User talk:Asilvering/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Asilvering. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Good job with the AfD stats

Just wanted to say good job working through all the AfD stats on the AELECT pages, I know it must be taking a long time to do - just wanted to say the diligence and insight is appreciated! BugGhost 🦗👻 18:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I've been hoping that this encourages others to do something similar for other things, since "divide the discussion by topic and discuss the topics neutrally" keeps coming up in discussions of how to turn down the temperature at RFA. So far, no luck, haha. I'm a little worried that this will result in over-emphasis on AfD participation so I'd like to encourage anyone reading this to start something similar for a topic you're familiar with and see where it goes. -- asilvering (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I, too, would like to thank you for posting those statistics. I find them very useful. I don't think they place undue importance on AfDs. PRODs, CSD tags and AfD participation is the closest most editors get to admin work, and their approach is often a good predictor for how they'll handle things once given the mop.

And since I'm here, I'd also mention that I really enjoy reading your well-thought-out, clearly explained AfD closing rationales. Keep up the good work! Owen× ☎ 11:20, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! -- asilvering (talk) 16:14, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

You are really adding value to this new Admin selection process -- not just stats but also a lot of effort into understanding what the stats mean for each candidate.

Thank you! --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 02:19, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Glad it was helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Question

Hi asilvering, I am still finding it impossible to discuss edits with Shahray, already less than a day after their block expired. They made an edit to Kievan Rus' and subsequently restored it after I reverted them. They did not make another revert after this, but they replied in a completely different discussion on Talk:History of Ukraine saying I won't create hundreds of talk pages just because you always disagree with me for precisely no reason. I told them they should start a discussion on the relevant talk page and that I would discuss with them there, but they stated: If you want to create new topic there, you can do it... And now, I ask for a clear explanation for why my changes are "synth" or "not an improvement", otherwise it's just another unreasonable edit.. I reiterated what I said, saying that this would be a misuse of the talk page, and they responded: I shouldn't waste my time on interrogating you everywhere for "more details", you should give a clear reasoning for you edit from the beginning. If you prefer to give explanation in the talk page, then fine, do it there.

I also noted that they had already started a talk page discussion before (as an IP) on Talk:Kievan Rus' about similar changes they made now (and a couple other editors had discussed this with them and there was no consensus for those changes). I was certain that this was them because I had previously reverted Shahray's edits before and the same IP left a message on my talk page asking why I reverted them. After this they self-reverted and logged in as Shahray and wrote the same comment. I told them to continue the discussion there as a result and I responded there. Despite this, Shahray said: This is not a discussion done by me, and looks antinormanist, why should I care?. Then they edited the comment to say: obviously, do you know anything about this topic or are you just testing my patience?. In their last comment, they once again imply that I am simply reverting them in bad faith: I just have no interest to wander in circles because of you giving some of the most minor excuses to not let my changes get in again and again.

I have tried to explain my reverts using policy-based reasons but it seems that no matter what, they will always suggest that I just reverting them for no reason. I do not want to start another ANI discussion so soon, particularly if this may be viewed as premature. Can you suggest any steps that can be taken here to resolve the issue here, if possible? Thank you. Mellk (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

I suggest you to look at your behavior first and stop complaining to other editors like a child.

Typing "I don't think this is an improvement" and inserting a random policy isn't yet a proper explanation. I asked you repeatedly why you consider this a WP:Synth , yet you haven't managed to reply to me properly. This is your last comment: "Also, I have not seen the formulation "first Rus people" before". Explains absolutely nothing about why my changes are "WP:Synth". Because you never really give an explanation, you just force to constantly wander in circles.

You've also made a claim like there's no source that tells about "Rus' land" , when it's literally mentioned one sentence above.

It looks more like you are just trying to create most minor excuses to not let my changes get in. The fact that you don't want to further discuss this on the talk page and instead you wrote this message proves my point.

You have been already formally warned to not make unreasonable reverts, yet here we are again.

