User talk:Onel5969/Archive 94

Archive 90

←

Archive 92

Archive 93

Archive 94

Archive 95

Archive 96

→

Archive 100

Archive 82:September 2021

mark weingard page

Hi. Can you pls guide me as to the issue with Mark Weingard page that has been moved from main space to draft. Kindly advise what needs to be done to amend it. thank you. Angie Balzan (talk) 14:57, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Angie Balzan, hi. The issue is that you appear to have a WP:COI or WP:UPE issue with the article's subject. Please see the correct path to take on those pages. Once you have addressed the concern, submit the article for review. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

This is rather frustrating

But what do you think about it? From current consensus it appears the community is somewhat sympathetic towards NT. Frustrating I know, but if this ends with no action, I honestly think that bringing/filing an official report was a good move on your part, there is awareness to this, so next time if they hound you, you could always link to this report and propose immediate action be taken. Celestina007 (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Celestina007, hi. It's truly whatever to me. I've decided to stop contributing on NPP so I don't have to deal with any more of their wiki-hounding. Although their latest post on that discussion clearly shows they are still stalking me. If the consensus of the project that they wish to protect sub-standard editors such as him, that's their choice. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:17, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that, you'll be missed at NPP, but can fully understand, I get close to jacking it every few weeks. NP patrollers always seem to be the bad guys and unsupported by most admins. Regards. --John B123 (talk) 23:50, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

John B123, thanks. Been doing it for a long time (at least seems that way!). Just too much negativity from poor editors. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:54, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

It's not just NPP. Dramaboards get project-wide attention. So, most of the time, there are people commenting based on what they just read in some PAGs, essays and supplements or based on their own biases, with no knowledge whatsoever of how things work in actual project work. Sometimes, the outside perspective helps pull the projects back into what's supported by project-wide consensus; sometimes, it's people with no knowledge of the issues leaving valuable contributors frustrated. You can see the same playing out in AFC, copypatrol as you just saw at AN, spam/UPE as you may know from how difficult it is to get obvious UPEs blocked and from how often the core group of UPE and spam fighters end up at ANI for not assuming more good faith, SPI as you may know from fishing debates last year, anti-vandalism work with its BLP/rollback/warning nuances, even FRAM was NPP/autopatrol, . Even in content creation, football editors don't agree with broader community, cricket editors don't agree with broader community, ARS doesn't agree with the broader community, prolific stub creators don't agree with broader community, there's an issue being discussed right now, where content editors are seeking accommodation for an editor who's been shown to fake referencing (it will likely push the burden on to AFC to check their work *smh*). Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:35, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, couldn't agree more. Before I got involved with NPP, I used to do quite a bit of work at AfC, and left for the same reason. And I've seen those other areas as well. It's a shame really. But it looks like I'm going to relegate myself to content creation. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:16, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Be careful though, I don't know if anything other than WP:GNG is safe in the medium to long term. Imagine creating thousands of articles based on an SNG, and then it gets deprecated and articles mass deleted. On the dark/bright side, I was recreating Lobin C. Lowe the other day and didn't have anything to resolve the dead end, cos apparently there are no articles for government ministries of Malawi; just one cabinet article and it's a list, and it gets overwritten every time there is a reshuffle. For a moment, I hoped that maybe they edit the French Wikipedia instead, but nope, our article on Malawi says they use English over there, but no French. 2000 articles are tagged with WikiProject Malawi; for comparison, Nepal has 4000 village stubs. One would think there's enough space here for everyone without stepping on anyone's toes.

Anyway (rant mode off), most people are unlikely to know enough to be able to distinguish a deletionist deletionist from an NPPreviewer who must choose between either stamping approval or nominating for deletion. And nothing on this website is worth taking any real stress over (easier said than done, I know), cos at the end of the day, we are still just a bunch of nerds on a website. So, good luck with whatever else you do, Onel; you can come back to NPP if and when you're ready again. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

• I think Usedtobecool says it best and I’m honestly not sure what to add to what they have said as it nigh all encompassing, but if I may; One1 honestly it’s not worth quitting over. I’ve been in your shoes before(more than once) and it took a lot of “frank” and “fatherly” advice from my superiors @Barkeep49(who happens to be my tutor) , DGG, Beeblebrox, Kudpung & a host of other fine editors to pull me out. Just give it time and you’d see that quitting new page reviewing over entries in notice boards isn’t the answer. Especially when you are particularly good and genuine at what you do, but having said, In the end, your peace of mind comes first above all(general life inclusive) so whilst others and i can only beg you not to leave new page reviewing, please do what gives you joy if it is content creation then by all means do that, we can only hope that you’d return to new page reviewing as loosing a high volume editor contributing to that area would be a huge disservice to the project (as a collective) Celestina007 (talk) 21:00, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

