User talk:SportingFlyer/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:SportingFlyer. 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.

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:51, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

I originally requested deletion of this article in main space. I then realised that Multi-Kamara was a recipient of the Grand Commander of the Order of the Rokel and believe that this significant award/honor actually pushes the bio over WP:ANYBIO. I informed the user who deleted the article immediately and they said that the deletion could not be undone right away, but I could go through the draft route to create the article again. I was therefore surprised that my draft request was declined with the rationale "Requested deleted by author", as I thought this was clear from the outset. Uhooep (talk) 00:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Uhooep: It wasn't clear, sorry! I was actually in the process of accepting it, but when you do that, it shows you how many times the page has been deleted before and I saw the recent AfD discussion and figured there was some sort of error going on. If you want to re-submit, let me know here and I'll accept it to mainspace. You may also want to put your version of the page's history on the talk page just so it doesn't get quickly sent to AfD again. SportingFlyer T·C 10:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I put in a second request. Thanks. Uhooep (talk) 12:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

@Uhooep: done. SportingFlyer T·C 12:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello SportingFlyer,

The New Page Patrol team is sending you this impromptu message to inform you of a steeply rising backlog of articles needing review. If you have any extra time to spare, please consider reviewing one or two articles each day to help lower the backlog. You can start reviewing by visiting Special:NewPagesFeed. Thank you very much for your help.

Reminders:

• There is live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Please add the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Hey @SportingFlyerI wanted to ask if you could remove the deletion discussion prompt on the Pionner League Rosters page, it seems the discussion is gone in the talk page so I think we can remove it. I would just prefer someone who has done it before to do it so I don’t cause more problems then I already have lol. ParkerLyme (talk) 20:59, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

@ParkerLyme: Unfortunately neither of us can withdraw the AfD since we didn't start the AfD, and someone will need to close the discussion first. The nominator will have to withdraw it. SportingFlyer T·C 21:29, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding this comment: did you mean something like "suspected violations of the biographies of living persons policy"? isaacl (talk) 22:09, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

@Isaacl: Just any poorly created BLP, since all of these are only sourced to statistical databases. SportingFlyer T·C 22:33, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

It might be helpful to clarify; right now it reads "are we going to treat suspected biographies of living persons differently?" isaacl (talk) 22:40, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

The proposed decision for the AlisonW case has been posted. Statements regarding the proposed decision are welcome at the talk page. Please note that comments must be made in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 15:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Redirect has been deleted. Please go ahead and accept the draft. - Whpq (talk) 00:12, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW has been closed, and the final decision is viewable at the case page. The following remedy has been enacted:

• For failure to meet the conduct standards expected of an administrator, AlisonW's administrative user rights are removed. She may regain them at any time via a successful request for adminship.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW closed

Hi. I have finished editing the rest of the 2022–23 LEN Euro Cup. I have also put in more third party sources. Can it finally be approved? Or the review already going on? ILoveSport2006 (talk) 22:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@ILoveSport2006: I've accepted the draft. The references you added weren't clear on whether the tournament was notable for a normal Wikipedian, so I went ahead and added a couple more sources to make sure the article would be less likely to get deleted as well. SportingFlyer T·C 23:15, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I've been working really hard to improve and create articles on European club water polo. I'm so happy that my hard work has paid off. After I made an article for the 2022 Super Cups and 2022–23 LEN Challenger Cup, it means that there's an article on every European club Water polo competition for last season. Thanks and I couldn't be happier. ILoveSport2006 (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@ILoveSport2006: For the future look for local newspaper articles to demonstrate notability, and consider writing a bit about the tournament if you can. The only issue is that Wikipedia looks to see if people have taken note of these tournaments, which is clearly the case in the countries where it's played, but at AfC if it's just sourced to the competition's website I can't move it out of draftspace because it might be immediately deleted. Hope that helps. SportingFlyer T·C 23:48, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I know. I didn't originally start this article, but I will use your advice for the future and when I start articles from scratch, I will try and have articles from different languages and write a bit about the tournament. Thanks ILoveSport2006 (talk) 23:55, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for reviewing my Tokyo Disney Celebration Hotel article. I've placed a few more Japanese references I found to the article so it can hopefully be approved. If you are able to take another look I would appricate it or if you have any further suggestions please let me know. Thanks Otchiman (talk) 11:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't know Japanese but I'll take another look soon when I have a chance to machine translate them. If I forget after a few days, please re-ping me. SportingFlyer T·C 10:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

