, so that they are no longer all in the "L" column. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AH! So doing the piping in this fashion gets them in alphabetical order by first name, overriding the built-in order by last name. Brilliant! It's just being done "under the hood" in a fashion, slotting the article into the Cat page in an editor's chosen order. Thanks for the explanation, I'll remember that. Very useful for these huge family cats... Shearonink (talk) 18:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donna Cori Gibson until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reya Benitez until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noor Pahlavi until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You've indicated that she's a member of the United Daughters of the Confederacy, but I don't see a source for that in her article. Where'd you get the info? —C.Fred (talk) 19:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On 13 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mary Custis Lee, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mary Custis Lee(pictured), a daughter of the Confederate general Robert E. Lee, refused to sit in the "whites-only" section of a streetcar? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mary Custis Lee. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mary Custis Lee), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello, I'm TJRC. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Santa Monica High School, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. TJRC (talk) 00:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howard Krein until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
No indication of being notable. Private in the army and JP are not sufficient to pass WP:NPOLITICIAN nor WP:SOLDIER. Just an indivual. Refs are atrocious.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milana Abensberg und Traun until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruby Guest until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikolai von Bismarck until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ginevra Csillaghy Fürstenberg until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 16:47, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 27[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Steve Breedlove, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rector.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
I have nominated Zelda Fitzgerald for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. As you edited this article in the past, your input there and further contributions to the article would be appreciated. — Flask (talk) 01:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick word from me, Willthacheerleader18, to thank you for creating so many interesting articles about women since you joined about three years ago. Your efforts represent a significant contribution to our efforts to chip away at the gender gap. Keep up the good work and let me know if ever I can be of any assistance.--Ipigott (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ipigott: Thank you so much for the acknowledgment, I appreciate it! I absolutely will! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:21, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was a Los Angeles Rams Cheerleader in the early 1980’s along side 16 other guys. I was on a LA Rams Cheerleader Poster poster and pictured in the LA Rams game football program. I danced and performed along side the the lady’s on the squad during halftime shows. Why was this never mentioned in any of the articles of new male LA Rams Cheerleaders? 2600:8802:400C:6500:152F:78A8:7A80:F8E8 (talk) 10:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To my understanding, all nobility titles in Austria became illegal in 1919. She was born in 1920, so I'd conclude: none of these Freiin - Baroness things were still valid. I'm tired, may look tomorrow. I just wrote about Ladislaja Harnoncourt who was born early enough to be born with titles ;) - and still a comment in the DYK review mentions nobility fancruft. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia Horvath until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Eliza Manners until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
An article you recently created, Alexey Vasilievich Teglev, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. scope_creepTalk 00:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Willthacheerleader18, How are you doing? I see you created Category:De Silva family. However, I can't see the relationship between some of the members. For example, How A. E. de Silva is related to George E. de Silva? If you have a source kindly share? Cheers--Chanaka L (talk) 03:00, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 15[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited In der Maur, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Master of the hunt and Birnstiel.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Neville, 11th Baron Braybrooke (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your solid expansion work on that article from a few days ago. I finished off the five-fold expansion so you're a co-nominator for the DYK! (BTW, ever consider setting up talk page archiving?) – Muboshgu (talk) 23:40, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk! 18:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 12 May 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mallory McMorrow, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Mallory McMorrow won a public contest to design the Mazda3 while she was a college student? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mallory McMorrow. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mallory McMorrow), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. --Hipal (talk) 22:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Would you consider becoming a New Page Reviewer?[edit]
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org.
Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)
Hi Willthacheerleader18,
I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join the new page reviewing team. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; the new page reviewing team needs help from experienced users.
Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Kindly read the tutorial before making your decision (if it looks daunting, don't worry, most pages are easy to review, and habits are quick to develop). If this looks like something that you can do, please consider joining us. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR. If you have questions, please feel free to drop a message on my talk page or at the reviewer's discussion board.
