User talk:Onel5969#Help needed with Steve Comisar article.

• [https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/pcount/index.php?name=Onel5969&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia edit count]

Hi! You might find these handy:

• Simple guide to Wikipedia mark-up
• Advanced guide to Wiki mark-up

Cheers! — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 22:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

• [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:NewPagesFeed Special:New pages feed]
• [https://tools.wmflabs.org/nppbrowser/ New pages sorted]
• Stub Sort
• [https://accounts.wmflabs.org/acc.php New Accounts]
• [http://www.webcitation.org/archive Website Archive]
• Cheatsheet
• [https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 Earwig's Copyvio tool]
• [https://copypatrol.toolforge.org/en/ Copypatrol copyvio tool]
• [https://tools.wmflabs.org/dplbot/dab_fix_list.php Dabfix]
• [https://dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/view/Dab_solver Dabsolver]
• [https://tools.wmflabs.org/dplbot/latest_dabs.php Dablink]
• [https://dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/view/File_viewer#log:missing_entries-enwiki.log Dabs with missing entries]
• [http://cd.cs.odu.edu/# Carbon dating the creation of web content (for checking for wiki mirrors)]
• [https://www.worldcat.org/search?q=%22dory+nason%22&qt=results_page WorldCat]
• [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=hoENs4gAAAAJ&hl=en Google Scholar profile]
• [https://www.worldcat.org/ WorldCat site]
• [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:PendingChanges Pending Changes]
• [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Stale_drafts G13 nominees]
• [https://www.fchd.info/indexa-z.htm Football Club History Database]

If you're leaving a question regarding an article you're attempting to get onto Wikipedia, here are some links you might find helpful:

• General notability criteria
• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• How to structure and layout your article
• On how to properly format your citations

Hi @Onel5969, I had created new articles on few Indian villages, Some of them got reviewed, However below articles are in Unreviewed state from past 2 months, If possible, Please help to review them.

1. Lagumenahalli, Bengaluru East
2. Bendiganahalli, Bengaluru East
3. Raghuvanahalli, Bengaluru East
4. Kodigehalli, Bengaluru East

Thanks in advance. Have a great day! --Naveen N Kadalaveni (talk) 10:35, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi. I'm slogging through the backlog. Will be awhile before I get to articles this new. Right now, I'm in May 2024. Be patient. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:38, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello. You have [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koox&diff=1283406344&oldid=1283348741 redirected] a fully sourced and notable article. The God Roog is a supreme creator whilst Koox is the god of the heavens and rain as stated in the article. Can you please undo your redirect? Thanks 2A00:23C7:E563:1700:1179:A2EB:522E:5205 (talk) 11:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, consensus is that this is simply an alternate name for the target article's subject. And nothing in the article suggests otherwise. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:49, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

::I will re-edit the article myself. There was no consensus, that's the issue. And having read the Roog talkpage where the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Roog#Merger_proposal merger request] was brought, it is quite clear that the two editors have a long standing feud, and that merger request was not brought in good faith. However, if yuou would allow me, I would re-edit the article. The deity Koox is not the same as Roog. Indeed, amongst the Saafi and Seex people, it is blasphemous to say that. Koox is the god of the heavens and rain, similar to the Yoruba goddess Ọya for example.2A00:23C7:E563:1700:B006:8129:3ABC:2B6E (talk) 09:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969,

May I ask, respectfully, that you undo the redirect you made on the page Brookfield Asset Management? The claim that there is "not enough in-depth coverage" is incorrect. Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada, was the company's chairman until two months ago, and given the Canadian election underway, Brookfield Asset Management is mentioned daily in the news. A quick search in Google news shows there are well over ten stories per day mentioning the company. If necessary, I can add a stub tag to the article. Tsc9i8 (talk) 00:24, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

:Please read WP:GNG to understand what notability means on WP. You need in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show that something is notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:48, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

::I have read that. And this topic has more than enough coverage from reliable sources. Tsc9i8 (talk) 02:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)

.. or how the edit summary ("Back to last clean version") explains it. Can you help? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_people_from_Tucson,_Arizona&diff=prev&oldid=1283855543 184.153.21.19 (talk) 04:59, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

