1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

• Post all new sections under a new header at the bottom of this page, not at random. If you make it clear you ignored these instructions by placing it elsewhere, I am likely to ignore your request in turn.

• If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here, as fragmented discussions are confusing. I may or may not leave you a notice that I've responded on your talk page. If you specifically request that I do (or do not) give you such a notice when I respond, I'll honor that request. If I contact you on your talk page, I will watchlist it so that I can respond there. If you'd like to leave me a notice when you respond (a ping will also suffice), it would be appreciated, and you'll probably receive a faster followup.
• No lulztxtspk or emojis on my talk page, please. "You" is spelled "you", "though" is spelled "though", "because" is spelled "because", "people" is spelled "people", and so on. There is no character limit on Wikipedia comments, so there is no need whatsoever for ad-hoc abbreviating. If you don't even take yourself seriously, don't expect me to take you seriously either.
• If you are an admin here to ask me about someone I blocked for vandalism or spamming/advertising, they've agreed to stop it, and you believe they intend to edit productively, go ahead and unblock them. If you still want my opinion please feel free to ask, but there's no obligation. For more complex cases I would appreciate a heads-up, but please go ahead with your best judgment if I don't seem to be online. I would appreciate it if you'd let me know after you do.
• If you are here to discuss edits made to an article, please use the article talk page, not this talk page, to discuss them. If I made the edit and the question is specifically directed at me, you are welcome to ping me.
• If you email me a question or request, and do not indicate why the matter is sensitive and must be handled privately (and such is not immediately obvious), I may ignore it or respond on your talk page rather than by return email. Talk pages are open to other editors to read, and so are the preferred method of communication for matters involving Wikipedia. If the matter you are speaking to me about is Wikipedia-related and would not violate anyone's privacy by being posted publicly, please use my talk page instead of email. This does not, of course, apply to editors who are blocked from editing, though I still may respond on your talk page rather than by return email.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
• A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

• Following a motion, remedies 5.1 and 5.2 of World War II and the history of Jews in Poland (the topic and interaction bans on My very best wishes, respectively) were repealed.
• Remedy 3C of the German war effort case ("Cinderella157 German history topic ban") was suspended for a period of six months.
• The arbitration case Historical Elections is currently open. Proposed decision is expected by 3 September 2024 for this case.

Miscellaneous

• Editors can now enter into good article review circles, an alternative for informal quid pro quo arrangements, to have a GAN reviewed in return for reviewing a different editor's nomination.
• A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in September 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles and redirects in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 13,900 articles and 26,200 redirects awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!

---

Hi.Seraphimblade, I reviewed Draft:Sri Ganesh and I think draft is clearly notable then I try to accepted this draft but I see you fully protected Sri Ganesh for creation, so, I request to you please unprotect this title, after that I will be able to accepted this request from Draft namespace. Happy editing --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 06:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aviram7, looks an awful lot better than the spamvertisements that were there before! I unprotected it so you can accept the draft. Seraphimblade 06:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see, Thanks a lot for unprotect this title on my request. Happy editing --- ᗩvírαm7 • (@píng mє-tαlk mє) 07:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Contao. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade,

You recently deleted the page on VAULT Festival as you deemed it (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion).

After the first submission of the page earlier today where it got flagged as being (unintentionally) advertising or promotion, I had made amendments to the article to neutralise the article further and add more external citations. So I wanted to check if the revisions I had added to the page had been taken into account in your review and subsequent deletion?

If they have been taken into account already, and you feel there needs further changes, could you let me know where so that I make the changes?

Thanks in advance for your help,

Andy AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AndygeorgeHAC, as you have been writing promotional material, please first clarify if you are being paid or otherwise compensated to edit Wikipedia, including being asked or expected to do so as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade 17:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade, just to be clear, I wasn't deliberately writing "promotional" material. It was deemed that way by others which is a perspective I politely contest.

But yes, I can confirm I am not being paid or compensated for editing Wikipedia and am not being asked to edit under employment or internship either.

Thanks

Andy AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 20:55, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Politely or otherwise contest it, but it sure was, both before and after your edit. From the very first sentence: VAULT Festival was one of the largest and most diverse arts festivals in the United Kingdom, celebrated annually in London between its inception in 2012 until it's closure in 2024 (the "largest" bit is sourced to [1], a clear editorial puff piece completely inappropriate as a source for factual statements, and held, not "celebrated"), underground warren of electrifying experiences, with each festival showcasing thousands of bold and brilliant new shows ("electrifying", "bold", "brilliant", etc., are puffery, leave the adjectives out), epic late night parties (do not editorialize that they were "epic"), and the whole thing is talking it up, often from unacceptable sources such as editorials. Articles should be strictly neutral in tone and content, and stick to factual information from reliable and independent sources, not editorials, fluff pieces, or the like. If you were truly unable to see how what you wrote was entirely promotional, I strongly suggest you gain experience by editing existing articles for a while before you try writing an entirely new one. Seraphimblade 21:44, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointers Seraphimblade. I appreciate them. I'd love to have another go at it if you're able to revert it to a draft for me? I'd suggest that I could notify you when I've had another go at it for your review before it's re-submitted. How does that sound? AndygeorgeHAC (talk) 07:08, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not restore advertisements, but if you like I would provide a list of sources which were used in the deleted article. You do not need to notify me if you try it again, that is what the review process is for. Seraphimblade 13:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Seraphimblade,