Cheers, and hope to see you around, (t · c) buidhe 17:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No *significant* coverage in reliable sources. The few non-primary sources included in the article are articles about the royal family not about van Straubenzee himself.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaïa Jacquet-Matisse until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kyra Kennedy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Alexey Vasilievich Teglev, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 01:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 00:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for creating Princess Marie des Neiges of Bourbon-Parma. You have created many articles, please address the Naked URL]s on this article any any others. Other editors might not do this for you. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Check the pages of the suitors of the House of Bourbon Two Sicilies of the Spanish branch and search on the web. If you search you will see that the titles of the daughters are false, because they are already assigned to someone. Check it out for yourself.--User:MariaAmaliaduchessadiParma — Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Felix Indermaur, is not suitable as written to remain published. It appears there is a WP:UPE or WP:COI conflict. Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, and have addressed the UPE/COI issue, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. As per WP policy, please do not move into mainspace yourself. Onel5969TT me 13:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On 23 October 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lucy de László, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that portraits of Lucy de László with a violin (one portrait pictured), painted by her husband, are recognised as some of the first examples of portraiture to include womens' talents in them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lucy de László. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Lucy de László), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
An article you recently created, Jennie Hallam-Peel, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:01, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Victoria Romanovna until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Remember to search slight spelling variations of your subject's name, like Katherine/Katharine or Elizabeth/Elisabeth, especially for historical subjects.
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sally Breedlove until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hello! I just found out that the Wikimedia Foundation runs these giveaways, and I nominated you for one! I really admire the articles on royalty and society that you build and think they make great contributions to the encyclopaedia. Lajmmoore (talk) 14:03, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lajmoore Oh my goodness, thank you so much for the nomination! this just made my day!! -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Rose Montoya, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Hitro talk 06:53, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating Rose Montoya. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because Issues raised by first reviewer were not addressed before another reviewer moved it back to mainspace..
Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 14:51, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Natalie Mars requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natalie Mars. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. • Gene93k (talk) 03:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]
Thanks for creating the article! Hopefully you will write more article, have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hi, she is only Radziwiłł by marriage, the category should contain only people with that birth name Marcelus (talk) 18:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcelus: Is that common standard on Wikipedia? I have never known a family category to only include birth members in it. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 18:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brían Nguyen until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daisy Taylor until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
An article you recently created, Riley Knoxx, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. Right now, the only in-depth sourcing is about the NBA gig, which makes it a case of WP:BIO1E. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 15:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating the article! I encourage you to create more article. Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
An article you recently created, Mary Sadler, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 10:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Elise Varner Winter is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 02:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
File permission problem with File:Cheer extreme logo.jpg[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Cheer extreme logo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.
If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{permission pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.
If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. Here is a list of your uploads. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:55, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks from the women who are not part of the 19% women on Wikipedia (aka the Women in Red. They know that you are moving them one closer to the front on the queue.... and my granddaughter keeps seeing more people she could emulate. Good work. Victuallers (talk) 09:02, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Felix Indermaur, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:03, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Pullen House, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 10:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 25[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Queen's Bath, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kuai.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Jennie Hallam-Peel, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I hadn't seen that other incident of cyberbullying in my quick skim of the article to see if the category is warranted, thanks for catching that for me. Also, I know the conversation is over 4 years old, however I noticed in the section "References to LDS Church name change reverted" above I noticed that you stated "but gives no teaching on what those outside the Church are supposed to do". The reasoning is while the Church provides guidance to its members, we believe that we are not authorized to provide guidance for others who are not in the Church, but we can encourage the guidance suggested to us for others. If this doesn't make sense I'm sorry I'm not good at explaining these things ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Notable dancers" section on Kansas City Ballet wikipedia article?[edit]
Noted your addition of this section on the KCB wikipedia article and the link to the article on Ms. Mayfield. I reviewed her article. While she certainly has had an interesting career, from a Kansas City Ballet perspective I'm not sure having danced in the corps equates to "notable."
KCB actually maintains an "alumni" website (see https://kcballet.org/alumni/ ), there is one former dancer on the list with the first name "Maryhelen." Last name Hanson, perhaps her maiden name? The alumni list contains nearly 600 names! There are probably a few "notables" on the list but having just one name on the list seems inappropriate. I would propose we remove this section/link until such time as the current KCB artistic leadership has time to review and weight in on this subject. Ontomeister (talk) 22:35, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Hanson is her maiden name. I forgot to add that to her article. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great! I'll contact the KCB webmaster and see if they want to link her name in the alumni list to the wikipedia article. I'll also reach out to the KCB Artistic Director Devon Carney and get his take on the concept of a notable section. Ontomeister (talk) 01:32, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good! Please keep me updated. Are you part of WikiDance? I am but I saw the project went inactive. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Os Bandeirantes, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 10:30, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Love the work you've done on Women in Red, it's a passion of mine as well. It's clear you are a valuable contributor. We encountered each other before regarding my perhaps overzealous deletion proposals for some of your church articles.
