User talk:Paul W/Archive 6

Anne Szarewski

Please review this - Draft:Anne Szarewski - for us. KatieERoberts (talk) 14:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Reviewed, clearly notable, key details all referenced. Now live.... Paul W (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so so much!! KatieERoberts (talk) 13:01, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Thea Tlsty

Please could you review the Thea Tlsty draft page for Kounde31 (talk)

Hi Paul, I've added some extra references to this page (and I see you have too) - do you think we're good to resubmit? KatieERoberts (talk) 16:20, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Vivian Li

I've finished editing a page on Vivian Li, how do I get it out of [User:SMRussell14]'s sandbox? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SMRussell14/sandbox#Vivian_Li KatieERoberts (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

It appears it's already out of the sandbox and in the AFC process - the article has been flagged as breaching copyright provisions, but I have used the article Talk page to call for a little patience while the issues are fixed. Paul W (talk) 18:44, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi - the article got deleted by an administrator in view of copyright violations. I didn't get chance to save my revisions, which also included additional references from The Guardian and other works. :-(. Paul W (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Paul! The article is back but it's been declined as she doesn't meet notability criteria. Do you think that there is anything I can add to convince administrators that she meets the criteria? Thanks so much for all your help!! KatieERoberts (talk) 13:00, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes. I messaged the admin who deleted it and asked for it be reinstated so that further work could be done to address the copyright violations and the notability points. Before and since that brief deletion, I worked at beefing up the references (found references in the Daily Express and the Guardian, which were particularly useful). The article can be resubmitted for a further review by other editors (it's not admins who determine such things) by clicking on the blue button. But perhaps before this happens, is there anything else that might usefully be added - has Vivian published her work, for example? Paul W (talk) 13:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Yes she has, I will add some more references and then resubmit. Thank you! KatieERoberts (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks so much Paul for all your help, it's so exciting that Vivian and Thea now have pages! KatieERoberts (talk) 09:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Ruth Plummer

Hello, I've created another page! Please could you take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ruth_Plummer#Ruth_Plummer KatieERoberts (talk) 14:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

It's been approved!! KatieERoberts (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Anna Perdrix Rosell

Hello! I made a new page about Anna and I think it's gone live straight away but I wondered if there's anything else I need to do? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Perdrix_Rosell KatieERoberts (talk) 10:14, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Once a page goes live, good things to do include adding categories, and also linking from other articles (this would also be good for most of the recently CRUK created articles) - so that they aren't "orphans". For example, I added Thea Tlsty to the list of alumni from one of her universities; not all institutions have such lists, but where they do it's an easy addition to make - some secondary schools have lists of notable former pupils, too. Paul W (talk) 11:59, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Amazing, thanks! KatieERoberts (talk) 17:49, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Good Relations for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Good Relations 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/Good Relations 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. Dial911 (talk) 01:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Paul W/Archive 6,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more. ​

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. Paul W (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Jordan Bowery

He remains a Crewe player until 30 June, and will be a MK Dons player from 1 July. GiantSnowman 09:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Clerk to the Justices

There is no need to change the link Clerk to the Justices, in fact "fixing" redirects like this is frowned upon. Please see WP:NOTBROKEN. DuncanHill (talk) 13:39, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Learn something new every day (even after 15 years!) Paul W (talk) 14:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution (2nd request)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from United Kingdom football sexual abuse scandal into Crewe Alexandra F.C.. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. I was/am the sole author/editor of the content that was copied from the main scandal article. Paul W (talk) 14:24, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Page protected

hi Paul W (talk) your inputs have been great help, i need help recently was trying to edit a page (it has extended protection) but it is being reverted by an individual repeatedly despite me telling that i have 10 yrs of exp. in wiki with over 1000 edits, pls help what to do. Joydeep ghosh `````

Hi, Joydeep ghosh. Without seeing the article, it is difficult to be specific about why your edits are being reverted. Changes to an article may be rejected if assertions aren't supported by citations, if they contain grammatical errors or change conventions such as how dates are formatted, or overly focus on current/recent events (I am currently contributing to a page which is prone to 'recentism' - see WP:recent). Sometimes editors do get protective about articles they've extensively edited - but "no one ... has the right to act as though they are the owner of a particular page" - see WP:Own, which has some useful advice. Paul W (talk) 06:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

hi Paul W (talk) thanks or the sane advice will try to present my case on the subject. btw i have a doubt can we use slideshare ppt as source in any wiki article.Joydeep ghosh

No problem, Joydeep ghosh. I think Slideshare would not usually be a reliable source - as with blogs, too often material is self-published by individuals or businesses that may have a conflict of interest (see WP:COI). Paul W (talk) 14:37, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bury