If you feel like you are unable to constructively discuss in this topic, then you shouldn't be trying to waste more time of other editors and instead move to the topics you're more knowledgeable about. This is my advice for you. Shahray (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Nah, I think you're fine to go to ANI about it. They've been blocked twice for this already, and now they might be doing WP:LOUTSOCK stuff. There was some pretty serious failure to "get it" in response to El_C's week-long block. Sometimes people don't course-correct and there's nothing you can do. -- asilvering (talk) 15:33, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Go ahead and use that reply above as evidence. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- asilvering (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I was hoping there could be an alternative way to resolve this without having to go to ANI, but their response above, along with the subsequent edits they've made and what they wrote on the talk page of El C has unfortunately made ANI inevitable. Mellk (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Thewriterthree (20:03, 26 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering, it is a pleasure to e-meet you. I have added a citation on-to this article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_New_York_City

And wanted to make sure I did it correctly.

The statement is:

"The beaver’s importance in New York’s history is reflected by its use on the city’s official sea" --Thewriterthree (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Thewriterthree, welcome to wikipedia! It looks like you did the first one correctly (the one on "Hudson's report on the regional beaver population served as the impetus for the founding of Dutch trading colonies in the New World."), but not the second. See how the second is missing "ref" tags? I'll fix it for you so you can see. -- asilvering (talk) 20:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, fixed it. There are lots of easier ways to add citations, too - I tend to add mine using the automatic function on Visual Editor. (Press "cite", then drop the ISBN into the popup. It sucks at searching for titles but works fine on ISBNs, dois, URLs, etc.) -- asilvering (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Thewriterthree (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

AFD Redirect Questions

I suggested in redirects here? Are they reasonable, and does the AfD closure meant prohibit me from making them? McYeee (talk) 03:31, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Hm, I don't know anything about the topic so I can't really say if making a redirect would be a good idea. I don't see a good spot on Heat-assisted magnetic recording for those to redirect to (I'd be hoping for a section heading or something like that). Does WP:REDYES apply? If so, it's probably better not to create any redirects. -- asilvering (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Redyes applies. Thanks for pointing it out! I think the place I thought made a good redirect target was actually a single paragraph in hard drive, but that's not actually a good target. McYeee (talk) 04:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from L'Andreea (08:28, 28 October 2024)

Hello. I created an article about a month ago. How long will it take to be reviewed? --L'Andreea (talk) 08:28, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Looks like it just was! Unfortunately it was declined because it didn't meet the notability guidelines. I don't suggest that you keep trying with this one, I'm afraid. Wikipedia is looking for articles on people who are already well into their careers, rather than people who are just starting out. Sorry! I'll come by your talk page and drop you some useful links. -- asilvering (talk) 08:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Sumanmali11 (16:00, 28 October 2024)

Hi Asilvering,

I am editing my clients wiki and one guys started to revert the changes. How can I lock the wiki page? --Sumanmali11 (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@Sumanmali11 (talk page watcher) To answer your question, you can't have the page locked so only you can edit it. It's against policy to restrict editing for people who are abiding by the policies and guidelines, and also technologically impossible.

You have a conflict of interest that you need to declare on your userpage per our policies. Don't worry, we're forgiving of those who don't already know. Courtesy ping for Viewmont Viking I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for getting this one, @I dream of horses. @Sumanmali11, I'll just add that if you need a page locked in the future because of vandalism (eg, someone repeatedly replaces the entire contents with "penis penis penis" or whatever), the place to go is WP:RPP. Do not go there because someone reverted your changes to your client's Wikipedia article. -- asilvering (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Draft:The Land of Skulls