I wanted to make sure you are aware of WP:COI and ask if you have any conflicts of interest with articles you have created or worked on that should be disclosed? You can place the {{Connected contributor|User1=Your username |U1-declared=yes| U1-otherlinks=(Optional) Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts or diffs showing COI contributions.}} template on any affected pages.
As I see it this is a small matter and nothing that needs a big production made over it, or report to WP:COIN. It would be better for you to place the tags yourself, if it is accurate. If it is inaccurate, I apologize and again thank you for your work on WIR. —DIYeditor (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DIYeditor: Hello again! Thank you, Women in Red is one of my greatest passions. I actually did not know how to declare a conflict of interest. I did start an article on one of my siblings (Katherine Indermaur), and then on a few ancestors.. (I'm not sure if ancestors are conflict of interest or not? One is Thomas Lygon. I also wrote most of the article In der Maur. A lot of my personal time is spent going through family archives, and I like to use that where I can to expand articles. Are distant relations/ancestors off limits? Even in my sister's article, I do my best to come across neutral and only present the facts.) so I will go disclose that now. Do I place this tag on the article itself or on the talk page? Thank you for clarifying this for me! I'm sorry for any misstep on my part. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 23:59, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As to how close of a connection, Any external relationship—personal, religious, political, academic, legal, or financial (including holding a cryptocurrency)—can trigger a COI. How close the relationship needs to be before it becomes a concern on Wikipedia is governed by common sense. For example, an article about a band should not be written by the band's manager, and a biography should not be an autobiography or written by the subject's spouse. There can be a COI when writing on behalf of a competitor or opponent of the page subject, just as there is when writing on behalf of the page subject. As far as I'm concerned it's no problem for you to edit articles about ancient ancestors if the COI is disclosed, but I am not an expert in this topic. You could ask at WP:COIN if you wanted.
I think one of your church articles may have a COI as well. Thanks for you attention to this and happy editing! —DIYeditor (talk) 00:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 19[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Willie Person Mangum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hardscrabble.
Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Fram (talk) 07:46, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please see WP:BLPCRIME: "For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured." Fram (talk) 07:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And this was just a blatant, unacceptable BLP violation. Do NOT accuse people of being criminals when they are only charged or arrested, but not convicted. Fram (talk) 07:51, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This was not an attack article. I've been writing articles on Wikipedia for over ten years and I have never once been accused of such before. I believed the subject notable, as a socialite who was arrested and charged as was cited in the article. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 07:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You labeled her literally a criminal in multiple articles, without any conviction (just arrest and charges). I hope you haven't been doing that for over 10 years either. Fram (talk) 08:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A misunderstanding, as I did not realize that is a BLP violation. And while I welcome any critique on editing that is not constructive or beneficial to Wikipedia, I will say I do not at all appreciate your attitude and tone. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 08:05, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above, I believe you are a well intentioned, constructive, and good faith editor. You probably simply have not run into these larger policy issues (BLPCRIME, COI, RSNP). Still, all three are issues that will raise the hackles of experienced editors and many will find it surprising that one didn't know of them, or feel that one should have known of them intuitively. People will become confrontational over such issues pretty quickly. —DIYeditor (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do not use tabloid-quality sources to write articles about people suspected of crime. See WP:RSNP for some of the sources you used (like Sportskeeda). —Kusma (talk) 10:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have recently edited a page related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.
You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Beccaynr (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Bigna Francis-von Wyttenbach, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 11:25, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Margaret Severin-Hansen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Weiss.
An article you recently created, Patrice E. Jones, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 11:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Tisch Jones, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three, to be safe. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969TT me 11:30, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia Library: #1Lib1Ref - May 15th to June 5th
Tip of the month:
Looking for new red links? Keep an eye out for interesting and notable friends, family, or associates of your last article subject, and re-examine group photos for other women who may still need an article.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk! 03:13, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A tag has been placed on Category:Vestera family requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a recently created redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 04:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]
Hello! I want to inform you that I have checked your article and mark it as reviewed. Have a good day and thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hello! I want to inform you that I have checked your article and mark it as reviewed.