Thanks for all your help with the article, Paul. I'm told that Benwell will make an offer for the club tomorrow and that the proposed phoenix club will be shelved. They were a bit premature with that but understandably feared the worst. I understand the judges are not best pleased with HMRC who need to get their act together. This is all speculation, of course, but who knows. You might get to manage the team after all, ha! Have a good Xmas and New Year. Regards, Roy. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Roy. Fingers crossed for a positive outcome. As a Crewe fan, I don't want to see another small northwestern club fail. Paul W (talk) 12:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Construction Industry Council logo 2016.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Construction Industry Council logo 2016.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) 18:26, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Benjamin Aislabie

Thanks for your copy edits on Benjamin Aislabie. I appreciate them! I've added a bit more this morning to the article if you have some time to give it a once over again? Thanks. Blue Square Thing (talk) 10:56, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy to help. Have made a few more edits, including a link to his burial place church. I amended the tense to say "was buried" as there is mention of some burials being disinterred, with some relocated to Brookwood. Paul W (talk) 15:37, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

All looks good to me - thank you. I have a couple of tweaks to add at some point, but I reckon that's about it. Maybe a touch more in the lead. Again, much appreciated. Blue Square Thing (talk) 20:04, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

"Steven Walters (disambiguation" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Steven Walters (disambiguation. Since you had some involvement with the Steven Walters (disambiguation redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. DannyS712 (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Everthorpe

Hello, why have you removed HM Prison Everthorpe that I placed back in the defunct section of {{Prisons in Yorkshire and the Humber‎}} so that there is a link to the article? Keith D (talk) 11:41, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean, Keith D. I edited your template revision so that it didn't have Everthorpe listed in both the active and defunct sections. It is now listed only in the defunct section. Paul W (talk) 13:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you, my mistake. I thought that you had removed it from the defunct section. Keith D (talk) 20:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

No worries. So many things to think about these days, it's easy to miss things. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 22:03, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Stockport County

Hi Paul, unsure if you remember but back in 2012 you assessed Stockport County through a GAN, after your assessment it failed the GAN but became a GA a few years later. I am now looking at making this a Featured Article and I have opened up a peer review - Peer review/Stockport County F.C./archive1. I have already had another user go through the page and I have already made amends based on their comments. It would be great to have another set of eyes on it. Also If you could assist with the referencing and citations that would be great, as it has been noted that the style is inconsistent. No worries if your can't. Thanks, Wna247 (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Wna247. Happy to help on this. I've started with a whole load of copy edits to the history (mainly correcting grammar, making the prose flow, removing some cliches, etc; also fixed one misdirected link), and will continue when I get a little more time. Paul W (talk) 10:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I have noticed you have done some edits already. Thanks for doing this. I have added some citations to the article and have added a bit more to the prose in a few areas, if the prose doesn't flow feel free to amend it. As mentioned previously appreciate your help. Wna247 (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Spent some more time on this today. More copy editing, etc. I noticed some repetition of the same book titles in the references, sometimes the only difference being page numbers. I have contributed to articles where, for brevity, the book is listed once among 'Sources' or 'bibliography' and only the author and page number is given as a citation - I have taken two of the most commonly cited references in this article (Guy Nelson and Freeman & Harnwell) and used the abbreviated format. Most other books are only cited once or no page number is given, so it's not widely applicable, but it does cut the article size a bit. I also used an alternative footnote template for the two notes. Hope this is all OK. Paul W (talk) 17:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I have noticed this today, thanks. There were times today where I was making edits myself, adding more detail to references, and was getting edit conflicts, but its fine. I do need to continue with the sources for Freeman & Harnwell to add page numbers to the other references to this book but will follow your citation style for this. I will also do this for references to Stockport County 100 by Carol Ann Perry as I have a copy of that book also. I will then check the reliability of all web links in the article. If you could just write a few lines on the peer review located: Peer review/Stockport County F.C./archive1 just to summarise your edits from the last few days that would be great. Appreciate you doing a little tidy of the article as well. Thanks again. Wna247 (talk) 18:48, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Burnley F.C. peer review

Hi Paul, I'm trying to make the Burnley F.C. article into a featured one, and therefore I've requested a peer review. There are still flaws, but I believe it has the potential. I noticed you improved the Stockport County page after a peer review was requested and I was wondering if you would like to improve the Burnley article as well. Thanks, WA8MTWAYC (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Happy to have a look at it (my late father was a Burnley fan and once even tried to convert me to being a Claret - but I was already doomed to be an Alex fan!). Paul W (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Paul, much appreciated.