Hello, Asilvering,

I see you turned down a CSD G5 tag for this article because the editor was not blocked. But you can see if you go to Special:Contributions/Cassigad you can see that the editor has been globally blocked as an LTA. Exactly who, it doesn't say. I have a script that shows globally blocked editors with their username crossed out but if you don't use it, you should check out the contributions page to see if WikiMedia has imposed a sockpuppet block. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:20, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Oops, thanks for the catch. I was using a script that indicated editors who were blocked, but I didn't know there was one that also showed global locks. Thanks for letting me know that one exists, I've stolen it from your common.js for myself. -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Your message about my edit

Thank you very much for your message about my edit of 'The Society of the Spectacle'; I wondered whether I was being pedantic. Thank you again.John Desmond (talk) John Desmond (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Fixing citations like that is extremely helpful! -- asilvering (talk) 20:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red November 2024

Women in Red | November 2024, Vol 10, Issue 11, Nos 293, 294, 321, 322, 323

Online events:

New: Asian women | Geofocus: Islands Q-Z | Women in engineering

Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative)

Announcements from other communities

Annual Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) is an online campaign designed to boost
Asian content on Wikipedia each November.
Unreferenced articles backlog drive. These Wikiproject clean-up lists offer a start
to November's backlog drive, e.g. Women's History and Women writers

Tip of the month:

Looking for an image? Sometimes you can find openly licensed images at
search.creativecommons.org/

Other ways to participate:

Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications.
Join the conversations on our talkpage.
Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project.
Follow us on social media:

Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter/X

--Lajmmoore (talk 20:44, 29 October 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Question from SahibSinghJi (23:11, 29 October 2024)

Hi Cocobb8.

I have joined to update and add new articles.

I wish to write about The Gurbani School app. Is there anything I need to know before I start writing new articles? --SahibSinghJi (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SahibSinghJi, welcome to wikipedia! I'm not @Cocobb8, but I've tagged them into this in case you needed them in particular for some reason?

I don't suggest that you write about an app. It would almost certainly not meet the guidelines at WP:N, which any topic needs to meet in order to be eligible for a wikipedia article. I see you've got a welcome message on your talk page already - have a look at those links for some tips to help you getting started. -- asilvering (talk) 02:33, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Safari's talk page

Did my reply ping you in some way? Or do you have super antennae that pick up a mere mention of your name? :) S0091 (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

There's no guarantee I'll see it, of course, but an edit summary left on a prolific AfC reviewer's page that says "re Fram, admins are active at AfC" will tend to sent off the super antennae, haha. -- asilvering (talk) 19:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Now I have this picture of you as a faceless person with big antennae lol (no tin foil hat though). I hope Fram takes the suggestion to bring his concerns to AfC because, based on my experience, reviewers do a good job with neutral re-reviews (and I personally have a distaste for ANI) but I can understand if he thinks a broader audience is needed. I also left him instructions on his tp for resubmitting drafts on behalf of another user. S0091 (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I hope so as well. The speed with which the backlog has been going down has made me a bit nervous that something like this would come up. But I think AfC will be less angst for all involved and lead to a more successful cleanup effort. -- asilvering (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

what to do about this

Talk:Russian language#The map of the geographic distribution of the Russian language this time it is not from a decade ago,but i saw some users message "It`s more accurate only in your head. Who are you, ukrainian warrior? Just the encouraged vandal. Do they even pay for your work? Fuc Count (talk) 10:40, 27 June 2024 (UTC)",seems like a violent message,is this one of the messages discouraged here Wikipedia:Harassment?? UnsungHistory (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's not acceptable. I've removed that from the talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 19:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

But how did you do it? UnsungHistory (talk) 01:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering UnsungHistory (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I missed this earlier. Here is the diff. Does that answer your question? -- asilvering (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

yes UnsungHistory (talk) 21:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from MarkWHowe (23:26, 30 October 2024)

Hello; Is there a way\ location, perhaps in my sandbox, to upload and store graphics like photos, diagrams, drawings etc? I'm thinking I could refine them in that place and then it would be convenient to copy and paste them into articles when needed. These would all be railroad related; photos of personages, maps, scans of documents etc. --MarkWHowe (talk) 23:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe, if you're talking about graphics that can go in articles where needed - as in, graphics that are compatibly licensed - the right place for most of those images is Wikimedia Commons. -- asilvering (talk) 23:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes. But I can't see where there is a way to find them again as my personal group of images. Hence my tho't of having such in/on my sandbox. I have bookmarked the 'upload wizard' but I'm wondering if it is somewhere in my 'tools' list. If so it's not obvious. MarkWHowe (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I got the answer; Special:ListFiles/MarkWHowe. precisely what i was looking for.