Have a good day and thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hello! Hopefully you have a nice day today. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by creating an article.
As your article have adhered to the policies of Wikipedia, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hello! Hopefully you have a nice day today. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by creating an article.
As your article have adhered to the policies of Wikipedia, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a good day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
In July 2015 around 15.5% of the English Wikipedia's biographies were about women. As of July 2023, 19.61% of the English Wikipedia's biographies are about women. That's a lot of biographies created in the effort to close the gender gap. Happy 8th Anniversary! Join us for some virtual cake and add comments or memories and please keep on editing to close the gap!
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nothando Hlophe until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Riley Knoxx, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kathleen Buhle until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Melton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kylan Darnell until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mary Sadler, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Pullen House, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 11:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pullen House, 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 Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class 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.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Riley Knoxx".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 15:59, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We don't create category redirects like article redirects. Please look at the code on this page so should you need to make a category redirect in the future, you'll know the correct wikicode to use. Thank you. LizRead!Talk! 04:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. I was wondering if you had additional sources for The Countess (trans woman)? Right now its citations are to two book reviews and a Twitter thread, the latter of which isn't really a reliable source and also makes assumptions about gender identity that aren't supported by the other source (and make the (trans woman) disambiguation, and the pronouns used, at odds with the reliable source.) Beyond that, I'm concerned it doesn't meet notability standards on the basis of the sourcing provided. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchstalk 19:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I believe so..? That's why I stated in the edit summary that a conversation should take place first between editors before such a large and well-cited section is removed. The news about incident between the school and Durham politicians was in the national news. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 11:39, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Willthacheerleader18 - I was also coming here to talk to you about the COI guidance. I actually wondered whether you were aware of the existence of the guidance - please can I ask you to confirm that you have read it, particularly the parts about the requirement that you disclose your conflicts of interest when making edits about subjects that you are personally connected to. You do not appear to have email enabled, so I can't reach out to you privately about this, but there is some discussion of your editing taking place on another website (I'm not going to post a link to it here), and what I have read there does give me concerns. If you would like more detail about that, you would be welcome to e-mail me directly (you'll need to enable email to do this). GirthSummit (blether) 12:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is that the only article you have ever edited that you have a personal connection to? The off-wiki discussion would seem to suggest that there are more, but I do not see any 'connected contributor' templates on the talk pages of those articles. Also, do you not also think that, since you have disclosed a conflict of interest with regards to that particular article, you ought to be using the talk page to propose changes rather than reverting other editors on it directly? GirthSummit (blether) 12:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I have declared myself as personally connected on a few talk pages after I was made aware of COI policy here and here. This was actually discussed further up on my talk page (which is a bit of a mess, sorry) with DIYeditor (talk·contribs) (I tried to link that discussion down here but am not sure how to). Yes, I should not have used the reversion template as a discussion, and should have used the talk page initially. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:55, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If those are the only people that you have written about with whom you have a personal connection, then you have satisfied that part of the guideline's recommendation. I see a number of other articles on your userpage about people with the same surname as those two, but that may be a coincidence and they are not related. Do also note, however, that the COI guidance strongly discourages you from editing such articles directly; these series of edits seems innocuous enough, but it would probably have been better to handle it through an edit request. Now, I see that your recent revert to Immaculate Conception Catholic Church (Durham, North Carolina) has been reverted - please do not reinstate it again, you can discuss the matter on the article's talk page but you should allow editors who do not have a COI to determine whether or not the content should be reinstated. Best wishes. GirthSummit (blether) 13:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, by the way, you can link to a particular section of a talk page using the hash