I already said at an edit summary but why do you think references are unreliable? For example, William Lawvere is prominent in this particular field. So his reference should be quite reliable. Anyway, I welcome for you to make your case at the talkpage of the article. —- Taku (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:Neither source is reliable. Please read WP:RS, wikis are not reliable sources. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::Sources listed at Further reading are not references. I think you missed the reference section. —- Taku (talk) 12:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:::No. Listing a book, is not a valid reference either. E.g. simply putting "Encyclopedia Brittanica" as a source doesn't qualify. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::::That depends. For example, Lawvere‘s notes has the word “doctrines”. So it’s directly relevant to the article. Of course, we need to have more footnotes that give supports for specific statements, but saying references aren’t reliable is not right. Like I said, the tags you put are not applicable. If you have concerns about the notability, please explain that at the talkpage (as it is not clear why you think that). —- Taku (talk) 12:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Sorry, there are two sources which are unreliable, so that tag is quite apt. And there are zero in-depth sources listed, so GNG is not proven, making that tag apt as well. And as I said on the talk page, you're in violation of 4RR, so you might want to self-revert. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::Well, your judgement on the reliability isn’t standard here in Wikipedia. For example, lecture notes by prominent mathematicians are frequently considered reliable and are used a lot. If you add tags wihout providing valid reasoning, then that is considered a disruptive editing and so such edits will obviously be reverted. —- Taku (talk) 12:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Actually, it's a pretty clear, see WP:USERG. And still you are in violation of WP:4RR. And this discussion is now over, since you seem to have a reticence to look at WP policy. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

::::::::As I already said, sources listed at the References section (not Further reading) are not wiki. You seem to be confusing sources at References with the sources at Further reading. (So WP:USERG is not applicable.) As for 3RR, I reverted your edit three times so it’s within the rule. It seems it is you who are being confused. —- Taku (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::Sorry, your reverts at 11:37, 12:03, 12:08, and 12:11. For most folks 1+1+1+1=4. And tagging an article for unreliable sources does not mean that all the sources are unreliable, but some are. Which is the case. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:44, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm (very) out of touch with policies around notability of late but I always thought the rule is whether notability can be established for an event not whether the current references support it? This gets especially tricky with older events with coverage hidden behind subscriptions like Newspapers.com. Why I ask is you redirected Miss Teen USA 1983 literally as I was working on it (although to be fair, you wouldn't have known that) but your contention that there is not enough in-depth coverage to support notability is clearly not born out by my subsequent edits. The same will be true for the others you redirected. The 1986 article was flat out deleted (I missed the PROD at the time) and I'll have to figure out where to go to get that one resurrected too. CJinoz (talk) 12:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi. With those there were 2 questions, notability being one of them. There other was WP:VERIFY (apologies if I didn't put that in the edit summary). And redirecting as WP:ATD, is a normal way to deal with articles which do not have enough sourcing to show notability. That way, if sourcing is found, it can simply be reverted and the additional sourcing included. VERIFY is different. Any information which is not sourced can be removed at any time, and then WP:BURDEN applies. Hope that helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:53, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Loai Al Fakir, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GNG.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 5 April 2025 (UTC)

How do we deal with the near-verbatim repeated bios of Al Williamson in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Comics/Selected_biography/1 these] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Cartoon/Selected_biography/3 parts]?

Which do we keep for public display? Need advice.

Odla101010 (talk) 09:18, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi. Wow, don't really know. I don't deal with portals all that much. You might ask over at WP:TEAHOUSE, and someone there might be able to help you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:09, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

I restored the wrong version at Grande Boucle Féminine Internationale - my apologies. Thanks for fixing. Turini2 (talk) 17:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:No worries. Thanks for reaching out. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

I noticed you requested a deletion of my constructive edits in Planet X due to a supposed copyvio. Actually, the article was a split of Planets beyond Neptune and information of this article is from that article, not from a random Wordpress page. RealStanger43286 (Let's talk!) 15:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

:Ok. That would have been avoided if you had followed the appropriate policy (see WP:COPYWITHIN. Also, you should really start a discussion on the PbN page on whether or not to split. I've restored the long standing redirect until a discussion consensus is reached. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Regarding your recent edit on the page, wouldn't it have been better to maintain the page and change the target page since this page is about the individual and not the clan? Solanif (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:Nope. Since it was copy pasted from the target. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969, how are you?

