User talk:Abs145/Archive 1

May 2025 Information icon Hi Abs145! I noticed that you recently made an edit at This Place Rules and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Thank you. fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk) 01:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

thanks! Abs145 (talk) 03:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC) Thank you, but... Hi, please double check the text once added, Italian cuisine isn't a draft. JacktheBrown (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

hey thanks for double checking the content. I always check before i post so if you have a preference on the grammar or think it can be improved, please do so. no wikipedia pages, once published, are drafts - thats an obvious statement i don't need to be told! Abs145 (talk) 10:48, 30 June 2025 (UTC) Welcome to the DCWC!

See a "developing" or "least developed" country? Write about it to earn points! Abs145, for the second running of the Developing Countries WikiContest, it is now open for submissions. Welcome to the contest! You can now list your work at your submissions page to earn points. The coordinators have addressed some of the queries at the last contest and we are hopeful that it'll turn out great for you—yes, you! If you haven't done so already, please review the following:

New to Wikipedia? Many experienced editors are part of this contest and willing to help; feel free to ask questions on the talk page. Got open nominations? List them at the review requests sidebar. Looking for a topic to work on? Check out suggested articles and eligible reviews. Remember, reviews now award 10 points! Not sure if your article qualifies? See the scoring rules for more information or contact a coordinator. Know someone else who might be interested? Sign-ups remain open throughout the contest, so don't hesitate to invite other editors! On behalf of the coordinators, we hope you enjoy participating and wish you the best of luck! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 10:05, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi folks - thank you! I have just added a new page (a Trinidadi person of significance) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norma_Ashe-Watt - how do I submit? I am not clear on the scoring rules and what type of points this would be eligible for. Abs145 (talk) 11:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC) Absolutely! The DCWC awards points when an article passes at one of Wikipedia's content review venues. You can see a list of eligible ones at § Scores of the scoring page. Since you created the Norma Ashe-Watt article today, I would recommend nominating it to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, which you can do for the next seven days. First, though, the article needs to meet the notability guideline for people and be edited to only use reliable sources. I've left some inline tags for issues that need to be addressed on that front. If you nominate the article and it ends up appearing on the Main Page, it can be submitted to the contest! Please let me know if you have questions about any of this (I recognize it's probably a lot of information at once), or you can also ask at the Teahouse and an experienced editor will help you with your questions. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC) thanks! I think it doesnt qualify (she lands in the UK) but she was on the list of suggested articles in the contest talk page... will still revisit your citation guidelines. its difficult as most info seems to come from the transcript of the interview, will seek out additional sources. Abs145 (talk) 16:03, 15 July 2025 (UTC) DCWC August update We're a month into the 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest, with stiff competition at the top of the leaderboard already! Our current top five contestants are:

Spookyaki (submissions) – 256 points, mostly from a handful of GAs about women's history in Latin America as well as the 1991 Haitian coup d'état.

vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) – 229 points, back with a number of articles on abortion in various African countries.

simongraham (submissions) – 213 points, mainly from GAs on species of jumping spiders in both Africa and Azerbaijan. El Salvador PizzaKing13 (submissions) – 200 points, with five GAs on articles relating to Salvadoran politics, history, and griddle cakes. Bosnia and Herzegovina BeanieFan11 (submissions) – 168 points from a few GAs, a few DYKs, and a few ITNs on athletes from a variety of countries. Looking for ways to climb up the leaderboard yourself? Help out your fellow participants by answering a few review requests, particularly the older entries. Several more nominations needing attention are listed at eligible reviews, and highlighed entries receive a 1.5× multiplier!

On behalf of the coordinators, we'd like to thank all the participants for helping to combat systemic bias on Wikipedia! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:36, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Laura Loomer

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Laura Loomer, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL and missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help) Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 17:57, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

October 2025 Information icon Hi, Abs145. Thanks for patrolling new pages. I've declined your deletion request for a page that you tagged for speedy deletion, because the criterion you used or the reason you gave does not cover this kind of page. Please take a moment to read the new tutorial for patrollers, criteria for speedy deletion, and particularly, the section covering non-criteria. Such pages are best tagged with proposed deletion or proposed deletion for biographies of living persons, or sent to the appropriate deletion discussion. Thanks! 204.111.137.106 (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