character. I did a Ctrl+F to find the discussion with DIYeditor, and I was going to tell you that you could like to it like this: User talk:Willthacheerleader18#Hey. Annoyingly though, that doesn't work since there's another section on this page with the same title to the browser just takes you to the first one. You could consider archiving this page - there's instructions for that at WP:ARCHIVE, but I'm afraid I am not an expert at setting it up (a very helpful person set mine up for me many years ago). GirthSummit (blether) 13:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In User_talk:Willthacheerleader18#Hey (this link is ambiguous, Willthacheerleader18 should set up archiving)I was trying to be moderate in admonishing you about COI. I think you do have a COI on some of these articles and should be careful about editing them. —DIYeditor (talk) 05:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've been looking into this a bit more. You've recently made this series of edits and [this one]. Do you believe that those were made in compliance with WP:COI (and potentially WP:PAID)? Look, you've been very open so far, and I'm not trying to give you a hard time here or accuse you of deliberate malfeasance - you just need to be more careful in this area. If you choose to edit in areas where you have a personal or professional connection, you need to disclose that, every time. I hope that makes sense. GirthSummit (blether) 14:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there are many articles with the same surname (Indermaur/In der Maur/ von Indermaur, etc.) But the closest relationship to any of them that I am aware of, besides the two which I already disclosed, is a fourth cousin twice-removed that I have never met. And I only know of that relation by our family tree records, not because I've ever had any contact with said person (Robert Indermaur). It's a large, old family and I am not personally connected to any besides the two previously mentioned. I am a part of WikiProject Switzerland so I was excited to write and expand coverage on Swiss people. I understand, and I will not make edits like those linked above again. Am I still allowed to make edits to other Indermaur articles that I have no personal connection to? I understand regarding ICCC as well. Thank you for the additional information on linking the discussion and archiving, I believe it is time for me to archive my talk page as I don't think I ever have before. I will look into that. Addressing your next point, no worries I understand that you are doing your job and want to be as diligent as possible. No, I do not believe that the edits I made to the Suicide of Tyler Clementi and Brian Sims are WP:COI and they absolutely were not WP:PAID— I have never recieved compensation for my writing and editing on Wikipedia nor would I ever accept it. My only connection there is that I began working for the foundation named after Tyler Clementi last Monday as an administrative assistant. I got an email that was sent out to all members of the foundation, that Brian Sims (a celebrity and LGBTQ+ advocate that, as a transgender woman, I have been following for quite some time) had joined the foundation's board of directors. It was also added to the foundation's website. Upon seeing that I, excitedly, added it to Wikipedia seeing as the article already listed other celebrities who had been affiliated with the foundation. I would not have thought that to be a WP:COI otherwise I would have disclosed it. Is that a violation of WP:COI? I have never met Sims nor was I instructed to do anything on Wikipedia. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well speaking for myself, if a famous person were to be appointed as a governor at the school where I work, I would consider myself to be too closely connected with the subject to either record the fact at the article about my school, or to edit the article about the famous person; I'd leave that for someone else to do. Use your best judgment, but if in doubt, leave it to someone else or at least declare the connection when making the edit.
The stuff about distant family members is probably fine - if you don't know them personally, don't worry about it. Your openness about the ones you are connected to does you credit, and it goes a long way to convince me that there is no attempt on your part to do anything improperly. Best GirthSummit (blether) 15:48, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense, I think that's a good rule of thumb for me to use moving forward in my editing. I apologize for any inconvenience that I've caused, and I will re-read through the WP:COI if I'm in doubt and see if it's something I can ask another editor to do instead. I wouldn't need to declare my connection when editing a page on, for example, my alma mater or the city I grew up in though, right? I feel like those are far enough removed institutions for it not to be considered a conflict of interest? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I've been watching this conversation, so hope you don't mind if I jump in here with some examples which might help answer your question. I mostly write about the history of the Bronx, which is where I live. I don't feel the need to declare a COI for most topics that I edit. I did, however, for Harlem Yacht Club, because I'm a member of the club. RoySmith(talk) 01:59, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Roy on this. Writing about the city where you live - sure, no problem at all, loads of people do stuff like that. Writing about your alma mater? Not a problem in the general sense, but it would start to get a bit nearer the knuckle if you were to write about the department where you studied, and I would certainly suggest staying away from people like professors who taught you, or people you were in classes with you who went on to become famous/notable. GirthSummit (blether) 13:24, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for August 29[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Julia Livingston Delafield, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fieldston.