Artist Ben Spider is prod. I have answered you in Talk:Ben_Spider. Thank you. Isolda (talk) 16:38, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:Hi. Simply remove the prod template and say "See talk page" in your edit summary. That should suffice. Thanks for reaching out. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:14, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I recently reverted your edit at Pinkie Pie because I believe this subject meets WP:GNG. I've listed some reliable sources with significant coverage in the talk page Talk:Pinkie Pie. GregariousMadness (talk to me!) 23:33, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry, but a couple of short blurbs don't do much for notability. The Feminism piece is the only one I would count as showing notability. Thesis papers rarely are used to establish notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:28, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Onel5969, Rinaldis has been for 30 years the trusted Audio engineer of the performer considered number 1 in the Italian music scene: Mina. He has worked alongside her on multiple studio singles and albums Hits, and Live concerts, including the singer's last performance captured in the Album Mina Live '78. I firmly believe that Nuccio Rinaldis' relevance in the music business can be considered unquestionable and that he is among the very few who have reached levels unattainable today. If you have no further objections, I'll remove the tags notice in the next few hours. Cheers, CoolJazz5 (talk) 23:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC) P.S. Rinaldis is in Italian musical history and beyond. The international successes for which he has been a key collaborator speak for themselves.

:That all is well and good. However, that is not what constitutes notability on WP. What you need are several references, from independent, reliable sources, that go into depth about him. Right now you have none. The first is a primary source, and the second is a brief mention of him. Additionally, please read WP:VERIFY. Everything in the article must be accompanied by a reference which supports the information. Neither of the assertions made in your first two sentences are supported by the reference you cite. What you did is called WP:SYNTH, which is not allowed on WP. I hope this helps. This man was very accomplished, but we need in-depth articles about him to show he is notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:11, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi, just saw you wiped Western Journal on the basis of GNG. Not sure if that's proper - it had substantially more cites than even the other mainstream Canadian journals found here. See e.g. Queen's Law Journal McGill Law Journal University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review. I'm actually a bit at a loss because I can't see any of the journals at Category:Canadian law journals surviving under that standard. Ethamn (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

:Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Thatis not what constitutes notability on WP. What you need are several references, from independent, reliable sources, that go into depth about him. Right now you have one (the Canadian Lawyer piece). One or two more like that from independent, reliable sources should do the trick. Hope this helps. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I was originally going to support your PROD of this, but because it was undeleted already, PROD is invalid. I "upgraded" it to AFD. - UtherSRG (talk) 11:47, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for reaching out. Sorry I missed the undeletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:19, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Onel5969, you've already tagged the article for notability. It was PRODed before as well. So I took it to AfD to get a clear notability assessment. You can share your vote if you like. Xpander (talk) 09:37, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

What copyright violations are you on about? I only added references to reliable sources (four books about Bolan) to the existing text which had been converted to a redirect for lack of sources.

Romomusicfan (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:The text from that Tumblr post was in previous versions of the article before the redirect for lack of sources. Why are not all earlier edits containing this material also being deleted?Romomusicfan (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:: Furthermore the copyright date on the Tumblr post dates from 2017. Text broadly similar to both the post and the most recent text appears in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steve_Currie&oldid=643252568 this article version from January 2015]. Therefore the Tumblr post is a plagiarism of Wikipedia, NOT the other way around.Romomusicfan (talk) 20:11, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

:::In response to your question on Nthep's talkpage: You wait patiently. My priorities are not the same as your priorities. Feel free to restore your edits, but be aware that even with those edits, there is not enough significant coverage from independent sources to show that they meet WP:GNG, so it will most likely end up at AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:27, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