if you want help parsing slovak sources there, i can help as im native Slovak Michael H (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, you have said here that you will re-open the discussion and notify the people on Wikiproject Football. Any plans to do so? TheWikiholic (talk) 02:50, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@TheWikiholic: Hi, I was making a suggestion to whoever closed that discussion, not suggesting I would do it myself, sorry. SportingFlyer T·C 08:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Hey, @SportingFlyer I was wondering if it would be okay if I took over and tried to fix the 2023 Pecos League season draft someone else made or if I could just start from scratch with it. I created the 2022 season one and several other Independent baseball league season pages. Something came up so I did really have the time to make the 2023 one for the Pecos League. I know the season is almost over but I would still like to do it for the season so if makes it easier for access to fans of the league. It wouldn't take me a long time. Wanted to hear your opinion on it. I would appreciate it! @ParkerLyme: No problem at all on my end - the draft just needs independent secondary sources. SportingFlyer T·C 08:57, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@SportingFlyer I did fix and update the 2023 Pecos League Draft and tried my best to make it the best it could be if you could review it for submission I would be so happy!

I hope it works and is up to standard! ParkerLyme (talk) 06:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

@ParkerLyme: Could you please find one or two more sources that aren't the league website? Not trying to be difficult but want to make sure your work doesn't get deleted. SportingFlyer T·C 09:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

It’s okay but I am a bit confused because I thought I did add secondary sources with rdrnews.com, timesherald, pointstreak, and oursportscentral

I thought those would suffice but if they don’t do you have any recommendations on where I should add secondary sources ParkerLyme (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Aha. Pointstreak was just statistics and OurSportsCentral may not be reliable for notability purposes. And something like this is probably too short. Maybe look at Tucson papers? SportingFlyer T·C 16:55, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

The mainspace redirect Abbot Public Library was deleted several days ago. Please complete the AfC acceptance. Thanks. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:22, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

@Pppery: Done. Apologies, I wasn't notified and haven't checked my CSD log for a few days SportingFlyer T·C 12:38, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

This season is on going, and is like the page from last season, 2022–23 Danish 3rd Division regards referacens. is it updatet by every round like Danish Superliga og Premier League in UK. 212.112.153.103 (talk) 08:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback on my first draft at an entry! It was very objective and easy to understand. I look forward to improving my work based on the insight you provided. I hope you have a great day. Thank you for the help and the work you do to make knowledge accessible. ArtWriter513 (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SportingFlyer. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Jergins Trust Building.
Message added 02:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

• Dogsbrunch (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Project Oregon Trail (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Howdy! I'm willing to continue working on this article as it will become the authoritative source on this previously under-reported military program. Let's go item by item to get this rolling! First, and perhaps most importantly, I believe this subject to be notable. Can you please explain your reasoning against this, and let me know what I can do to ensure that it meets the notability guidelines? Thanks!

Dogsbrunch (talk) 04:43, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

@Dogsbrunch: I didn't think the article would necessarily be kept at a deletion discussion. The Dyson references aren't necessarily bad but he's the author of note on three of the four references, and it's not clear if he's the only person who has ever discussed the project at length. The fourth reference was only a couple sentences long and did not seem like significant coverage to me, though it can definitely be used as a reference in the article, just not to establish notability. Notability here works based on whether secondary sources have discussed the topic in a way that we don't have to do any original research, so the way to improve this would be to find additional independent, secondary references which discuss the topic at length - you probably only need one or two more. SportingFlyer T·C 17:49, 4 September 2023 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for your guidance. It's hard to find ANY references to this project, and certainly not in one place. I'll seek additional sources and re-submit. Thanks again! Dogsbrunch (talk) 00:43, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Please comment on my article nomination.Mahmood Rasooli - Mahmood Rasooli (nomination)

I have used reliable sources in my article and reliable sources have been used in all my explanations. And someone gives unacceptable reasons and wants to delete my article.

I want you to tell me what you think about my article.