Many of the good cites are behind NYT's paywall. It would nice to find some more accessible references.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Loriendrew}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
My comment was a suggestion to add some non-paywalled sources. The article was still positively reviewed and curated.--☾Loriendrew☽☏(ring-ring) 21:43, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jinny Widowski until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sylvia Swayne until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 03:51, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your contributions to Izza (singer). Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability.
Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.
Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page.
When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Oaktree b (talk) 01:16, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. LizRead!Talk! 16:01, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When creating an article, check to see if there is an entry in the sister project Wikidata. If your subject is listed, the Wikidata information can be useful
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|JackFromWisconsin}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bigna Francis-von Wyttenbach, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Patrice E. Jones, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]
Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. LizRead!Talk! 02:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for November 14[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sylvia Swayne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Runoff.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Tisch Jones".
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:21, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗plicit 15:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have sent you a note about a page you started[edit]
Thank you for writing the article on Wikipedia! I genuinely appreciate your efforts in creating the article on Wikipedia and expanding the sum of human knowledge in Wikipedia. Wishing you and your family a great day!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a citation needed tag and fixed some of the bare URLs. Please see WP:BAREREF.
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Seawolf35}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Hi Willthacheerleader18, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled user right to your account. This means that pages you create will automatically be marked as 'reviewed', and no longer appear in the new pages feed. Autopatrolled is assigned to prolific creators of articles, where those articles do not require further review, and may have been requested on your behalf by someone else. It doesn't affect how you edit; it is used only to manage the workload of new page patrollers.
Since the articles you create will no longer be systematically reviewed by other editors, it is important that you maintain the high standard you have achieved so far in all your future creations. Please also try to remember to add relevant WikiProject templates, stub tags, categories, and incoming links to them, if you aren't already in the habit; user scripts such as Rater and StubSorter can help with this. As you have already shown that you have a strong grasp of Wikipedia's core content policies, you might also consider volunteering to become a new page patroller yourself, helping to uphold the project's standards and encourage other good faith article writers.
Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! – Joe (talk) 10:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid that I have removed the "autopatrolled user" right because you have created dozens of new pages that have been deleted, so keeping them from being easily reviewed doesn't seem wise. -- 23:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC) BCorr|Брайен 23:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No evidence of notability, none of the sources are about her (at best she gets a passing mention), and nothing in the article suggests that she has actually been in the spotlight at any time, instead seemingly avoiding all publicity.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loyse de Pury until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laurie Buckhout until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine that a story of a bodybuilding college cheerleader got some attention from blogs in 2012 but there has been no sustained coverage of this article subject. Looks like momentary notability.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program. Congratulations and thank you for your hard work! Please email us at merchandisewikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas van Straubenzee until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
The group you added to this article does not fall under traditional witchcraft, but rather Neopagan witchcraft. I've removed it from the former, you should add it to the latter. On another note, almost anything hosted at scribd.com is a copyright violation. Wikipedia cannot link to sources posted in violation of copyright, so please don't do that. Skyerise (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've been editing the Riley Knoxx draft and I think I've culled through as much as I can without going into primary source material. There are already a couple of those, and I don't want to do that so much that it hurts the article.
Is there anything else you think needs to be done, or any references you think need a better source?
And does Wikipedia policy allow the use of a screen grab from the 2019 MTV Awards where Knoxx is standing next to Swift? It's publicly accessible on their YouTube. Please let me know if you're aware whether it can be used.
Hello, Willthacheerleader18. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Izza (singer), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natali Germanotta until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. LizRead!Talk! 01:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maeve Kennedy McKean until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons. Thank you.--John (talk) 11:28, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Auntieruth55 -- Auntieruth55 (talk) 14:21, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
; see Talk:Carl von In der Maur for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Auntieruth55 -- Auntieruth55 (talk) 16:22, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Tessa Ganserer at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 13:24, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. EnterpriseyBot (talk!) 12:01, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
.png){kind=logo}
.jpg)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at The Real Housewives of New York City, you may be blocked from editing. TheHotwiki (talk) 04:23, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=logo}
You have recently made edits related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. This is a standard message to inform you that articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles is a designated contentious topic. This message does not imply that there are any issues with your editing. For more information about the contentious topics system, please see Wikipedia:Contentious topics. Beccaynr (talk) 14:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Template:Bulgarian princesses by marriage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. DrKay (talk) 16:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt. Thanks!