credible claim of significance is violated Abs145 (talk) 20:49, 9 October 2025 (UTC) Please note that WP:CCS is only relevant to the criteria of WP:A7, WP:A9, and WP:A11, which apply only to a specifically listed set of topics and so is entirely irrelevant to this case, see WP:NOTCSD point 5. The CSD are specific and narrow, none of them applied. All bad speedy tags do is waste time so please refrain from tagging pages for speedy deletion until you have read and understood the criteria, thank you. 204.111.137.106 (talk) 21:11, 9 October 2025 (UTC) sorry - i felt it was 'invented' as a non-significant topic. i reviewed speedy deletion recs. Given your advice, I did merge + delete request. Abs145 (talk) 01:26, 11 October 2025 (UTC) Information icon Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 21:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I didn't attack anyone. if anything the person attacked me for wasting their time. Please let me know what this is related to? Abs145 (talk) 21:10, 19 October 2025 (UTC) talk pages Hallo, Please remember to add new items to the bottom of a talk page, not the top. I've moved your post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women. Thanks. PamD 08:15, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

thank you! Abs145 (talk) 23:11, 17 October 2025 (UTC) DCWC closing update Two weeks ago, the 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest came to a close! After three months of stiff competition at the top of the leaderboard, we have our winners. Bronze Belt Buckle – 3rd place vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions), continuing his work on covering abortion in Africa, comes in third with 692 points. Silver Belt Buckle – 2nd place simongraham (submissions) comes in second with 763 points, largely from a slew of good articles about jumping spiders. And returning to the podium for the second year in a row, Gold Belt Buckle – 1st place Bosnia and Herzegovina BeanieFan11 (submissions) takes the Gold Belt Buckle with a mind-boggling 946 points from his series of articles on sportpersons. Congratulations to our winners!

Amazingly, the award for the most countries covered goes to both Bosnia and Herzegovina BeanieFan11 (submissions) and simongraham (submissions), who each submitted articles under 30 flags! Bosnia and Herzegovina BeanieFan11 (submissions) also wins for writing the most quality articles (16 good articles). For submitting 16 articles related to El Salvador, El Salvador PizzaKing13 (submissions) wins the award for most submissions under one country. The award for most submissions related to women goes to both Spookyaki (submissions) (7 biographies about women) and vigilantcosmicpenguin (submissions) (21 related articles). And for the second year, simongraham (submissions) wins for the most reviews, having submitted 21!

Among the participants' contributions were 2 FAs, 5 FLs, 124 GAs, and an uncounted number of DYKs, ITNs, and reviews of every kind! Regardless of your level of participation, every contestant can be proud to have contributed towards a major step in countering the systemic bias on Wikipedia. Every year, millions of readers and editors around the globe use Wikipedia to educate themselves and communicate with others about parts of the world that often receive less attention than they deserve. Thank you for participating with us in the contest and contributing to this effort. The DCWC will return next year, and we look forward to seeing you contribute again! However, before that...

We need your feedback! Join the conversation on the talk page to discuss your reflections on the contest (even if you didn't participate!) and help us make it better.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or ask one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia Latif (October 18) Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by LuniZunie 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 after they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nadia Latif and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted. If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors. – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 21:38, 18 October 2025 (UTC) Teahouse logo Hello, Abs145! Having an article draft 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! – LuniZunie ツ(talk) 21:38, 18 October 2025 (UTC) Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief 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 an expanded level of powers and discretion 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 practices; 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

This user is aware of the designation of the following as contentious topics: They should not be given alerts for those areas.

template.

331dot (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

what are you investigating me now b/c you all apply a 3 perfect source guideline to a blp? Abs145 (talk) 20:29, 19 October 2025 (UTC) No one is "investigating" you. I've simply given you mandatory notices related to the subjects of your editing. 331dot (talk) 20:57, 19 October 2025 (UTC) Yep so you went and investigated what I edited as a result of not agreeing with me on a BLP discussion. its fine but I think its weird so I've called it out. Abs145 (talk) 21:03, 19 October 2025 (UTC) funny bc i've been editing these pages for months w/ no notice Abs145 (talk) 21:04, 19 October 2025 (UTC) This is a volunteer project; editors are not required to perform any particular function. I will provide these notices if I see editors that need them. I didn't even go into your edit history- just looked at your user page. 331dot (talk) 21:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC) awesome thanks you've been so cool and helpful! Abs145 (talk) 21:11, 19 October 2025 (UTC) Information icon 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. 331dot (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Companies House info Please stop using the information from Companies House as a source for personal information about a living person, as in Draft:Nadia Latif. You have now been told 3 times that this is not acceptable per WP:BLPPRIMARY. Although this information is undoubtedly reliable, it is information which a person has been obliged to reveal for official purposes, and not information which they have voluntarily published, so out of respect to their privacy we do not include this information where this is the only available source. PamD 09:28, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

I was told primary sourcing was not going to cut the mustard if it was not accompanied by 3 reliable sources. In the BLP primary you shared there’s no specific discussion of company house pages so I didn’t know it couldn’t be used. Please see comments nowhere I was told 3 times. Abs145 (talk) 17:18, 6 November 2025 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for November 13 An automated process has detected that when you recently edited British Airways, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bloomberg and Refund.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 22:07, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Ann Simonton Hello Abs145, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Ann Simonton, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 03:32, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