(This text was written with Google Translate.) AbolfazlEbrahimi14 (talk) 10:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

On 21 September 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Jergins Trust Building, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... That There's a Tunnel Under Ocean Blvd that once led to the Jergins Trust Building in Long Beach, California? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jergins Trust Building. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Jergins Trust Building), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. 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.

—Kusma (talk) 00:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello SportingFlyer,

Backlog update: At the time of this message, there are 11,300 articles and 15,600 redirects awaiting review. This is the highest backlog in a long time. Please help out by doing additional reviews!

October backlog elimination drive: A one-month backlog drive for October will start in one week! Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Articles will earn 4x as many points compared to redirects. You can sign up here.

PageTriage code upgrades: Upgrades to the PageTriage code, initiated by the NPP open letter in 2022 and actioned by the WMF Moderator Tools Team in 2023, are ongoing. More information can be found here. As part of this work, the Special:NewPagesFeed now has a new version in beta! The update leaves the NewPagesFeed appearance and function mostly identical to the old one, but updates the underlying code, making it easier to maintain and helping make sure the extension is not decommissioned due to maintenance issues in the future. You can try out the new Special:NewPagesFeed here - it will replace the current version soon.

Notability tip: Professors can meet WP:PROF #1 by having their academic papers be widely cited by their peers. When reviewing professor articles, it is a good idea to find their Google Scholar or Scopus profile and take a look at their h-index and number of citations. As a very rough rule of thumb, for most fields, articles on people with a h-index of twenty or more, a first-authored paper with more than a thousand citations, or multiple papers each with more than a hundred citations are likely to be kept at AfD.

Reviewing tip: If you would like like a second opinion on your reviews or simply want another new page reviewer by your side when patrolling, we recommend pair reviewing! This is where two reviewers use Discord voice chat and screen sharing to communicate with each other while reviewing the same article simultaneously. This is a great way to learn and transfer knowledge.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello SportingFlyer,

I’m reaching out as part of a Cornell University academic study investigating the potential for user-facing tools to help improve discussion quality within Wikipedia discussion spaces (such as talk pages, noticeboards, etc.). We chose to reach out to you because you have been highly active on various discussion pages.

The study centers around a prototype tool, ConvoWizard, which is designed to warn Wikipedia editors when a discussion they are replying to is getting tense and at risk of derailing into personal attacks or incivility. More information about ConvoWizard and the study can be found at our research project page on meta-wiki.

If this sounds like it might be interesting to you, you can use this link to sign up and install ConvoWizard. Of course, if you are not interested, feel free to ignore this message.

If you have any questions or thoughts about the study, our team is happy to discuss! You may direct such comments to me or to my collaborator, Cristian_at_CornellNLP.

Thank you for your consideration.

-- Jonathan at CornellNLP (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello SportingFlyer:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than 2 months outstanding reviews from the current 4+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 November 2023 through 30 November 2023.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.

There is a backlog of over 2200 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I resubmitted the Draft:Canadian Lacrosse League adding eight (8) additional reliable sources including two (2) national Canadian publications... other pages have far less. At a loss of what to do. Faaksee (talk) 00:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

@Faaksee: I don't see it yet unfortunately. A lot of it is just press releases, I don't even really understand what the CLL is reading the article - is it a major junior league? An organisation? An arm of Canadian lacrosse? Something which deals with broadcast rights? If you could get secondary sources which talk specifically about the org that would clear things up a lot I think. SportingFlyer T·C 23:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

~ ~ ~ Merry Christmas! ~ ~ ~

Hello SportingFlyer: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/Xmas1}} to send this message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

	Happy New Year!
	Hello SportingFlyer: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary blisters. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year elves}} to send this message

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Thanks for your help and advice with the draft article for the English non-league football club AFC Welwyn. I have added some further links to other media articles and interesting information.

I based the format of the wiki page on the other football clubs in the same league, who all have their own pages. (example: Codicote FC).

Because AFC Welwyn has only been playing for one season, it is difficult to find many media stories. I also have a logo to upload, but wiki will only let me do this once the page is moved from "draft".

I have resubmitted, but any further advice gratefully received.