::::Thank you. I will refer them back to the person who originally created the redirects last year. They seemed happy with my similar work on Bill Legend and have not reverted or started an AfD on that. Romomusicfan (talk) 17:52, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear Editor:

When you have a chance, could you look ar this article? Thank you, Joan Murray Joan arden murray (talk) 20:47, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey dear editor thanks for all your edits the are appreciated a lot. Am contacting you for this article it is the same article as the article Tave you previously patrolled which was a redirect and was then converted to an article but was later converted to a redirect as I can see cause does not fit at the title Tave so now I created another article for the same subject Tave now at Baisez-Moi am just requesting if you can please, look through this article try helping to fix any errors and mark it as patrolled since you already marked it as patrolled at the previous redirect or title, thank you so much.🙏 Goodreadernow (talk) 02:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:Well, there are three issues with it. First, it is not about his song, which may or may not be titled "Baisez-Moi" (there is no source which gives the name of any of his work other than "Fires". So it should be titled John Juest Jr . Second, you hijacked a long-standing redirect, which should be restored. Third, it does not look like he is notable yet. In going through the sources, there is not a single in-depth article about him from an independent, reliable source. Mone of the first 4 sources are reliable, and the last two are not about him at all. I've restored the redirect for now. If you wish to develop an article about the singer, I might suggest you create the article, with the appropriate title, in draft. I'd be more than willing to take a look at it and let you know when it is ready for mainspace. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

::Can you please check out the draft and see what I should fix I have added more references about him. Goodreadernow (talk) 11:12, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

I see that your speedy deletion nomination of Puthalath Dinesan has been declined. I don't think the reasons for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Puthalath Dinesan have been adequately addressed, so I think deletion would be reasonable. However, I have to agree with the decline of the speedy deletion nomination, because there have been significant changes since that AfD discussion. You may like to take it to a second Articles for deletion discussion. JBW (talk) 18:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for the comment. Most of my speedy G4s are simply procedural. Not having access to the deleted version, I leave that up to an admin to evaluate. Since it was declined, I then evaluate it for notability, sourcing, etc. This one seemed to be barely passable, so I marked it "reviewed". Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:32, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear Editor:

Could you review this article? Many thanks, Joan Murray Joan arden murray (talk) 14:56, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for returning to NPP. After seeing you around more often at AfD, I checked your log...lo and behold, you're back! I just wanted to let you know that you're a legend and I really appreciate what you do, even if I sometimes !vote to keep your AfD noms :D –Toadspike [Talk] 20:50, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you for your kind words. Thought I'd give it another go. We'll see how long I last. And thank you for all your hard work at NPP and AfC, amongst others. And I never feel bad about folks !voting keep at an AfD I've started, as long is its based on policy. Which yours always are. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:34, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I am a bit confused by what you mean by “notability”. I am the page creator, and I would like to know what exactly you are referring to. Also, I don’t think I ever had the page reviewed either. Could you possibly give it a review? Or have it reviewed for me? Or have it connected to a Wikidata? Thanks. Fdom5997 (talk) 16:20, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

You reverted my edits to a former redirect that is the result of a passed split proposal, which I had submitted a move request for, with the edit summary being just "what consensus?" - this clearly indicates you did not actually look at the page you were redirecting to with your revert, because the Split Proposal is still displayed at the top of the page, and it links directly to the discussion, which has received no opposition. This led to another page mover closing the request, because it appeared that there was nothing more than a redirect page, thanks to your revert.

In other words, you presumed fault despite not actually knowing.

Please take the time to look into things yourself. I understand you are doing high-volume work here, but that work becomes actively harmful if it cannot be considered reliable. Just-a-can-of-beans (talk) 00:12, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

:Proper etiquette would be for the person making the change to mention where the consensus was, not leave it to someone else to have to search for it. No fault was implied, a question was simply asked. However, the term AWOL is an acronym. You incorrectly turned the page Awol into the article, which was clearly not the consensus. And please learn how to do things correctly, for doing them incorrectly is definitely harmful. Also, you might want to read WP:CIVIL. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:58, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

• Please respect Vietnam! READ Plan to arrange and merge administrative units in Vietnam 2024–2025 to know.