Haha great, it means you still have a bit of Claret in your blood! WA8MTWAYC (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:All Saints Parish Hall

Hello PaulW - I'd appreciate any support you can give to my draft article. I did a lot of local archive research on this building (it's in Tranquil Vale SE3) and its various community uses over the years. I feel it's notable enough architecturally to deserve an entry. I'm also working on a draft for the architect who designed it and supervised its construction, Charles Canning Winmill. Many thanks in advance! CourtauldGill (talk) 19:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi CourtaulGill. Happy to help on this if I can. Many years ago, I licensed images from the Mary Evans Picture Library for a civil engineering history project; only later did I move to SE London and see where they were housed. I think there may also be scope for an article about All Saints Church itself, while Winmill is also a worthy subject (I've edited pages on other London Fire Brigade subjects in the past). I will try to take a look later this week. Paul W (talk) 21:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi PaulW - really appreciate your interest, thank you! I've lived in the area for over 40 years, and worked inside the building for over 20 years, for the picture library itself, so I'm glad to know of your use of images. The research I did on the building was originally for the two Open House London events we took part in a few years ago. I agree, the church itself definitely deserves an article, will bear that in mind! Great to be in touch with you - many thanks. CourtauldGill (talk) 06:51, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Paul W, for your helpful updates today - really appreciate your input! CourtauldGill (talk) 18:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Paul W - the article has now been accepted for publication, thanks to all your helpful input. CourtauldGill (talk) 16:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Good to hear. Let me know if I can help with any other locally-connected subjects.Paul W (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Newport Rising

Hi, I've removed some text you added and explained why on the talk page. Do revert if you think I'm wrong. --Cavrdg (talk) 12:42, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Cavrdg. I have had a look, as has Martinevans123 who also made changes around the same issue. I think his recent edits provide as accurate a view as is possible at the moment. Paul W (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Charles Canning Winmill

Hello Paul - I've at last completed my draft article on the architect Charles Canning Winmill, at User:CourtauldGill/sandbox-y, just submitted for review a few minutes ago! Would really appreciate your input and support. It's the longest article I've written so far, there was so much to say about him. Thanks in advance and best wishes - CourtauldGill (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks CourtauldGill. I have made a few edits. I suspect Winmill may have worked with Robert Pearsall at LCC - is Pearsall mentioned at all in the Winmill biography? Paul W (talk)

Hello Paul W - many thanks for your input and support. I'm thrilled that my article was accepted so quickly. I've read your article on Pearsall, and realise that he was Winmill's boss at LCC. I don't have access to the Winmill book at the moment (it's in the office, where I'm currently not going!). I made extensive notes from the book, and it's those notes that I based my article on. I'll see if I can add a reference to Pearsall, as I can see he had a big influence over the design of the new fire stations. Thanks for the heads-up! CourtauldGill (talk) 09:35, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Elizabeth Hadly has been accepted

Elizabeth Hadly, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

MapleSoy (talk) 00:47, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

African Caribbean Leukaemia Trust

Hi Paul, I've created a new page for the ACLT, but someone has immediately changed it to the US spelling of Leukaemia, even though it's a UK charity. I've also realised that they mostly refer to themselves as ACLT, so wanted to add that to the title, but I didn't know how! Can you help?

Thanks User:KatieERoberts. I have moved the page to the correct title, and also made a note on the article's Talk page so that (hopefully) it won't be changed again. Paul W (talk) 18:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Paul W!

Samra Turajlic

Hi Paul, Me again! I've created a page for Samra but I'm not entirely sure I've put it in the right place! Is this a draft that's been submitted for review? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:KatieERoberts/Samra_Turajlic

It was listed on the Articles for Creation review page, and then later moved to draftspace (PS, you can sign your Talk page messages by using 4 tildes, ie 4 x ~). Paul W (talk) 21:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Stockport County F.C.

Hi, thank you for correcting my edit. Do you have any idea of to hyperlink the words "1997-98 Football League First Division" so that they lead here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997%E2%80%9398_Football_League_First_Division KobiNew (talk) 10:35, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, KobiNew. Do you mean wikilink? So that you can see, I have wikilinked from the Stockport page to the page for the 97-98 season. Depending upon the editor tool you use, it's either (in Visual editor) clicking on the chain link icon to add a link, or (in Wikitext editor) putting double square brackets around the words pointing to the target page. Hope that helps. Paul W (talk) 11:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I am using the Wikitext editor. Now it is clear to me how it is done. KobiNew (talk) 13:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by KobiNew (talk • contribs) 13:05, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Barkeep49. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Angela Flowers, and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Barkeep49 (talk) 18:07, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

This article had some COPYVIO issues and you seemed to do a Wikipedia:Copy and paste move from the draft which creates attribution issues. I believe I have fixed all this but want a second pair of eyes given these overlapping concerns. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, Barkeep49. As per the Talk page, I believe my edit happened while User:Praxidicae was moving it to Draft, requesting revdel after removing a copyright violation. This has resulted in there being two articles - one in mainspace and in draft. I think the mainspace one needs to be deleted by an admin while the draft is developed. Paul W (talk) 18:14, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