Yes even if it meets that guideline it does not have sufficiently robust sourcing (all primary sources - interviews and local, non robust newspapers). I thought this was a criteria both (1) notability and (2) no good sources. ~2025-38299-77 (talk) 03:36, 4 December 2025 (UTC) Hi there - my apologies on the speedy deletion so I retagged for regular deletion. By Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Deletion of biographies and BLPs I believe the figure is not notable, any has been sourced from first person material (interviews). secondary sources are two - which mention blp subject in relation to their work. Please let me know if i've followed the process correctly. Abs145 (talk) 07:58, 8 December 2025 (UTC) I disagree and have removed the PROD. If you still feel the article needs to be deleted, you should nominate it for deletion using WP:Articles for deletion. -- Whpq (talk) 14:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC) Hey I responded to your reply in the discussion page. I did use the Articles for deletion process, not speedy delete this time. Note that you didn't review the sources completely and you hallucinated the LA Times one (it happens...). Let me know what you think or if we can bring in another reviewer. When I started editing this page I toned it down from severe self-promotion with unsourced statements and I see Ann has probably added back in her original research. Given the lack of information, repeated self promotion and her insignificance (whats her actual contribution - activism? modeling?) I propose delete. Abs145 (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2025 (UTC) I am aware the Sports Illustrated article is duplicated, and that the LIFE news clipping is a scan hosted from another site. The LA Times article exists because I read it. It is here. I don;t know why you can't access it. Here it on the Wayback Machine. If you think this needs deletion, use WP:AFD and not WP:PROD, -- Whpq (talk) 19:57, 8 December 2025 (UTC) OK sounds good. but the LIFE news clipping is hosted by Ann Simonton's website: MediaWatch. I had to remove because its self-promotion. With only two articles about her its really a borderline case, I've made articles and had multiple pages denied bc the reviewers demanded 3 non-interview sources that explicitly discuss her contribution. Therefore, really this article has one source that isn't an interview + her self-authored 'academic' work. Abs145 (talk) 20:19, 8 December 2025 (UTC) Do you actually doubt the article exists? Having a copy of a news clipping about yourself is not the same as writing an article about yourself. -- Whpq (talk) 20:33, 8 December 2025 (UTC) I would say I do doubt its existence: given (1) its a simple scan that says LIFE in the corner of the page, but theres no edition / page number / year / month. I have no way of knowing if thats a genuine article from the magazine and (2) particularly because its hosted by the author and given there was evidence of self promotion on the BLP. Therefore, I think I cannot assume good faith on behalf of the creator of the page. Unrelated to its existence, if we assume it does exist, the LIFE publication is under copyright and the use of a source that is not in the public domain without proper citation or confirmation of publication with permission. If we think it exists, its likely not accessible online, then we can use it per WP guidelines but I'm not sure how I would want to indicate its existence and not cite something that may fall under copyright violation if improperly written. I think I'm understanding the rule, but if not do explain. Finally, I would add the LA Times article to the BLP because its not currently listed as a source. Abs145 (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2025 (UTC) Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia Latif (December 8) Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Josedimaria 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:

The sources fail to show notability. 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 after they have been resolved. If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nadia Latif and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted. If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors. Joãohola 21:51, 8 December 2025 (UTC) Anything that could potentially move her into notability? Don't feel like its clear at this time what I need to do to improve. Thanks! Abs145 (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2025 (UTC) Most I feel like I have two academic sources discussing her play, a BBC article discussing her play, two Guardian articles about her, and an interview with the Standard. She also has awards that are - definitely - not super well known, but being a part of Sundance, writing for the Guardian, running Young Vic, and then directing a movie with William DeFoe all felt fairly notable to me. So it would be really useful if I could understand against what metric she fails on. Abs145 (talk) 03:44, 11 December 2025 (UTC) Nomination of Norma Ashe-Watt for deletion A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Norma Ashe-Watt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norma Ashe-Watt 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. Klbrain (talk) 08:24, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Joi Ito

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Joi Ito, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A generic name error. References show this error when author or editor name parameters use place-holder names. Please edit the article to include the source's actual author or editor name. (Fix | Ask for help) Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:23, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8 An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Burundi, a link pointing to the disambiguation page Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:54, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nadia Latif has been accepted Nadia Latif, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

CONFUSED SPIRIT(Thilio).Talk 19:44, 8 February 2026 (UTC) thank you! Abs145 (talk) 19:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC) February 2026 This is a formal warning from an administrator. Drop your grudge and disruptive editing regarding the Nadia Latif review process now. If you continue, you are at a very high risk of being blocked from editing. Cullen328 (talk) 05:56, 9 February 2026 (UTC)