2401:D800:C3C:C448:6818:49CA:F704:621B (talk) 08:20, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello OneI5969,

Thank you for reviewing Nike Campbell a second time.

I would like to find out how the descriptive tags at the beginning of the article can be removed. The article has been edited multiple times to ensure it is not promotional. When compared with other Wiki articles of female Nigerian authors, such as Lola Shoneyin, Ukamaka Olisakwe, Molara Wood, etc., I believe it has a neutral point of view. Also, the subject is as notable as these listed authors.

What more can be done to ensure it is not nominated for deletion again and that the different header tags including the "This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (April 2025)" is removed from the top of the page?

Would appreciate any guidance.

Thank you. Yourmmy (talk) 08:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

:Well, first of all, since you seem to have either a WP:COI or WP:UPE issue, you can stop editing the article. You also need to follow the instructions on those two pages to deal with the COI/UPE issue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:24, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear Editor:

One more to review. Thanks very much. Joan Joan arden murray (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

:Okay, here's the thing. Usually, when I review your articles, there isn't much of a question regarding notability. However, this time, there's not a single in-depth reference from a reliable, independent source. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:12, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

::I had my doubts too but I didn't want to be unfair to women in a the scene was almost totally male-dominated. I can add one source. See if that helps. If not, you can tell me and I'll let it go if you would be kind enough to remove it. Thanks, JoanJoan arden murray (talk) 14:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:::I wouldn't remove it. Another reviewer might deem it notable. She might be notable as per WP:AUTHOR. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear editor could you kindly look over my draft and see if it is yet ready for main space if it is can you please do me a favor to move to main space and then review it, thank you so much Nsibidi or Elûvian (talk) 01:47, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

:Note the article meets WP:ANYBIO, by meeting this criteria the subject of the article is considered notable, and also there is an Isindebele Wikipedia article at https://nr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juest. So I think it should be moved to main space then marked as patrolled, thank you so much for all your hard work. Nsibidi or Elûvian (talk) 02:33, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :Tunisia national under-18 football team, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Content on site is copied from Wikipedia (and attributed to Wikiepdia). Thank you. Whpq (talk) 17:09, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for the heads up. I don't see the attribution in the page history, however. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

::The external site copied From Wikipedia. Whpq (talk) 23:26, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, so according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial arts/Kickboxing task force#Guidelines a "kickboxing athlete is presumed notable if they've… prior to March 1, 2022… been a Lumpinee or Rajadamnern champion".

Am I mistaken to believe they don't pass due to this? Briantcraven (talk) 02:01, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:Any help? Briantcraven (talk) 17:07, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

::My bad, looked at the wrong SNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi there! It looks like tonight we are patrolling roughly the same vintage of articles in the feed... I'll click to the next article, see your notability tag, then while I searching for sources the next thing I see is it's been redirected. For at least three of them, I've found sources demonstrating their notability and re-tagged accordingly: Vincent Vosse, Alfred Oetker, Sev Sarmenta (the latter of which has solid coverage already in the article). Given what I've found, would you mind doing a bit of a WP:BEFORE before you WP:BLAR these pages? Finally, as you do BLAR pages, would you please consider notifying the page creators and adding notices to the target talk pages? Per WP:BLAR, {{tq|It is good practice to notify the article creator or significant contributors using {{uw-blar}}. If other editors disagree with this blanking, its contents can be recovered from page history, as the article has not been deleted.... To make it easier for other editors to find the history of the blanked article, it's good practice to add a short notice using {{Blank and redirect notice}}, even if no content has been merged there.}} Considering some of these are being contested (by me), I think it would be good to notify the page creators. Thank you and happy patrolling! Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:+1, Sandesh Prabhudesai was WP:BLARed without any notification to me, the creator, only because of some problematic WP:NPOV language by an IP editor. Wikipedia is a collaborative space, and if you would like to delete an article, please nominate it to WP:AFD or gain consensus first. SerChevalerie (talk) 05:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:Hi. Editors can disagree with constitutes notability. Your first two examples did not have enough in-depth coverage to show they had met WP:GNG. The third was a blatant case of WP:COI or WP:UPE editing. There are other articles which you have marked as "reviewed", even though they do not have a single in-depth source about them. But I respect your judgement. Thank you for all your hard work. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::I don't mark a page as reviewed unless I've done a search and found sources, which I did in both cases where I reverted your BLAR. As for Sev Sarmenta, @SerChevalerie has just pointed out above that the page was fine before a COI IP editor came along. The whole article didn't need to be removed from mainspace; it just needed to have the COI content reverted. All I'm asking is that you notify page creators per the recommended practice when you BLAR a page. Thanks. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:31, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::My problem with the Sandesh article is not the IP editor, but there is a clear indication that Ser has a blatant coi/upe interest. Hence the entire article has that issue. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::::If you believe there is COI/UPE going on, I would have assumed you would have brought your concerns directly to SerChevalerie and/or taken them to WP:COIN, but I don't see any such posts in the archives (perhaps I am missing something). Those are the steps that should be taken before airing accusations to third parties. I am not interested in hearing accusations of COI that have not been first aired in the appropriate channels. Bye. Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::No worries. I always give editors a chance to come clean before I take them to COIN. Especially in such an obvious case as this. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:07, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::You do give them chance? why you are lying? Wh67890 (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