Still wondering if the 'upload wizard' is somewhere in my 'tools' list and I'm just not seeing it. MarkWHowe (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@MarkWHowe, I use the old Vector skin so I'm not sure exactly where it's hiding on others, but I can get to the upload wizard on Commons in the left-hand menu, under "Participate". The link is called "Upload file". Does that help you find it? -- asilvering (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Here is a link to all your uploads on Commons - is this the kind of thing you're hoping for? -- asilvering (talk) 17:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that is exactly what I want but I have not yet found a way to install the link in my 'tools' sidebar., or if that is even possible. I figured it should be a 'user log' item; nope. Or a 'special pages' item; nope. Somebody said I should see an 'uploads' item in the upper right corner; not that I notice. I am now simply bookmarking the pages. That works. MarkWHowe (talk) 18:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Random redirects

So we can have random redirects like Vulgar Turkish? This isn't a proper name. Beshogur (talk) 10:48, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

FYI, this user Mr. Information1409 (talk · contribs) claims there is a "vulgar Turkish" like Vulgar Latin, but that's simply translation of the Turkish term kaba Türkçe (see Ottoman Turkish). This user didn't even bother to try to create something, just a redirect. Beshogur (talk) 10:53, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I admit that, sorry for that mistake. It was something that was referenced in the Turkish language article. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 13:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

What you can't do is put a CSD tag on a redirect without giving a reason, where no CSD criteria apply. If you object to a redirect for editorial reasons, nominate it at WP:RFD. -- asilvering (talk) 14:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Ok, for the next time in other article. You can delete it, I'm seemingly wrong despite the fact that it were references, I didn't fully searched them. Mr. Information1409 (talk) 16:45, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. Information1409, that was a reply to @Beshogur, not to you, so don't worry. -- asilvering (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. Information1409: I understand your thing, but with all respect, there's nothing like "vulgar Turkish". Turkish language (aka Istanbul Turkish) isn't spoken in rural Turkey either. So your edits were basically illogical. Same applies for Ottoman Turkish article, if you read it carefully, it covered all versions. Beshogur (talk) 20:57, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Rakeshkrish 19 on Heinrich Klaasen (13:48, 31 October 2024)

How to insert image --Rakeshkrish 19 (talk) 13:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Rakeshkrish 19, there's information on uploading images at WP:UPIMAGE. Does that help? -- asilvering (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from Hallowme (15:02, 31 October 2024)

Why do all of my Wikipedia articles for creation get deleted even if I had 200 trusted sources the the new article --Hallowme (talk) 15:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hallowme, I only see that you've had one AfC draft deleted. Can you tell me what the others were? -- asilvering (talk) 15:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I mean my article but I had enough trusted sources Hallowme (talk) 15:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Really? The article was deleted as a hoax. Are you sure the trusted sources verified the article content? -- asilvering (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Talk-psychology

Thank you User:Asilvering for the message that you have left on my talk page. I understand now that you consider psychology as a real medical field that me as an old woman should rather not talk about, and you are %100 right. My question is if there can be a space in Wikipedia for social talk psychology for non-medical situations, where I would still have some life experience and knowledge to share. Chelky (talk) 02:17, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Not at all! Please do go ahead and edit articles on psychology, medical or otherwise - we just need to be following WP:MEDRS whenever we're editing something that contains a biomedical claim of some kind. I see that almost all of your edits to mainspace articles have been reverted for lack of reliable sources, which is why I suggest going through AfC first if you want to create a new article. -- asilvering (talk) 02:43, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Beauthentic (16:02, 28 October 2024)