Thank you Sparkytoes (talk) 08:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sparkytoes: I've looked at it again but haven't declined it again. Unfortunately as you say it's a new club, so they haven't really been mentioned much in secondary sources, which is a requirement for Wikipedia - I'm not trying to be difficult but I don't want to see your work deleted. My best advice is to hold on to the draft and see if they generate any more coverage - 11th tier can be difficult though, and it's possible some of the other clubs in the league wouldn't survive a deletion discussion. SportingFlyer T·C 04:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Very helpful. I will continue to add to the page as more reports are published. Maybe a resubmission at the end of the season might work, especially if there is news of a promotion. Sparkytoes (talk) 08:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, 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 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.

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in the Russo-Ukrainian War. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it matters much who challenges the close because the question isn't "is my interpretation/argument about the RFC correct", it's "is the close reasonable." You can provide your reasoning as to why the closure wasn't a reasonable reading of the discussion, but it doesn't matter much of that's the opening statement or in a statement later. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@ScottishFinnishRadish: I'm just frustrated because the people responding so far are reviewing in the context of the opening statement, which is completely different to the reason why I think the close was wrong. In any case it's potentially created a much larger problem for the project than anyone has anticipated considering we're here after only one table was removed. SportingFlyer T·C 01:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Your comment here might need some clarification. Paired with oppose, it seems to mean "There's no evidence that MOS:CAPS is met in this case at all", but is worded as if to mean "There's no evidence the MOS:CAPS guideline covers this subject at all".  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  17:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Sigh, my comment signified pretty much exactly the amount of time I wanted to spend on the situation.

SportingFlyer T·C 17:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Could you please explain why it is not acceptable? 14 novembre (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: Sure. Articles on games need to show why they had a lasting impact, while that was an important match it was not a final or other noteworthy game with a lasting impact yet. SportingFlyer T·C 21:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@SportingFlyer Should I add more sources? 14 novembre (talk) 22:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

If so, of any specific kind? Thank you very much and kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 22:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Any source that was written a long time after the game would be what I would be looking for personally. SportingFlyer T·C 10:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks and kind regards 37.162.165.249 (talk) 13:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	. 14 novembre (talk) 15:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Some critics of the optional RfA candidate poll have said they don't see any advantages that couldn't be achieved more effectively through other means. I was wondering if you had some concerns about asking one of the frequent administrator candidate nominators for feedback? You can get a sense from their track record how dialed in they are to community sentiment. I appreciate it can be tricky to take an unbiased look at your own record. Nonetheless, have you attempted to see how you measure up based on the various concerns that users have raised at RfA?

Regarding your proposal, I understand you might think it's a perfect way to attract you to volunteer to be an administrator. I have concerns, though, both about the community effort expended in having trial runs versus added benefit, and making the process twice as arduous for prospective candidates, while still discouraging those who don't receive positive support during their trial run and thus leave Wikipedia. isaacl (talk) 01:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Isaacl: Thanks for the response. I used to be more interested in potentially becoming an admin, and there's definitely times on here where it would be helpful to have the mop. I understand the concerns about a trial run, but my sense is RfA is considered toxic for the edge cases: people opposing on specific grounds which may not have been vetted, where the candidate doesn't have the chance to respond directly. It's also somewhat intimidating to reach out and say this is something I'm interested in. I'd be more interested if there was a more streamlined intake process. I'm not entirely sure what that looks like, but a straw poll, where a potential candidate can receive and accept feedback, is something I'd definitely be interested in, and I don't think reaching out to an admin or two would necessarily prepare someone for an RfA. Perhaps I'm jaded.

In any case though I appreciate your response and you reaching out. SportingFlyer T·C 14:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate the reply which helps me get a better sense of your concerns. Some of the common administrator candidate nominators will work with you to prepare you for your RfA. They're friendly and from what I can tell, relish the opportunity to assist a new promising candidate. Not sure what you mean by a "streamlined intake process"; either you contact one of them, or they contact you if they come across your edits and think you're worth encouraging.