bring back "2024-25 Denmark series" it is a ongoing site whit weekly updates, as all others football legues around the world. Johnbp2 (talk) 07:05, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:Anyone can "bring it back", but it requires reliable sourcing to do that. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

::Why you do this to every article. You are not going to take this one easy though because you hurt a scholar with mental fatigue to write an article. Wh67890 (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello,

I am somewhat curious, as this is my first challenge regarding AfD. Rewrite everything to maintain a neutral point of view. Let me know your thought.

By the way, I have noticed that many pages about living individuals in Saudi Arabia lack quality writing and do not seem to follow the guidelines.

GreenRedFlag (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:I have been monitoring this page closely. I noticed that two temporary users appeared briefly, made only a few edits—all on this page—and then contributed no further. This situation seems quite unusual. What do you suggest? GreenRedFlag (talk) 19:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

What do you think about [https://books.google.com/books?id=rlhOD1V1jVsC&pg=PA99&dq=%22Andr%C3%A9+Gibert%22+-wikipedia&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi7sfiOx4qNAxUwjVYBHU51IjQQ6AF6BAgLEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Andr%C3%A9%20Gibert%22%20-wikipedia&f=false this citation]? Is it significant enough? Bearian (talk) 19:34, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

:I'm always of two minds about stuff like this. On the one hand, my heart says this type of citation from 100 years ago, in an age of print newspaper as virtually our only source of information, is worth 2,988 in-depth references from today's 24-hour news cycle from sites like MSNBC, Salon, Deadline, etc. On the other hand, I am constrained by the current policy. In the latter, your reference mentions the subject of the article 3 times, but all 3 times they are simple mentions. Being a former fighter pilot, I'd love for this to pass WP:GNG. By the way, I do not always agree with you, but respect the hell out of you. Not sure I answered your question. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:56, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

I think must be moved to draft. --Altenmann >talk 19:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

I have removed the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} tag from :P. C. Solanki, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{Tlc|proposed deletion}} back to the page. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks!— Komodo (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2025 (UTC)

I noticed that you believe Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin Medical University Chu Hsien-I Memorial Hospital, and Tianjin University Central Hospital do not meet the notability criteria, and have therefore redirected their entries. I would like to clarify that all of these institutions are Grade A Tertiary Hospitals, which represents the highest level of hospital accreditation by the Chinese government. They are non-profit public hospitals, not commercial entities, and each treats tens of thousands of patients annually.These hospitals each have a history spanning several decades.

Frankly, one of the reasons I focus on writing entries about major public hospitals is to counter the misleading effects of commercial promotion by smaller, for-profit institutions. The references cited in these entries are based on the most authoritative professional data sources that document local healthcare conditions. A simple search through Google or other search engines reveals a wealth of news coverage, online content, and books related to these hospitals—not to mention a substantial number of academic publications.