  Celestina007, yeah, I hear you, however this is the third case of wikihounding which has arisen from my NPP work over the past 4 years. And the lack of support over at ANI was the proverbial straw. Especially when the wikihound is such a weak, subpar editor, and at least two of those who voted oppose are themselves not editors I would consider reaching even average capabilities (for one of them to get on my AfD %, when their % is in the low 40's is pretty ironic). But thanks for your words. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I know it's relatively easy for me to say ignore the wikihounding, but its the only viable approach here. Some of my first articles were deleted. Some of my category work was objected to. I discovered to my chagrin that I was too far out of date in copyright to be helpful--there were some vey unpleasant comments, and they were right. I struggled for a year or two to get a consensus on high schools, and worked on defending them for 10. An ambiguous RfC was interpreted against considering them presumably notable. I was urged to keep fighting, but gave it up as a lost cause--I just couldn't handle yet another round--I now wont even look at drafts, articles, or AfDs in that area to avoid getting tempted. D The basic rule or working at AfC or NPP is particularly easy: nothing we do there actually makes a decision.. It's just a preliminary screen. AfD decides, and there's no point in getting angry at afd because t's notoriously inconsistent. I don't think of WP as a game--I think of it as a place, an environment, a geography. I live in my neighborhood. Some things I like, some I dont't. Some changes I find good, many I do not. If I moved elsewhere, it would be similar. I pay attention to what I like, patronize the stores I find comfortable, and don't even think about people who ignore me because I'm don't have enough money to live the way they do.

ANI isn't a part of the neighborhood I like, so I commented briefly. If it's still open tomorrow, I'll comment again, but its 5 AM here Ping me quietly for future problems.:As I said in my earlier comment there, AfD percent depends on the difficulty of what you work on. If it's too high, you're not working on the hard articles.

and don't think of content creation as if it were something not really worthwhile. It's the only really important thing that is done here. DGG ( talk ) 09:36, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Sir Henry Gunning, 4th Baronet Gunning of Eltham

Dear User:Onel5969,

Hi, I added this page because it connected different pages together, I understand that he in himself wasn't of particular import, however I thought that the connections that he brought through his marriages and children allowed for his page to be created. Therefore, while he doesn't have many citations, his page does still help to connect up other pages. If this isn't enough then of course I understand, however I do think that it is a useful page to have around, small though it may be.

All the best,

User:Angloscottish

Hi, Angloscottish. To quote the essence of WP:USEFUL, "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it should include useful encyclopedic content. But many useful things do not belong in an encyclopedia and are excluded.". I tend to agree with your way of thinking, however WP goes on WP:GNG. But thank you for your contributions. And please don't let this discourage you. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

What am I reading?

Re this - I'm reading these, amongst others. What books were you reading? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Redrose64, as I said in the edit summary, I'm actually reading the lead in the WP article, from which I quoted directly. So not sure why you were having such an issue with that sd, to leave such an uncivil comment. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

About Senran Kagura Estival Versus page

Dear User:Onel5969, the page that I've created for the game Senran Kagura Estival Versus was reverted, was it just for somewhat copied content in a section, or is it due to other reasons? Patiently me :D - Noctisnoviembre (talk) 03:28, 06 September 2021 (UTC)

Noctisnoviembre, no, as I said in the edit summary, in addition to the copyvio, there was no indication of notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:44, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Signpost interview request - Random Page Patrol

Hello! I'm writing an article for The Signpost about the Random Page Patrol wikiproject. We often do interviews with Wikiproject members, and I saw your name on the list of members. As a member and long-time Wiki contributor, I'd love to ask about the project, why you do it, and why you think it's valuable. I could drop a few questions for you below which you could answer in your own time over the next couple of weeks. Let me know - thank you! Ganesha811 (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Ganesha811, sure thing. Glad to help. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:25, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

That's great! I'll drop the questions below - if you could answer them by September 20th, 10 days from now, that would be ideal. If you have any questions or clarifications, just ask. Thank you! Ganesha811 (talk) 12:56, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

• How did you come across the Random Page Patrol?

I came across it as part of NPP.