A full trial run is asking 100+ users to duplicate their vetting efforts. There will be some who will tell candidates "why didn't you just proceed with an actual request". I'm less certain but I think there will be some who will tell candidates who skipped a trial run "please do a trial run first". In a world where users have boundless effort to devote to Wikipedia, it would help provide a smoother transition to being an administrator, but I highly suspect in practice that it would be too large of an imposition. Getting feedback from users (who don't have to be admins) that are experienced in evaluating and nominating candidates will, in my view, result in much of the same benefits. isaacl (talk) 17:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

That IP address looks like a duck wearing socks anyways. from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bettina Rodriguez Aguilera was the perfect answer to Daylight Savings Monday. Have a good one! Star Mississippi 12:31, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, do you think you would vote to delete the page John Tran if you saw it in an AfD? I asked on another editor's talk page weeks ago with no response. I ask only because I am unsure if it meets WP:NPOL #2 and I'd rather avoid another Paul Richards if possible. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I just took a quick glance and I'm not sure. There looks to be more on Richards. SportingFlyer T·C 17:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you, but it can be a futile task to debate the long term notability of a political candidate in the middle of election season in the US. It may be better to wait until the election is in the rear view mirror to discuss notability and in the meantime, patrol the article for policy violations. - Enos733 (talk) 04:42, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to be honest with you regarding the RfC closure review in January and say that yes, I had noticed the discussion that you and others were having on A. B.'s talk page. I'm sorry for plotting against your plan to challenge the close. I had spoken to A. B. about this on their talk page and should've contacted you, too. Sunnya343 (talk) 21:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I believe the Chiefs going on to win the Super Bowl shows an “lasting impact” that could justify the page. 131.247.224.203 (talk) 20:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? 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/Where is Kate? (3rd 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 until the discussion has finished.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 11:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello SportingFlyer,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to let you know that I was thinking of going to DRV regarding the closure of the AfD on lists of airline destinations, though I'd be arguing for Delete all. Sunnya343 (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I should've asked, would you be interested in starting a review instead? Sunnya343 (talk) 04:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

@Sunnya343: I thought Liz made an excellent and well-reasoned close given the circumstances, and am less adamant about keeping all of this information than I am about the information on airport pages, so feel free to proceed however you see fit. SportingFlyer T·C 05:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

OK, I have posted a request for deletion review. Sunnya343 (talk) 18:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:

• Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
• Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
• Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
• Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
• Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
• Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
• Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
• Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed

See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For that beautiful How to AfD 101..!! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 16:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article United Airlines Flight 1175 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/United Airlines Flight 1175 (3rd 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 until the discussion has finished.

Dfadden (talk) 05:20, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lighthouse Beach, New South Wales, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ballina.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 17:58, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Sangerpedia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 31 § Sangerpedia until a consensus is reached. (Notification being sent to all who participated in the DRV.) Cheers, Daniel (talk) 21:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 17:49, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I was just wondering if you could remember the name of the book that talks about its paving in Roads and Road Construction from 1928 and about its historical importance dating back to medieval times in a book on Naseby, as when I look it up on Google Books, nothing comes up. No worries if you can't remember it though! Regards, Roads4117 (talk) 10:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

@Roads4117: [1] [2] there you go! SportingFlyer T·C 18:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok, great! Thanks! Roads4117 (talk) 08:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello, SportingFlyer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2022–23 Djibouti Premier League, 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) 18:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 7 § Category:Buildings and structures by decade of destruction on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. BlasterOfHouses (HouseBlaster's alt • talk • he/they) 17:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:09, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Regarding this comment: I'm not sure I understand. There are of course plenty of areas requiring administrative privileges that can use more admins, some of them listed in the main section of the discussion. Did you mean areas that you were interested in? isaacl (talk) 23:50, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Isaacl: yes, precisely. (I also didn't read the entire discussion - the watchlist header looked interesting to me.) SportingFlyer T·C 00:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Your comment just sounds a bit odd, since even the subsection discusses admin backlogs (and if you're interested in finding admin backlogs, they aren't that hard to locate). Thanks for the clarification. isaacl (talk) 00:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Isaacl: No worries. Admin backlogs are not something I engage with on a normal basis, which is why I'm in favour of some sort of recruitment campaign. SportingFlyer T·C 00:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Just wanted to say thanks for backing the Tarnobrzeg Municipal Stadium article during the discussion. Even though it ended up being deleted (which I still think was unfair—felt more like a snowball effect than actual consensus), I really appreciate that your input helped keep the debate going for another week. It’s a good reminder that you don’t always win, even when you’ve got solid arguments on your side. Still, I’m glad we had the chance to make the case, and your fairness in the discussion didn’t go unnoticed. ;) Paradygmaty (talk) 16:57, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