Hi, my goal is to contribute to the Wikipedia community by creating neutral profiles for notable people from underrepresented backgrounds. I already have a list of folks that I've written articles for that I believe adhere to all guidelines (neutrality, notability, citations, etc.), but would love to get your input before doing my first :) --Beauthentic (talk) 16:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Beauthentic, welcome to wikipedia! If you've already written the articles, no need to ask in advance: just set them up as drafts. WP:WIZARD makes this really easy. You can then submit the drafts to the Articles for Creation process for review. I'm happy to give you some feedback about your drafts, and so will other AfC reviewers. By the way, if those underrepresented people are women, you might be interested in joining WP:WIRED, which is a wikiproject that is very supportive to new editors. -- asilvering (talk) 16:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Asilvering! Super helpful. I'd love to get your feedback about my draft. Here it is:

== Layne Eskridge ==

Layne Eskridge (born September 8, 1981)^[1] is an American television executive and producer who has overseen the development of multiple Emmy Award-winning series.^[2] She founded POV Entertainment in 2020.^[3]

=== Career ===

==== Netflix (2016–2020) ====

At Netflix, Eskridge served as a creative executive overseeing drama series development.^[4] During her tenure, she supervised Ozark, which garnered 45 Primetime Emmy Award nominations and four wins between 2017 and 2022, including Outstanding Directing for Jason Bateman.^[5]

She oversaw When They See Us, which received 16 Emmy nominations and won Outstanding Lead Actor for Jharrel Jerome in 2019.^[6] The series earned a Peabody Award that same year.^[7]

Her portfolio included Dead to Me, which The Washington Post described as compelling television,^[8] and Top Boy, which won the 2024 BAFTA TV Award for Best Drama Series.^[9]

==== POV Entertainment (2020–present) ====

In 2020, Eskridge founded POV Entertainment and established a development deal with Endeavor Content in January 2021.^[2] Through this partnership, POV Entertainment began developing The Plot, a limited series adaptation starring Mahershala Ali for Disney's Onyx Collective.^[10]

In 2024, she executive produced Lady in the Lake for Apple TV+, starring Natalie Portman and Moses Ingram.^[11] She also serves as executive producer on Manhunt, an Apple TV+ series about John Wilkes Booth following Abraham Lincoln's assassination.^[12]

=== Selected filmography ===

==== Executive producer ====

Lady in the Lake (Apple TV+, 2024)
Manhunt (Apple TV+, 2024)
The Plot (Hulu, in development)

==== Development executive ====

Ozark (Netflix, 2017–2022)
When They See Us (Netflix, 2019)
Dead to Me (Netflix, 2019–2022)
Top Boy (Netflix, 2019–2023)
Seven Seconds (Netflix, 2018)
Messiah (Netflix, 2020)
Self Made (Netflix, 2020)

== References ==

[1]
Smith, John (March 15, 2020). "Profile: Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[2]
Fleming, Mike Jr. (January 6, 2021). "Layne Eskridge Inks Producing Deal With Endeavor Content Via Her POV Banner". Deadline Hollywood. |url=https://deadline.com/2021/01/layne-eskridge-endeavor-content-pov-banner-deal-1234666791/ |access-date=October 27, 2024}}
[3]
Otterson, Joe (June 10, 2021). "Endeavor Content Partners With Jeff Friday Media to Develop TV Series From Diverse Creators". Variety. |url=https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/endeavor-content-jeff-friday-media-1234992834/ |access-date=October 27, 2024
[4]
Andreeva, Nellie (March 15, 2020). "Netflix Executive Layne Eskridge Launches Production Company". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[5]
"74th Emmy Awards Complete Nominations List" (PDF). Television Academy. July 12, 2022. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[6]
"Emmy Awards: Complete Winners List". The Hollywood Reporter. September 22, 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[7]
"When They See Us". Peabody Awards. 2019. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[8]
Stuever, Hank (May 3, 2019). "It's hard to stop watching 'Dead to Me'". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[9]
"Top Boy wins Best Drama at BAFTA TV Awards". BBC News. May 12, 2024. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[10]
Petski, Denise (January 27, 2023). "Disney's Onyx Collective Orders 'The Plot' Limited Series With Mahershala Ali". Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[11]
Kroll, Justin (January 19, 2024). "'Lady in the Lake' Trailer: Natalie Portman, Moses Ingram Lead Apple Series". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
[12]
Otterson, Joe (March 10, 2022). "Apple Orders Lincoln Assassination Series 'Manhunt'". Variety. Retrieved October 27, 2024.