• Why did you decide to become a random page patroller? What do you find valuable about the project?

As part of NPP, it is sometimes a welcome change from reviewing at the back of the queue.

• How often do you randomly page patrol? Do you use it mostly as a break from other Wikipedia contributions, or is it a major part of how you spend your time here?

As I said above, I definitely used it as a break from my normal NPP routine, while still contributing to reducing the reviewing queue. How often varies from week to week. But I used to review about 50-60 articles a week that way.

• Are there any articles you have edited as part of the Random Page Patrol that particularly stand out in your memory?

Wow, not that I can remember, but you have to understand I've reviewed a couple of hundred thousand articles or thereabouts in the last 5 years.

• What would you say to someone considering joining the Patrol?

I'd actually caution them. Virtually all of the headaches I've had on WP have arisen out of patrolling. It's a very necessary function, but you get tons of POV pushing, and folks with special interests who do nothing but argue and complain. You can also develop the unpleasantness of wikihounds who get annoyed when they have articles removed for lack of notability, etc.

• Is there anything else you'd like to add that I haven't asked you?

Anybody who's interested, I would recommend going through NPP School. While being familiar with the flow chart is great, going through the school with an experienced editor is a great way to learn all of the intricacies. Thanks for writing the article. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:15, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Ganesha811 - Sorry, I guess I should have pinged you! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll take your answers and incorporate them into the article. There shouldn't be much editing, though perhaps not every part of every answer will make it in depending on how many other interviewees end up responding as well. I'll ping you a few days before the article goes live so you can take a look and make sure I haven't misrepresented anything you said. I really appreciate you taking the time. Ganesha811 (talk) 12:25, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@Onel5969: - the article has been edited. It's at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report - please check it out ahead of publication on Sunday, and if you feel I've changed the meaning of any of your answers through editing, let me know and I'll fix it. Thank you again for participating! Ganesha811 (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Ganesha811 - looks fine. Thanks. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:45, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Dang

Really sorry to lose you but understand there’s only so much shit anyone can shovel. All the best Mccapra (talk) 19:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Mccapra, thanks. Knew NPP'ers would understand. Stay in touch. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:26, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

NPP school

I was going through the questions in the new section and after answering some of them realized that it felt familar, so I looked back into earlier sections. There is some overlap. Both questions #4 (before the source accessment) and question #13 (after the source accessment) read "Please explain in your own words why content needs to be verified". There does appear to be one new question among the new batch though, about accesing unfamilar sources to be reliable or not.

Also, I noticed that you have decided to stop patrolling new pages. I can only imagine how exhausting it is to do the amount of patrolling you were doing, and while I don't fully understand the ANI thread and what led to it, I respect your decision to withdraw from participating further. Not that you need my approval or disapproval to do anything. I guess I just wanted to say what I said? Anyways, I was wondering if this will effect the NPP training at all. Are we going to just continue like normal or would you prefer to stop? Also, approximately how far along are we? Am I about halfway, less, more? Clovermoss (talk) 03:07, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Clovermoss, man, I am so sorry for the duplication of questions. Will upload the correct set shortly. There are 10 main sections to go through, although of varying degrees of difficulty/time. With this next set you'll finish section 2. Regarding continuing, I spoke with a couple of the other NPP schoolers, and while I'm not active in patrolling any longer, we all felt it was fine for me to continue with training others. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:46, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@Clovermoss, The ANI in summary was One1 filed a valid report rather than the report itself being accessed it spiraled into something off topic that showed (we) didn't value the input of new page reviewers, One1 decided to give it a break and statistically speaking we are seeing the result of that. Celestina007 (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Review

Hi @Onel5969:, Please review this article Bindu Rawal which was created by me. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 11:03, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Fade258, hi and thanks for your contributions. Unfortunately, circumstances have arisen which have led me to back away from actively reviewing articles. Another NPP reviewer will review it as they come across it in the queue. Thanks for reaching out, and good luck. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:55, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your words. Best regards ! Fade258 (talk) 13:14, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Rocky Point, Arizona for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rocky Point, Arizona 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/Rocky Point, Arizona 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.

–dlthewave ☎ 16:05, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Replica cluster move

You moved Replica cluster move from article space to draft space on 23 August 2021. It has now been moved back to article space, apparently without any changes. I haven't reviewed it in detail, and besides, it is physics and not chemistry, and besides, I won't move an article to draft space twice. I suggest that you take another look at it and decide whether something needs to be done about it. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon - hi! I responded on the talk page, but in a nutshell, I don't review articles any more, and I don't have an opinion on this one. I removed the uncited material, which was the main reason I draftified it in the first place. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:35, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you!