@Paradygmaty: I think it's a bad decision, best we can do is add information about it onto the Siarka Tarnobrzeg page. If you have access to older sources we might be able to make a case for reinstatement! SportingFlyer T·C 19:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

January 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 January 2025, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin in hopes of addressing the growing backlog. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello SportingFlyer, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:08, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, this notice is for everyone who took part in the March 2024 AfD on lists of airline destinations. I have started a new RfC on the subject. If you would like to participate please follow this link: Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not § RfC on WP:NOT and British Airways destinations. Sunnya343 (talk) 00:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, sorry for not participating in discussion, cuz... a lot of stuff came up. I have a question for you regarding the AfD: You said that youth leagues receive coverage... Can you actually find any? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:00, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Clariniie: I'm not familiar with Moldovan sources, so I didn't care to look. SportingFlyer T·C 18:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

I meant from other countries you know. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 13:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Just that I've seen write ups in the paper, but again that wasn't for Moldova, and focuses mostly on European competitions. SportingFlyer T·C 16:02, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of baseball nicknames, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Davis.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Premier_Futsal_League

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harimau_Muda

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MK_Land_F.C.#

(Please check and help the discussion) 93.140.210.165 (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm not going to judge the comments made by the person who judged the page, but Draft:John West (cricketer, born 1861) failed for the same reasons that a lesser version of the page got deleted for in 2022. What happens next? Of course, regardless of what happens next, if those people think I will just give up trying to revive this article, they've got another think coming. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@JustJamie820: Sorry about that! I would !vote keep at AfD at this point. SportingFlyer T·C 04:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

What steps do I need to take from here? I mean, if I can't just straight out turn the redirect into an article again, what can I do? Where is the proper place to turn? I know that's a lot of questions, but I don't know who or where else to ask. If I wasn't giving so many questions to WP:WikiProject Cricket lately, I'd ask them if I felt it'd be helpful. Either way, I honestly do not know or remember what I have to do to state my case and explain why the article needs to exist. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 05:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@JustJamie820: The Cricket wikiproject is a good start just to get more eyeballs on it. Deletion review is also a potential place to go since the draft is significantly better, but let's wait on that first. SportingFlyer T·C 05:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The former is where I'll go right now. I'm sure the WikiProject won't mind me asking another question... -- JustJamie820 (talk) 05:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Incidentally, I didn't realize you'd take the issue to the decliner's talk page. I think that opens up a different Pandora's Box, but, that said, I'm willing to explain why I didn't do so myself, since it's not my preference to protest. Then again, I am willing to argue...namely, argue reasons why my article should be kept. Well-tempered arguing, of course. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 07:58, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@JustJamie820: Robert McClenon and I generally volunteer in the same areas of the project, and I'm interested in his perspective, so I felt comfortable reaching out to him. We'll see what he says! SportingFlyer T·C 08:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I got the impression from your conversation on his talk page that it was rejected either on a misunderstanding, or because I submitted it incorrectly. Regardless, I have submitted it again and added some comments for reviewers to help out. Hopefully, I did it correctly this time. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 00:51, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Apparently, I don't know how to do the submission process for drafts. A new draft I made an hour or two ago on Draft:Rahul Kanwat, a deleted player who is now a redirect like West, was already declined for the same reasons that the West article was. I'm making the draft, fleshing it out as fully as possible, and getting the same reasons for declining because I'm guessing the reviewer is seeing the original article. Is this a Wikipedia glitch, by chance? If not, what things do I have to do to make it pass the first time? Or, at least, the second one... -- JustJamie820 (talk) 05:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

@JustJamie820: I would have declined Kanwat as well - it was too reliant on statistics and didn't have much coverage of him specifically. SportingFlyer T·C 03:39, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll work on "humanizing" the article a little more then. On a better note, the John West article was accepted the second time around. I'll learn my lessons from that article and apply them to Kanwat's as best as possible. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 04:35, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes - the focus now is on finding sources which actually talk about the player, not just sourcing them to stats sites. That can indeed be difficult for some cricketers, especially in the India/Pakistan region. SportingFlyer T·C 06:45, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Isolation-era South Africa is like this as well, incidentally. I did add a mention of Kanwat being involved with unsuccessful litigiation against India's cricket board; I was hesitant to do so since it was dropped and COVID had some say in making the results irrelevant anyway, but I'm hoping it adds a small bit of humanity to Kanwat's article. -- JustJamie820 (talk) 07:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.