Beauthentic (talk) 14:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Beauthentic, please just go ahead and create the draft, it's much easier to edit and discuss that way. -- asilvering (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

So to be clear about the process: that means to put the draft in my sandbox and then hit publish? Or should I be doing something else? Beauthentic (talk) 19:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Beauthentic (talk page watcher) You could do that. You could also create Draft:Layne Eskridge, and put the draft there. Either way is a legitimate way to create a draft. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:35, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

topic ban?

Your closing of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shirley Clelland

Question from Robert Justin 514 Gee! (20:19, 1 November 2024)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

Ban appeal by Shahray

How to change the name of a page

Happy Wikiversary!

Why can't i insert an infobox??

Question from TheSkillet (22:54, 4 November 2024)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Voorts

Thank you

How to Archive conversations

Draft:Christoph Lüthy

Yugoslav Communist Pirate Party

Speedy deletion nomination of Pauletta Brupbakher

"Pauletta Brupbakher" listed at Redirects for discussion

Question from Kunchok Namgail Ladakh (15:13, 8 November 2024)

User:MalakFayedEUI

Wild Wing close

You sure about declining the U5 on what has now been moved to Draft:Emmanuel Alexander Onofua?

This was created as a userpage. If you compare the username to the page content, it looks to me that this is a CV, not an attempt at a draft. E.g., text like this by an account named Eonofua, that is E Onofua, and a userpage that begins Dr. Emmanuel Alexander Onofua and continues with text like Highly accomplished finance expert with 10+ years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Highly accomplished finance expert with a PhD in Finance and over 15 years of experience in investment banking, financial consulting, and strategic leadership. Proven track record of driving business growth, managing complex projects, and providing expert advisory services to top-tier organizations. Looks like someone writing their personal profile to me. Thanks, MarcGarver (talk) 08:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Yep, sure looks like someone writing a crap autobio to me, too. People write all kinds of those (we see them at AfC all the time). They're drafts. Crap drafts! But drafts. And drafts aren't eligible for U5. -- asilvering (talk) 09:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

