User talk:Boleyn/Archive 5

Bernardino_II_da_Polenta
Hello. I declined the speedy nomination of this article because I felt there was a possibility of notability. However, the content you've added is almost entirely about the subject's family and not the subject themselves. Unfortunately, notability is not inherited by being related to a notable character. I believe the subject was the ruler/lord of something, but I do not know what. If you could improve the article and show that the article has notability by themselves and not as members of their family, I'd appreciate it. If not, I'll AfD the article in a few days. Thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 17:23, 15 November 2009 (UTC) Nevermind, thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 17:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Charles Dance (disambiguation)
Just for devilment, I've recreated Charles Dance (disambiguation), albeit I've found a third Charles Dance to make it all worthwhile ;) --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see you've created an article on a third Charles Dance, glad to see it. The dab is now a valid page. Boleyn (talk) 06:46, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Hamish MacDonald (disambiguation)
Hi there, thanks for letting me know of your recent deletion of this disambiguation page.

There is actually a third biography page in draft (the other Hamish MacDonald, indie press author whose name was linked but whose article wasn't there yet), this is why I'd set up a disambiguation page in the first place. Is there any chance you could undo the deletion please? or alternatively advise a more appropriate approach to these overlapping names if a disambiguation page is genuinely not the best approach?

Thanks in advance Splateagle (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. When an article is created, either recreate the dab or let me know and I'll do it. At the moment there doesn't seem to be any mention even on WP of the author, so there is no need to mention him on a disambiguation page, which is just a navigational tool to help users find articles on a person. If there's no article/significant mention in an article (see MOS:DABRL for when a redlink is a valid addition) then it's best for the user that they draw a blank straightaway, rather than clicking on a bluelink such as indie press, expecting information on the author. It'll only take 2 seconds to recreate when/if the article is created and if the author is notable enough, so please let me know when this happens if you want me to recreate it. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 15:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the clarification. The author was mentioned and referenced in the original Hamish MacDonald article where three individuals were being conflated, when I researched the three individuals in the process of untangling that article I thought that it probably was worth putting up a page on each... I just got two done and was then sidelined by other things.
 * I've now put up the initial draft at Hamish_MacDonald_(author) so that (hopefully) it can grow as an article in its own right. I'd be much obliged if you could now restore the disambiguation page. Thanks! Splateagle (talk) 16:52, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Now done. Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 19:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I'm puzzled by the notability tag you've placed on the third article though. I've already in the early draft listed several sources and external references. How is this article more suited to be tagged as of questionable notability than the other two? I'd really appreciate some input on what you feel should be improved upon in notability terms? And why this article out of the three merited tagging? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Splateagle (talk • contribs) 09:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Notability (people) contains the guidelines for the notability of authors and publishers. I don't feel he clearly meets this criteria, especially as he is self-published, but neither did I feel that it deserved to be tagged for deletion. As for the other articles on people of similar names, I'm afraid I haven't read them. I think you've done all you can to write a good article on this author, but he doesn't seem to meet the notability guidelines. Boleyn3 (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I disagree, but thanks for explaining your motivation. Being self-published is neither here nor there really I would argue that his work on promoting micro-press places him firmly in item 2 of the guidelines you linked to. I'll continue expanding on the article. Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Splateagle (talk • contribs) 14:47, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

More disambiguation problems
Hi Boleyn

I have just undone yet another problem caused by your removal of disambiguation pages.

Most of it can be seen at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Jonathan+Pim but here's a summary:

created a disambiguation page for two notable Dubliners called Jonathan Pim. At the time, only one of the two articles existed, but the dab page as it existed then clearly marked both of them as notables (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Pim_(disambiguation)&oldid=168305327, subsequently moved by you to Jonathan Pim (disambiguation) with the edit summary "clear primary".

That "clear primary" refers to Jonathan Pim (1858–1949), which after you moved the dab page was moved to the primary topic. At the time it was the only of the two articles actually existing, but I am surprised that you chose as a primary topic an unelected man who served for one year as Attoney-General over someone who served for 13 years as a Member of Parliament for the capital city.

It seems to me that you just stuck the "clear primary" label" on the article which actually existed. That set in train  a series of edits by, which resulted in the removal of any trace of the disambiguation.  I spotted a misplaced link when editing related articles, and it has just taken me 15 minutes to unravel it all.

I note that in response to my earlier complaint you said that you "feel attacked", and I'm sorry about that ... but even if my tone is coming across wrong, we have a problem here, in that yor work is starting to look to me like an attack on the efforts of editors who are putting a lot of time into disambiguating ambiguous topics. I haven't checked all of your edits, but so far I have encountered damage caused by your work on at least four disambiguation pages. I am beginning to think that I need to do a wider check of your edit history to see what other damage has been done.

Please can you stop just removing dab pages? It's hard enough to disambiguate articles in the first place, but I really hate wasting my time by redoing work which has already been done -- recreating the dab pages and fixing all the links (including cross-checking back to primary sources). I understand that the existence of some dab pages seems to offend your sense of neatness, but they are there for a reason, and you have yet to demonstrate any harm done by them.

I am aware that you are trying to follow guidelines, but guidelines are not a stick ... and they shouldn't be used to damage the encyclopedia, as happened in your edits to Jonathan Pim.