We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi SportingFlyer. I just wanted to say thanks for opposing the deletion of the parallels articles. Bazonka (talk) 08:26, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

@Bazonka: I just think they're encyclopedic. SportingFlyer T·C 08:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Johnson was an appointee, he was not voted in – Are you seriously arguing that members of the German Bundesrat (we don't have a list but we do have an article on nearly all of them), the State Council of China, senators like Laphonza Butler and Alex Padilla (until his election), all US cabinet secretaries, and nearly every judge on the planet are not presumed notable? I don't think I have ever seen this reading of NPOL before from anyone else, not even at the AfD you're talking about. Toadspike [Talk] 07:44, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the rant. On a more positive note, you can read the article on tall buildings in the EU at archive.today [3]. I agree that it talks about "Europe" as well as "the EU", and it seems that they're using "the EU" as a conveniently-defined group of countries that excludes London, Moscow, and Istanbul (the three European cities which defy their argumentation), but I think it still shows that people are talking about tall buildings in the EU and their rankings. Toadspike [Talk] Toadspike [Talk] 07:52, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Hm. They also say "Continental Europe". That, I think, is nonsensical elegant variation on "the EU". Toadspike [Talk] 07:54, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Toadspike: Essentially, yes, that is my argument. That being said, I am not arguing against the Bundesrat, the State Council, or US Senators who were appointed instead of elected. I am arguing against that certain political appointees to non-legislative roles, especially at non-federal levels, will not necessarily meet GNG, and therefore should not be a part of NPOL. The AfD I linked in the discussion - that gentleman failed GNG and should have been deleted or redirected.

As per the article, thank you for the link, I appreciate it! After reading it, I just don't think it's the link we need to definitively prove that list is notable. There are some marketing materials and building announcements but the vast majority of the rankings I've been able to find just use Europe. SportingFlyer T·C 10:21, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

May 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Pages Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello, following a 2024 AfD discussion that closed as "redirect", Teresa Harding has been recreated and has been renominated for a redirect. The discussion is taking place here. I am notifying all participants in the earlier discussion. Thanks! Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey there. Lets try to reach a consensus, so we don't end up in an edit war. On Krist Novoselic, somebody added in that he is Croatian-American. I removed that and replaced it with saying he is just American. That's what the article said for years until someone randomly changed it without asking anybody. I think the change was unnecessary because Krist is not Croatian-American, he is just American with Croatian Ancestry. In your response you said "Krist is Croatian-American, Croatian first language, parents live in Croatia." But just because you speak a language, that doesn't mean you're from the country the language originates. Many American's of Mexican descent grow up speaking Spanish as a child but they're not called Mexican-Americans, for example Jenna Ortega. Also, your parents living in a country also doesn't mean you have nationality there yourself. Krist was born in America, raised there for the majority of his childhood, and identifies as American, not Croatian-American. I would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thank you. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: I assumed it was not recently added. He is absolutely clearly ethnically Croatian and culturally American and has spoken about this at length. I cannot find if he has Croatian citizenship, but Croatia has citizenship by descent and I do not know how else he would have been able to attend school in Zadar. SportingFlyer T·C 16:34, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

It was added about 1 month ago, for years it just said he was American. I'm not denying his Croatian ethnicity, his surname is Croatian and he has indeed spoken about that. I also tried to find if he had Croatian citizenship, but came up with nothing. Krist could've had a visa or temporary permit to attend school there. Croatia does have citizenship by descent, but it's not automatically granted by birth, you have to apply for it yourself. Since we don't know for 100% sure if Krist applied for it, we cannot speculate, therefore "Croatian-American" should be omitted from his page. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: Well, he's not a nationalist, he's clearly Croatian, and his Croatian links are better established than his ties to America. It deserves to be mentioned in the lede - maybe American guitar player of Croatian descent? SportingFlyer T·C 18:31, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