I saw that at the time. I would have deleted per U5 and G11 instead of draftifying. I agree we sometimes are over zealous with U5's and would like to learn more about your approach. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe I should have just sighed and blocked that guy in particular for spamming, but in general my thinking is that if we're extending enough grace and good faith to someone that we're not going to make them eat an indef over their crap first edits, those edits don't deserve to be immediately summarily deleted either. Moving it to draft doesn't cost us much (only a bit more admin time than deleting), and it breaks the possibly desired "here is my linkedin profile" effect for the editor just as well as deletion. If they're a good faith editor making a genuine but foolish attempt at engaging with Wikipedia, they'll appreciate it. If they go to the AfC help desk or Teahouse in confusion, the non-admin reviewers/hosts will appreciate being able to see it (rather than having to say "I dunno, but it looks like your first try sucked so bad we set it on fire"). If they don't come back, it'll be resolved by G13 in six months, and if they refuse to get it and keep recreating their userpage, we can indef them and move on with our lives. -- asilvering (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Insightful. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi there -- If you don't mind me butting in -- I'm keen to share admin perspectives on what to do with U5–G11 tagged pages in the light of the discussion of Fastily's U5 deletions. For example, User:Billybilluk/Sample page, currently tagged G11, which I would probably generally delete G11 (but not U5), but I'm thinking (in the light of the above) you wouldn't? My feeling on some of these is that they overshare, and often give private information not only about themselves, but also relatives/friends/enemies. (This is particularly problematic with such pages from clear minors.) Anyway, interested in sharing views informally somewhere outside the Fastily petition. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 02:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
FWIW, I have more stringent criteria for honoring CSD's than some. Not sure I would honor that one. I do not detag them 'cause I know i'm out of alignment with other admins. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 02:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
That's very interesting to know, Deepfriedokra. What would drive me to delete it more than anything else is the names of all the subject's relatives. I tend to have three heaps when looking at G11: delete, grey area, decline, and am finding more and more that my personal grey area expands as I realise that there is a huge spectrum of response among admins. However, the great majority (though not all) of my grey-area G11s are later deleted by someone else, and some of my declines lead to conflict with patrollers (eg recently Draft:Posity Online), so I have been feeling rather out of step with community norms of late. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm not so sure, @Deepfriedokra - of course, there's going to be a wide variety of opinions when you ask any 800 Wikipedians about anything, but I think there might be more sympathy for the "don't delete" end of things than you think. I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it. We probably shouldn't be calibrating ourselves on "it got deleted eventually" if that's going to end in that admin getting hung out to dry over it.

As for this example... ugh. I admit that I have found exceptions to my ability to extend grace and good faith, and two of those exceptions are "SEO professionals" and "up-and-coming Nigerian rappers". As a promotional userspace draft on an "up-and-coming Nigerian tech entrepreneur"... I twitch and let someone else handle it. Yes, I know this means it will be deleted. I feel slightly better for not having pulled the trigger. -- asilvering (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
"I think what happens is that all of the less-deletionist admins stop taking the tags off because they get tired of being yelled at by patrollers. Which means that nearly everything that gets tagged will be deleted, since it will just sit until it finds an admin who will take it." Indeed. And over time, those of us who started out being inclusionist,-user/draft-space-is-rarely-a-problem–type admins either turn away from deletion, or turn into deletion machines. I am more likely to intervene for things where I'm prepared to strip out overt promotion, but it's not clear whether that's ok in userspace. I'd certainly be offended if someone I didn't know came along and edited my sandbox drafts substantively. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Didn't think about all the other people named. Of course if there are minors involved, it needs oversight. Most of my Gray area CSDs get deleted. I learned very quickly after my return to just leave be. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Deepfriedokra Thanks. When to call for oversight is another thorny one; I have had most of my calls for oversight declined, too. Espresso Addict (talk) 04:00, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
under 14 yo seems to be the threshold. YMMV. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 05:05, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
@Deepfriedokra, @Espresso Addict: I've been told the threshold is 15/16 years and younger. I've also had most of my rejected requests for oversight rev-deleted instead. I strongly suspect there's a gray area. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
I dream of horses I'm fairly sure I've been told that deleted articles even on quite young children (12–15) need not be oversighted unless there is clear identifying material such as telephone number, or some other reason for caution. But perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well. PS: Sorry to hijack your talk on this issue, Asilvering! Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 05:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
@Espresso Addict Perhaps I owe Asilvering an apology as well, since I was thinking about editors self-outing themselves (including but not limited to an autobiography).