That makes sense. You or Praxidicae should feel free to move it back to draft. Barkeep49 (talk) 18:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I moved it to draft; the first draft had got deleted (I lost a few edits, but I was able to recall what I'd added). Paul W (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Alexandra Recreation Ground

Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/618860/1/The%20Industrial%20Middle%20Class%20and%20the%20Development%20of%20Sport%20in%20a%20Railway%20Town.pdf, which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, some content had to be removed and I paraphrased some. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 12:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

No problem, Diannaa. I thought I had paraphrased it sufficiently, but clearly not. Paul W (talk) 16:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for editing Draft: Relevent Sports Group

Hi Paul W: Thank you so much for taking the time to improve the content, organization, and overall quality of Draft: Relevent Sports Group. I like your suggestion to divide the history section as well. Since you seem to believe the subject is notable, could you take the next step and accept the draft into Wikipedia’s main space? That would be much appreciated. SylviaatRSG (talk) 10:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Article now in mainspace; I have also wikilinked it from a couple of other articles, and added some categories. Paul W (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to thank you again for your involvement, and your decision to move the article to main space. Would you mind having a look at another, related article, Draft: Daniel Sillman. Although it might not have SIGCOV on par with Relevent Sports Group, it still has some good sources from Business Journal, The Michigan Daily, and Sports Business Daily, which could justify moving the draft to main space. Thanks again for your contribution. SylviaatRSG (talk) 14:55, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi, SylviaatRSG. I have had a look at the Sillman draft and done a bit of fine-tuning, but I don't think it yet meets WP:GNG or WP:NBIO requirements regarding notability ("worthy of notice" ... "remarkable" or "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"). Much of the draft relates to his work for RSG but notability cannot be inherited by association with a subject described in a Wikipedia article. I had a look at what past reviewers have said (the most recent was in December 2020), and I can't see that the addition of one piece of coverage since then makes Sillman any more notable. Moreover, as a general rule, editors will also be wary of media coverage that appears derived from public relations work: they are dependent sources rather than independent, and some of the referenced sources display little independent analysis or comment about Sillman. But, ultimately, it is not about coverage - it is about Sillman himself being or doing something sufficiently worthy of notice to warrant a biographical article. Best wishes. Paul W (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Institute of Internal Communication

The article Institute of Internal Communication has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NORG and WP:MILL. Despite its name, this is just a staffing agency in the UK.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rogermx (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Women human rights defenders has been nominated for renaming

Category:Women human rights defenders has been nominated for 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 the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Paul_012 (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Crewe Alexandra

Hi Paul, I'm happy to help with the article and to have a look at it. Some quick things I've noticed:

• Some sentences/sections are unsourced, e.g. "and securing a ... to earn promotion." (Done) and the honours section - Done
• History: can do with some trimming in the "stepping back" and "2011 to present day" sections, e.g. "Although the season ... their Development League." can be removed as it's not about the first team. Some sentences are redundant, such as their finishing positions from 2017 to 2019, because mid-table finishes won't really be relevant in 10 years time. - Done
• Stadium: can do with some expansion. E.g. development of the stands, record attendances, it is an all-seater? - Done
• Supporters and rivalries: maybe something about the average attendances, the supporters' demographics - partially Done
• Sexual abuse scandal: I agree it should be part of the article, but needs trimming as it's too large right now. - Not done (yet) The subject remains newsworthy and I don't want to trim it significantly yet, in case it is seen as air-brushing recent history, particularly by a self-acknowledged Crewe supporter. Now Done
• Club records: maybe write it in prose? - Done
• References: needs some fixes in the formatting; e.g. at some refs it's "Guardian" and at some it's "The Guardian" - Done
• I'm missing information about Crewe's colours and crest. - Done (started)
• Luton Town F.C. and Cardiff City F.C. are excellent articles to take some inspiration from

The article already looks quite decent but needs some polishing. I'll take a look further into the article somewhere this weekend (and leave some comments in the peer review) as I'm short on time this week. Cheers, WA8MTWAYC (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, WA8MTWAYC. You have already confirmed some of my thoughts, and I look forward to your comments in due course. Meanwhile, I will start to tackle one or two of the points. Paul W (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Actioned most of the points - see notes above. Paul W (talk) 11:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paul, no problem. I'll take another look at the article somewhere this week. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 20:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for working through my comments so quickly. If there's anything else I can do, please let me know; I'm happy to help. I think the article is in GA range and worth a shot. Good luck. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 15:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Parlanti Foundry has been accepted

Parlanti Foundry, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bkissin (talk) 20:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Paul Darling OBE QC

Just a note to say thank you for approving the above! Stuartwilks (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)