You don't need to add in his ancestry in the lead as per MOS, it's already in the early life section where it says he's the son of Croatian immigrants. I don't know why you keep saying he's clearly Croatian, i've never once said he isn't, i'm just saying he doesn't seem to hold Croatian citizenship. Also explain how his ties to Croatia are better established than his ties to America? Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: Easy: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] ... SportingFlyer T·C 20:43, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

so what does this prove? and what does it have to do with his citizenship? Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: It shows he's Croatian, even though he has American citizenship. Why are we so focused on citizenship? SportingFlyer T·C 23:03, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Because without Croatian citizenship, it shouldn't say he's a Croatian-American on his wiki. Again, i'm not saying he isn't ethnically Croatian, but if he doesn't have Croatian citizenship (which you can't prove he does) then he's not Croatian, he's just an American. I don't see how Croatian websites writing about him means he has better ties there than in America, it doesn't prove that at all. Irish websites have written about Kurt Cobain, but he's not listed as an Irish-American. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 23:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: Croatian websites are writing specifically about how he is Croatian, though, because, again, both of his parents are Croatian, he's lived in Croatia, he changed his name to be more Croatian. The Kurt Cobain analogy is incorrect. Even if he's not Croatian citizen, which we don't know, we should reflect he's of Croatian heritage. SportingFlyer T·C 23:46, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

He never changed his name? Just because your parents are from a country, doesn't mean you're also from there. See Liam Gallagher, his parents are Irish but he's just English. And you're right, we don't know if he is a Croatian citizen, so we shouldn't speculate, because Wikipedia isn't a place to guess, it needs facts with evidence which you don't have. And the article DOES already reflect he's of Croatian heritage. It says he was born to Croatian immigrant parents. In fact, in an interview he said this "I do feel close to my Croatian heritage, but I’m an American. I was born in the United States; I’m culturally an American." So even he himself says he is an American, not Croatian-American. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 00:04, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: He was born Chris Novoselic but changed it in 1993 to better reflect his heritage: [10] I've also seen that interview, it shows exactly what I am trying to say. We also only know he's an American because he was born there. SportingFlyer T·C 00:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

That article is wrong, he was not born as Chris, he has always legally been Krist, in the 90s he went by Chris as a nickname, which is actually less Croatian than Krist, so it disproves your point. "We also only know he's an American because he was born there.", so now you're denying he's an American?? Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 00:22, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: You can find many articles saying that though: [11] which also documents the surname change, what proof do you have he's always been Krist? SportingFlyer T·C 00:37, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

he said he was always krist in the interview you said you've read? his surname wasn't changed by krist, it was changed by a clerk when krists dad was applying for a passport, so in krists whole life he has always been Krist Anthony Novoselic. Chris was just a NICKNAME he used for a little while, not a LEGAL name. if his name was changed, it would say that in the lead of his article, see Jack Benny. but it doesn't say that because it wasn't changed. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 00:43, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: Where does it say that? The article clearly states Krist Novoselic cijeli je život nosio ime Chris, sve do posjeta Hrvatskoj 1993. godine kada je odlučio ime promijeniti u “izvorniju” varijantu. which roughly translates to "Krist went by Chris his whole life until he decided to change to a more "original" variant after travelling to Croatia in 1993." SportingFlyer T·C 00:57, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

it's basic nirvana knowledge that chris is just a nickname, which you literally quoted in that reply. if his name is really chris then why doesn't it say that in his wiki page? because it's just not true, every nirvana fan knows that it was a nickname. but what does any of this have to do with krist being a croatian citizen? the fact of the matter is that krist is not a croatian-american, and her never has been, he's just american, he literally even said it himself! what more do you want if he said it himself?? Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: We've gone off on some sort of strange tangent here. All I'm saying is Krist is clearly Croatian. SportingFlyer T·C 05:25, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

yes he has Croatian ancestry, but he's not Croatian-American. he even says so himself. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 15:14, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Cherryblossomgirly: he's never said specifically, and he is absolutely Croatian-American which does not require having Croatian citizenship, see the link. SportingFlyer T·C 08:59, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

He literally said specifically he is just American! To be be described as a Croatian-American, you need citizenships of both countries. You can’t prove he has Croatian citizenship, so it shouldn’t say he is Croatian-American in the lead, because you can’t prove it. You’re guess guessing. Cherryblossomgirly (talk) 14:57, 7 June 2025 (UTC)