For all the work you do. JBchrch talk 02:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sheilah Wilson ReStack

Hi Onel5969, Could you take a look at the article for Sheilah Wilson ReStack? You had tagged it back in July. I worked on it for a bit last night and I think her inclusion in the 2017 Whitney Biennial and her McDowell residency could be considered grounds for notability. Thanks. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 20:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

WomenArtistUpdates - simply being included in an exhibition does not meet NARTIST, neither does the residency.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 10:59, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ArthurStone1934.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ArthurStone1934.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Tyson Walker

I'm just curious, what would be the procedure for moving Draft:Tyson Walker to the mainspace? Is it just a formal "AfC accepted notice"? I think it would meet GNG currently, and the AfD was enough time ago (in my opinion) that it would not necessarily stand. Is there something that I'm missing here? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 22:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Editorofthewiki - It would have to show substantial improvement from the version which was draftified. Which this, imho, does not. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Victoria Arduino

Dear Onel5969, had neglected to post a reply to your 2017 considerate proposal to tag the page created for Victoria Arduino for deletion -- which you justified because you deemed that the article did not clearly state "why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia".

When I belatedly observed the notification I did take action -- yet was far too late. Indeed, as of now, both the page + related 'talk page' have been deleted.

There does not appear to be any archive to revive if the revocation of deletion were to be adjudicated. This is a pity as the original entry had justified the notability (or see wiki article [[1]]) due to the original device (made in 1905) being both a patented invention and an early example of espresso machines using controlled steam pressure to serve coffees to consumers -- and referenced the related marketing efforts. This was not to claim that Pier Teresio Arduino was the first inventor of the steam powered espresso machine, as that accolade is generally bestowed upon Angelo Moriondo, with both Desiderio Pavoni and Luigi Bezerra making significant technical enhancements in the subsequent years. Arduino was perhaps most notable for mix of technical and marketing competency which resulted in his device seeing success outside of Milan and across Europe. The graphic designer Leonetto Cappiello being tasked to create the marketing posters that accelerated the business success. Indeed, this led to Smithsonian Magazine publishing an article in June 2012 'The Long History of the Espresso Machine' that contrasts the respective contributions of each inventor and business person for establishing the European market for drinking espresso coffee.

On the basis that there exists an English language Wikipedia entry for Giovanni Achille Gaggia, then there ought to be equal merit for one for Victoria Arduino. Furthermore, there ought to exist an entry for disambiguation in Arduino_(disambiguation); which I had contributed towards at the time of creating the initial page in June 2017 and yet this too has been subsequently removed - with the referenced Wikipedia article having been deleted.

I observe that since 2012 there has been an entry for 'Victoria Arduino' in the French version of Wikipedia for [[2]].

As outlined above, all five individuals (Moriondo, Pavoni, Bezerra, Arduino, Gaggia) contributed towards what is now a pervasive technology used in the delivery of coffee beverages across the world (see 'History of Espresso Machine: The Ultimate Legacy of 150 Years' by Munshi Md; published 17 September 2020). Although I note that the apparent founders of espresso machines are not equally represented across Wikipedia, with mixed presence across different language versions: La Pavoni entry in Italian Wikipedia [[3]], French [[4]], and Dutch [[5]]. However, only the German Wikipedia has an entry for Bezzera [[6]]. This would seem to depict different community interest in this domain based on different linguistic cultural grouping, either to create and/or to delete content.

Take no issue with volunteer clean-up efforts on Wikipedia. Indeed, I salute you for your efforts that span many years! My quest remains to contribute meaningful content for the broader community.

lxs (talk) 10:13, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

lxs - whether or not that single contribution would meet the level required to be called a claim of significance is a moot point. As to their notability, that's a different issue, and they would have to pass WP:GNG. The fact that others in similar positions have articles is called an WP:OSE argument, and is virtually meaningless. Similarly, the fact that other wikis have articles about them also doesn't hold much weight, since other wikis do not have the same standards for notability that English wiki does. My suggestion is to create a draft article and go through the WP:AFC process. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Onel5969 TT me 11:12, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

onel5969 - Thank you for your meaningful response : justifications with resource referenced. Will absorb this guidance prior to any future new page creation. lxs (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)