May I ask whether a thorough literature review was conducted before making the decision to redirect? Or was the judgment based merely on personal unfamiliarity? Such an approach is neither collegial nor aligned with the rigor and sense of responsibility that this kind of editorial work demands. Amazingloong (talk) 16:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

:If you wish to write articles about these institutions, might I suggest that you include 2-3 in-depth references about them from independent, reliable sources in order to establish that they pass WP:GNG. That's pretty standard WP procedure. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:14, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

{{-}}

File:Yogo2783 Close crop.JPG

Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:36, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

:As always, a pleasure Gerda. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hey Onel, FYI, I added one source to Monument to the Great Victory of Yenangyaung and did a partial merge to Battle of Yenangyaung, de-proding it in the process. Best, MarioGom (talk) 17:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for letting me know, MarioGom. Appreciate it. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Onel5969! I noticed that you recently edited the lead section of the Commvault article. I’m reaching out because I’ve had a set of proposed edits to that same section waiting on the article’s Talk page for about three months, and I’m hoping you might be willing to take a look.

To be fully transparent, I’m a connected contributor with a declared conflict of interest, and I’ve added a COI tag to the article's Talk page. Because of that, I’m not editing the article directly, but I’ve tried to present suggested edits in line with Wikipedia’s sourcing and neutrality standards while also improving the accuracy of the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Commvault#Suggesting_Article_Improvements

If you have the time, I’d greatly appreciate your review and feedback on the proposals. Thanks for your consideration either way and for your work improving the article. SBCornelius (talk) 18:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello. I agree with you that there's a lot of non-notable footballer articles that need to be dealt with, but I want to suggest that, at least when you come across active players, you take them to AFD or PROD rather than redirect them to their current team. Most players move around from team to team, and thus redirecting to the one they're at currently can quickly become outdated and incorrect. If a modern footballer is truly non-notable, deletion is often the best route. Thanks, BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:I always use redirect as an ATD if there is a valid target. Often, this is the only way to get folks to work on articles. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

You recently deleted https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1992_Barkly_East_Branch_railway_accident&oldid=1290452593 , this is very unkind behaviour of a researched article from pre-internet African. Wikipedia has a severe lack of articles covering African events because of unkind actions like yours. The article is well researched, yes it currently has limited linked sources because of when the event happened, I have now tried to address it by requesting further references on the Talk page, I will follow up again. Africa doesn't have many online archives, South African Newspapers, magazines and Hansard [ZA] has articles of the event, but getting offline media takes time and is extremely difficult if it even still exists. I have spoken to people involved accident to create the article, but only sourced wikipedia acceptable reference. The accident was a major pivotal event in the fledgling private rail industry in South Africa. -- Firefishy (talk) 05:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:That's all well and good, I suggest you use the draftspace to work on articles with substandard sourcing. This will give you time to develop the article. Remember, sources do not have to be available online, simply provide enough information in your sourcing to show where the information came from. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:37, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

::Instead of following policy to call for improved sourcing you skipped standard procedure and rushed to delete the article. In my view is wikipedia is a hostile place for small contribution. -- Firefishy (talk) 13:39, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I've looked over the draft and I don't see a single action from User:Onel5969 which might draw complaint. On the other hand, statements here from User:Firefishy seem way out of place for an account registered in 2005. I would think that in twenty years of contributions, Firefishy might have learned to assume good faith and avoid personal characterizations towards other editors. Firefishy should know to build pages out of found reliable sources, not conversations with {{tq|people involved accident to create the article}} which meets the very definition of WP:Original research. Trying to make this an "African" issue is an argument entirely failing AGF. Please go work on sourcing your draft, and leave this editor alone. BusterD (talk) 13:58, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Please review the correct history as per https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1992_Barkly_East_Branch_railway_accident&oldid=1290452593 , the draft was only created after I restored the article, User:Onel5969 had initially removed the article stating WP:GNG. The same method was used to remove my article about the Polihali Dam https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Polihali_Dam&diff=1222155935&oldid=1222047209 . -- Firefishy (talk) 14:09, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::I read the correct page history before posting. AfD is a common method wikipedians use to remove article for subjects which don't meet thresholds like GNG or V. The process is disinterested in the outcome, unlike the page creator. Make arguments by sourcing your work, not unfairly complaining about wikipedians who happen to be doing theirs. (Btw, Polihali Dam has its own issues.) If you continue to post here I'll take this conversation to your talk page. BusterD (talk) 14:34, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Yes, sorry my blood was high, it takes time to get enough detail for these articles and it is incredibly frustrating for someone from another continent to remove the article without any discussion. Feel free to move this discussion to my talk page if appropriate. The article was not removed by the standard AfD process which I believe has an process to appeal, it was removed by just replacing the article with a redirect. Moving the page to draft namespace was only after I restored the original article. On the talk page of the article I've already started a process to collect additional sources for the article. Pre-internet articles for African content are difficult, source material is thin, referencing acceptable Wikipedia sources is tough. -- Firefishy (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello Onel5969. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of :New Zealand Militia, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: backwards copy - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Zealand_Militia&oldid=1249728066. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you for letting me know. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:42, 15 May 2025 (UTC)