About perhaps the oversighters all work independently as well: I recently once sent something into User:Oversight, which apparently prompted a discussion aamong the oversighers as to whether or not it should be oversighted. It was oversighted during the discussion and remained oversighted. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 05:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
The trouble with oversight, by its very nature, is that we mortals can't see what is oversighted and what isn't. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Huh, I think everything I've referred to OS for "minor outing themselves" reasons has been actioned. But then, my "this needs oversight" alarms didn't go off for that User:Billybilluk/Sample page. -- asilvering (talk) 09:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
[Missed this...] For clarity, I don't think there's anything that needs oversight in User:Billybilluk/Sample page (which seems to have bounced back) but unsourced personal info of that sort I remove from mainspace all the time, and even in userspace drafts that look like autobios, the subject is unlikely to have got consent from relatives to mention them. You do have to read the whole thing as sometimes similar profiles mention conquering drug abuse or the like, or even make allegations of sexual abuse towards identifiable people. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 14:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I would absolutely remove that stuff from mainspace articles. I end up having to do that kind of thing pretty often when accepting AfC drafts. -- asilvering (talk) 19:23, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Question about you close

Can you name a policy or guideline based keep argument that was made at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of World War II weapons of Turkey? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Nope, sure can't. -- asilvering (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

🤔 -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Then how did we end up with a no consenus close? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. But I don't think that will get anywhere (though you may find it personally affirming). Sometimes you've just got to sigh, roll your eyes, and try again in a few weeks. -- asilvering (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

So you're saying that there was no policy or guideline based deletion argument? I would also note that redirect and delete are the same thing in this context. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:14, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

I did not say that. What I said was pretty clear: If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. Redirect and delete are absolutely not the same thing, though I will often count delete !votes as "would presumably be satisfied with a redirect" if they don't give any reason why it explicitly needs to be deleted or why a redirect is undesirable. In this case we also had two potential targets, with no later participants expressing a preference for either of them. -- asilvering (talk) 13:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Why did you not do what you often do here? You still have not explained how you get to no consensus if there are only policy based arguments on one side. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I did not do that because In this case we also had two potential targets, with no later participants expressing a preference for either of them. I found no consensus for deletion because I saw no consensus for deletion. I don't get to overrule 2/3 of the participants simply because I think they're not doing AfD "correctly". What I can do is close the discussion as no consensus, so that it can be relisted again soon for another try, if anyone is so inclined. -- asilvering (talk) 19:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Aren't you required to discount or disregard arguments which are not based in policy or guideline? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think it's appropriate to close an AfD with two keep votes, a redirect, a merge, and only a single affirmation for deletion as anything other than "no consensus", you're welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 20:31, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

That doesn't add up, you don't seem to be counting Conyo14 at all and "No compelling reason that it should exist." is affirmation for deletion... And you can't say its two potential targets when it says "for instance" Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you think my close was inappropriate you are welcome to take it to WP:DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 22:14, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I can't know that unless you explain your close, which you haven't done if you haven't said how you accounted for Conyo14's contribution. You are also clearly wrong about there being two two potential targets as one is qualified with "for instance" meaning that it can't competently be interpreted as exlusive Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:19, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Horse Eye's Back Asilvering has been clear that they aren't changing their position, and that DRV is an appropriate venue for further discussion. Please respect that boundary. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 22:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

They're not at all being clear about that, but if thats what you want we can can all go to DRV. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I've explained the close several times. You don't like the explanation; that's fine. You're not forced to like it. But I absolutely have explained it. I don't know why you, as the delete !voter, would want to fight it, since a no-consensus close leaves it open for relisting and deletion, but you're not forced to accept it, either. DRV has been open to you this whole time. -- asilvering (talk) 22:34, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

This is only the second or third time I've ever contested a close, if you had compentently explained your position we wouldn't be at DRV. You're insisted on providing the bare minimum that you think needs to be provided at each step of the process and I just don't get it. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:39, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

@Horse Eye's Back, the first relist comment said there was no consensus, there was a new type of !vote (for merge) following that one, it was again relisted as no consensus yet, and then you formalized the position you'd already taken at the beginning of the AfD. It was "no consensus" the entire time. I don't know how this outcome could possibly be a surprise. Again, I've said from the beginning that you're welcome to take it to DRV for a sanity check. -- asilvering (talk) 22:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

I did, the notice is below. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 22:56, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Related Articles