I am new and this is my first time writing a wikipedia article, and you have deleted my first article draft, which was about Georgia Rotary Student Program (GRSP). Rereading it now I can see how it may sound promotional as I am used to writing in a persuasive tone for my college essays and the tone used for wikipedia articles is completely different. I don't know if you can still see it since it has been deleted but from your point of view, how much should I rewrite or delete to make it wikipedia worth? What I am trying to ask is, if i rewrite it do you think i can submit it again or will it keep being deleted? I believe it is a notable program that has existed for decades and it derived from Rotary International, a notable organization. As such, I think it is worth informing about the existence of this program, just as many other Rotary programs that have their own wikipedia article. The problem too is that although it has been around for a long time, it has been overlooked and it has been hard to find secondary sources to write about it without relying on the official website for the most part. Can I still post an article with few secondary sources? What can be done in such cases? Like I said, I am new here and I wanted your opinion before I start rewriting this article piece.

I hope you can help me out! Thanks in advance for your time. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 05:32, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject2024, as you have been involved in writing promotional material, please first clarify if you have a financial interest in what you are writing about, including but not limited to being asked or expected to edit as a duty of employment or internship. If so, you will need to make the mandatory disclosures before we proceed. Seraphimblade 13:46, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any financial interest in what I am writing. I had to write a wikipedia article as part of a college class and I could write about anything and noticed this program didn't have a wikipedia page. Wikiproject2024 (talk) 16:44, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying that. In answer to your question, articles should be primarily based upon reliable and independent sources, since those have no motivation to "talk up" their subject or the like. Generally, stuff a subject writes about itself will be promotional, and of course no one can blame them for that, but for that reason, self-published and non-independent sources should be used cautiously and sparingly, if at all. If there isn't much source material like that about a subject at all, the subject may not be notable, which generally indicates there shouldn't be an article about it, but "not much" isn't "not any". So, you could certainly give it another go, making sure this time to stay neutral (and leave out the link farms—if an article's subject has an official website, one link to that site may be placed at the bottom of the article in an "External links" section, but article text should otherwise not have external links.) If no independent sources thought something the organization did was significant enough to write about, it's probably not significant enough to merit mention in the article either. Seraphimblade 17:03, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nga loe ma tha admin. min may loe? 223.206.45.210 (talk) 09:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That makes no sense. Seraphimblade 10:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/key/Talk:Dropstitch_Inflatable_Fabric was recently deleted by you. Can I understand more? It says it was promotional? I didnt promote any company or mention a company ( except historical patent for Goodyear company)

I have no financial interest in this. Its a fascinating material that I have worked with before. I want to create the page and start researching and adding technical patents and others about its history and creation. Bellspringsteen212 (talk) 16:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bellspringsteen212, well, thanks for clarifying up front regarding the financial bit, saves me having to ask. So far as the rest, I think the main issue here was a poor selection of sources. The entire article talks the stuff up, with material like he history of the fabric most likely started with velvet processes. ("most likely" according to what reliable and independent source?), interest and usage of the material increased (that's "sourced" to a YouTube channel belonging to a company that sells it, so of course they're going to say people are interested in it; do any independent sources confirm that?), Inflatable Stand Up Paddle Boards (shouldn't be capitalized; don't ask me why, but in my experience miscapitalization like that is really common in promotional material) And more examples (any variant of "and more" is meaningless marketese that doesn't provide any actual information), every point under the "uses" part links to a "reference" that's actually someone selling it (which is reference spamming), and there is not one single reliable and independent source used in the article (the patent is primary; all the others are sales sites). So, what you would need to do is first look to find source material which is both reliable and, critically, independent. Anyone selling it isn't independent. If there is not a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material available about this subject, then it is not notable and it would not be appropriate to have an article about it. If you can find a good quantity of such material, stick to facts that the actual independent sources verify, since they don't have any incentive to talk it up, and present them in a neutral tone. Maybe you think it's neat stuff, but by reading the article, I shouldn't be able to tell what you think about it at all. I should just find out what reliable and independent sources have had to say. Seraphimblade 17:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good feedback. Thanks. Will work more on it. Bellspringsteen212 (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]