There is an AfD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahau (software)) for an article you PRODed. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:23, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear OneI5969,

I noticed your reverted my page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Third_Man_(novel) to a redirection to the film. However, I created that page because that was the only novel by Graham Greene that was not covered in Wikipedia. You can see this 1) from the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Greene#Selected_works Graham Greene] page itself, where it is listed among his novels and incorrectly linked to the film (the novel is not the same, the ending for instance is different), 2) from the pages existing in many other languages ([https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Troisi%C3%A8me_Homme_(roman) French], Spanish, German, Galego, I was planning to write one in Italian), 3) from the 255 (!) [https://www.goodreads.com/work/editions/791313-the-third-man editions in dozens of languages]. I strongly believe that this novel deserves a Wikipedia page. Don't you? Would you like me to work on more citations? Thanks.

Lauretana1975 (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

:Nothing "deserves" a WP page. Do I think it should have one? Maybe. But you need to have enough in-depth sources from independent, reliable sources to show that it meets WP:GNG. In addition, everything on WP needs to pass WP:VERIFY, so you need sourcing to back up everything in the article. If you can do that, then yes, it's okay for the book to have a an article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:48, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

You literally deleted a research based article that took an effort in few seconds. Are you really aware of what you are doing? I am mentally exhausted doing reasearch on it and you came and deleted it like it was some piece of garbage or dump. It took 18000+ characters. WP:Essay? From which sense it looks like an essay? And I would like to ask you "WP:Verify"? I mean i grinded myself to add citations and you came and said "Avada Kedavra wooh!".

Now, I dont care about how old, mad, strict or egofilled person you are but I am here as an independent writer not your "slave", I dont even know you nor care about you. Please, come at discussion and do a mercy on person who spent his time and energy into it and be a mature editor if you think you are. Wh67890 (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:And also I am not going to bother but why nobody grind you for such unaware action filled with attitude? This place is a toxic. Wh67890 (talk) 13:28, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

::You really need to check your attitude at the door buddy. I have no idea what you are referring to by " I dont care about how old, mad, strict or egofilled person you are". You also alluded to something along the lines at Wikipedia:Help desk#Mentally fatigued, when you said "what they say "I am 1000 year old editor and I have voldemort stick of death" deleted the 18000 characters article". If you are going to resort to personal attacks, you should at least attempt to be accurate. I do not have anything more to add to the suggestions you've already received at the help desk. But unless you can be civil, please stay off my talk page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Who are you? Wh67890 (talk) 02:16, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

Dear Onel5969

The Article PolyAnalytik was deleted, I think based on your request, mention in this conversation @Liz as well.

Unfortunately, I didn’t have the chance to save a copy or contest the deletion in time. The topic is notable and supported by many global resources, and I’d like to preserve it.

Could you please advise on the best way to retrieve the article? Is there a way for you to recover it, or should I start rewriting it from scratch?

My goal is to retain the content and ensure it aligns with Wikipedia’s notability and sourcing guidelines. Any guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance Dina96 (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2025 (UTC)