User talk:Asukite/Archives/2021/June

= permute instruction page =

hello Asukite, i appreciate your efforts to keep wikipedia clean. however i had just taken a break and was just about to return to editing this page, which i do incremrntally. i am now not going to (including not creating a "Special" page) until it has been reverted, because i do not feel comfortable with dealing with wikipedia procedures, and i feel strongly that mistakes should be corrected by those that make them. this means that wikipedia will need an alternative contributor for this particular page. Lkcl (talk) 00:24, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

also please note, although i am grateful that you informed me, i have removed all mention of the page from my talk page, to make it absolutely clear that will not be contributing further to that page until it is restored. if the talk page for permute had been checked you would have seen i was in the process of collating information and gave a clear reason as to why it had been created. the destruction of this information and complete lack of consultation is why i will not be contributing further unless this mistake is rectified. i repeat again: someone else, the person who made the mistake, shall have to be the one pressing the "restore" button. i will not ne getting involved in that process. Lkcl (talk) 00:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello, I understand that having something deleted can cause frustration. At the time I tagged the page for deletion, it appeared blank. I can't remember if I checked the talk page, but as the page was deleted by an admin, it's likely that it was qualified for deletion (further explanation of this can be found in the history of your talk page). If you would like to restore the content to resume working on it, the process is to make a request at Requests for undeletion, which I will do for you if you would like - keeping in mind it won't likely be restored if there was no new content added since the time it was tagged, in which case it would be easier just to recreate the page again. Sorry for causing any inconvenience, and do let me know if you want me to make that request for you. A S U K I T E  03:22, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * appreciated Asukite, i do get it. i'm just pissed that all the research notes have gone, along with the explanation in the talk page as to why i created it as a stub (it has 6 other separate and distinct pages referring to it as a link, each expecting the page to exist, and the page and the ones referring to it are all on the "high priority" list of computing pages needing attention).  also the reason i created the stub is because after creating the talk page with research notes it looked really odd that the *page* did not exist but the talk page did, particularly with 6 other high priority pages all linking to it. if that is sufficient justification to restore the work done, great, otherwise i will leave it: someone else can take responsibility for the page, and deal with wikipedia bureaucracy, i have too much else to do and am strictly limiting my contributions to non-bureaucracy useful interactions. Lkcl (talk) 10:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I placed the request, you'll find it here. In the future, to prevent this from happening again I recommend either starting the article in a draft or userspace, then moving it when it's ready, or using this template: to notify other editors that the page is still under construction. I usually wait at least 30 minutes to an hour before tagging such articles for deletion, but some editors will tag it within a few minutes, so I wouldn't want this to happen again. Thanks for your contributions!  A S U K I T E  12:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I placed the request, you'll find it here. In the future, to prevent this from happening again I recommend either starting the article in a draft or userspace, then moving it when it's ready, or using this template: to notify other editors that the page is still under construction. I usually wait at least 30 minutes to an hour before tagging such articles for deletion, but some editors will tag it within a few minutes, so I wouldn't want this to happen again. Thanks for your contributions!  A S U K I T E  12:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Leela Owen
Hello, Asukite,

You can't close a deletion discussion you started. The appropriate way to end one that you believe was a mistake was to withdraw your nomination. Make sense? Liz Read! Talk! 02:13, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , Yes, thank you. To be honest, I was using XfDCloser for the first time and I didn't realize that clicking "keep" would automatically start the process without me having a chance to add an explanation. I also wasn't sure how to proceed as the creator decided to draftify the article. Thanks for letting me know, I will add a comment stating that I withdraw and allow a non-involved editor to process it. A S U K I T E  02:19, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi
Hello friend how are you? I am kindly asking for review page of 2021 CAFA U-20 Women's Championship. Thanks God bless you. Arijit Tagore (talk) 23:42, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , I took a look at the page. It looks like another editor has already started to review it, and tagged it as needing more sources. More is always better, especially as it helps prove that the championship is notable, improving the article's odds of remaining up as well as backing up content. There isn't a lot in the article besides stats at the moment, and I was able to fix the size of the image in the "Venue" section, which could also be expanded. As the event is over now, there hopefully is more news coverage that can be added to the article. Other than lack of sources and need for expansion and organization, I can't think of any other problem to point out right now. Hope this helps. A S U K I T E  23:21, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

Credibility of Altnews
An anonymous request regarding questionable credibility of Altnews was made. In the light of the past and recent events some of the claims seem to be true in nature and I have had researched and submitted 3-4 media reports as well. But it seems like it didn't got registered in the system. Is it a technical issue? Vis14620 (talk) 01:32, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , If you're referring to my comment here, all I can say is that the request was asking too much of us as reviewers - the purpose of these requests is to enable users without sufficient privilege to continue editing articles, but these edits typically must be uncontroversial to be approved. The linked request was calling into question the validity of a source, and due to the controversy of this (and lack of sources presented in the request) it was, and likely will be continually denied. As for the edits you refer to which were not registered, can you let me know where you were trying to edit? If you were trying to link sources which were in this blacklist (sorry, it's not very readable), the system will have automatically rejected them. If this is the case, you will likely need other sources, but there may be another reason you had trouble - hope this helps. A S U K I T E  03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Whiteguru. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Lawnmower Man, and have marked it as unreviewed. 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.)

Whiteguru (talk) 10:11, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Links to disambiguation pages in hatnotes
Hi. I noticed you added various hatnotes to articles about people called John Powell. Would you mind repairing them in line with WP:INTDAB, and keep INTDAB in mind in the future? Links like these create a lot of unnecessary work for editors who fix links to disambiguation pages. Lennart97 (talk) 12:16, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out. Yes, I can do that, I should be able to sometime today. I was not aware of that but it makes sense - I will point them all to John Powell (disambiguation), and it will give me a chance to fix my invalid use of the template.  A S U K I T E  12:22, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * All done for now. Please let me know if I did anything wrong, and thanks again. A S U K I T E  13:21, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Perfect, thank you! Lennart97 (talk) 13:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

Help request
Hi. Good morning. I asked for an edit in the article Eye Color, but my request was rejected due to the invalidity of the resources. Can you check to see if it now meets all Wikipedia standards please? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pam2021 (talk • contribs) 06:51, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , It appears I was the last person to comment on it. The sources are the same as they were when I commented. If you look at the bottom of the talk page you'll see a description of each source, which you can read to help you understand why it's being declined. There's not much more I can do myself, and generally I avoid re-reviewing the same change. I'd rather leave it to another editor to make sure everybody is in agreement. A S U K I T E  16:36, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@: I mean, I found the same material in reputable sources over the past few weeks and modified all the sources, so I asked you to review it again. It is on my workout page right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pam2021 (talk • contribs) If you can't there is nothing problem with that. Can you tell me from whom I can request this?Pam2021 — Preceding undated comment added 19:33, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , Sorry, I tried looking through other pages you've edited, but I couldn't find any new sources other than the ones currently listed at Talk: Eye color. If you can link me to the updated sources I can try to look at them later. You might find it helpful to try making a request at Teahouse, they are good at answering questions for new editors. A S U K I T E  20:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%B1:Pam2021/%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%D9%87_%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B1%DB%8C%D9%86 .Thank you so much for your kindness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pam2021 (talk • contribs)
 * , I didn't realize you meant your fawiki page. Those sources appear to be much higher quality than the previous ones. I probably won't get a chance to review them as I do most of my editing from work and it's fairly busy this week, so I will probably have to focus on smaller edits. If I get a chance I can go over them this weekend, but if you were to reopen your edit request with those sources listed (at Talk:Eye color), I've a feeling your request will have a better chance of approval edit: I just realized, Eye color is only semi-proected, and you are now autoconfirmed. Your account should be able to edit that page now, so you don't need an edit request. If you feel those sources are sufficient, you may add the content in yourself without a request. A S U K I T E  14:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I did it. Thank you very much for every thing. I never forget your helps. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pam2021 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taksin%27s_Reunification_of_Siam
This is info from another article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taksin Deleting it would lead to a loss of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanakorn Srichaisuphakit (talk • contribs)
 * Sorry, I didn't notice this until after I moved it to draftspace. I did fix the citations based on your message. Please make sure to link to the original page and make a note when moving material to a new page, in order to preserve attribution. If that had been there, I would have noticed that the article was pre-existing content. A S U K I T E  11:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)