Finally, please can you not just archive this thread immediately, like you did with the last issues I raised? (archived only 16 hours after you replied to my comment). We clearly disagree, and I want to discuss this with you and try to reach a consensus, but discussion can't happen if you just archive things immediately. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

PS I just checked in again at Articles for deletion/John Wingfield (disambiguation), to find that several other relevant articles existed which were added to the dab page. Why did you not do check for those other articles before tagging the dab page for speedy, then prod, then AFD? This is similar to the problem with the two Jonathan Pims, and it really does seem that you are set on deletion. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 07:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

In my last message, I politely asked you not to contact me on this issue again, as I feel this is becoming harassment. I will not be responding to you on a case-by-case basis anymore because you already seem to have made up your mind. I would appreciate it if you heeded my polite request and just commented - without personal attacks - on any AfD. Boleyn3 (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * If you want someone to read a message, it's best not to archive it before someone has read it. Skim-reading the diff, I hadn't spotted the don't-contact-me-again message.
 * However, I don't see how WP:HARASSMENT is relevant to asking someone to discuss a matter on which there is disagreement. Yes, I have made up my mind on the basis of what I know so far, and so have you.  That's why I was trying to open up a dialogue to see if we can resolve the disagreement.
 * If you still insist that you don't want to discuss this disagreement, I won't use my time writing lengthy explanations here to try to explain why I disagree with you, seeking your explanation of your understanding. However, since I have identified an unresolved problem I will monitor your edits, and since you don't want to discuss them I will just have to revert any further problematic ones with an edit summary noting your refusal to discuss.  This isn't the way that wikipedia is supposed to work, but unless you discuss disagreements it's the best I can do. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Discussion elsewhere
This is just a courtesy notice to advise you that I have replied on my talk page to a comment by another editor which relates to you, and you may wish to comment. See User talk:BrownHairedGirl. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:05, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * For the third time, please do not continue to send me messages. Boleyn2 (talk) 16:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not a very collaborative response to a polite notification of a discussion which refers to you. Per the policy WP:CONSENSUS, "When editors cannot reach an agreement by editing, the process of reaching consensus is furthered on the relevant talk pages". It's a pity that you seem reluctant to engage in that consensus-building process of discussion. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Anne Brandon
Hi Boleyn, I just created a new article on this person, who I think will interest you: Anne Brandon. If you find the time, could you please help me edit the article as you have more books on the Tudor period than I do, which can be referenced. Thank you.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Will do, looks like an interesting article. Thanks for your work on the last couple of articles I created. Boleyn (talk) 13:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I just finished another article on her sister, Mary Brandon, Baroness Monteagle. The Holbein picture of her is lovely, don't you think?--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Gordon Bennett!
Regarding your edit, I understand your point, but I don't wholey (or however one spells it) agree with you.

My problem is, I can't think of another way to convey the information.

"Gordon Bennett!" is a significant part of the English language; have you any suggestions how to incorporate this aspect of usage into the page?

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. I completely understand your point. However, there was no mention of the term on the bluelinked article, and I don't think it would make sense to include it. There is a link at the top of the dab to its Wiktionary entry, which of course discusses the phrase. It is definitely something people would look for, but I think we need to stick to WP:DICT and keep definitions in Wiktionary rather than here. However, someone else may have another solution, although I really can't think of any legitimate way to include it directly on the dab. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 18:43, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Dab page Mark Alexander
I'm not following why you created a "See also" section in the Dab page Mark Alexander. I see that you are quite experienced with Dab pages, so I'm hesitant to make a change, in case there is a good reason. I've read Disambiguation (possibly too cursory a read), but I didn't see that style listed.

I can understand having two sections, one for Mark and another for Marc. I can understand a See Also as was done in Rice (disambiguation), but I'm not following why the See Also was done this way for Mark Alexander.

As an important aside, I came to this page because someone named Marc Alexander posted a question to the help page. I don't think that issue will go anywhere, but while looking at the dab page, I note that the original editor of Mark Alexander (keyboardist) removed the article from the Dab page. I'm planning to restore it, unless I hear why it was removed. I only mention this because you have edited the Dab page, and may have some insight into what happened and why.-- SPhilbrick  T  18:26, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. It is normal to list those with the exact name of the dab in the main section, with those of a similar name in the see also. If 'Marc Alexander' redirected to the dab, then it would probably be in the main body. As for the keyboardist, I can see no good reason why this was removed, so I've re-added it. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 18:36, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Ben Taylor
Thanks for the MOS:DAB fix.

Warmest Regards, :)-- thecurran let it off your chest 02:28, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Feinstein
Thanx for the pick-up -- David is the anglicized version of Dovid, much as Elijah is to Eliyahu. Wikipedia may have policies, but I think names should be based on how the individual calls themselves (like Madonna, even though she has a last name). In the end, it all seems so silly because of the redirect potential of an online encyclopedia. Have a good night!  DRosenbach  ( Talk 01:08, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Bill Glasson


I think I deleted the right thing and moved things to the right places. Please check and let me know if I did it wrong. Jehochman Talk 22:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Mike Dunbar
Hi, I see that as a more experienced dab cleanup editor than me, you've followed up some of my attempts and tidied up some aspects--thanks! :) I have learned from this. I've just worked on Mike Dunbar but I had to remove two entries whose redlinks had no other links, and therefore the result is a redirect to a redlink (which does have other links). This doesn't seem to be an adequate end result... could you take a look? Perhaps a stub should be created for the one remaining article in such circumstances. Interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks. PL290 (talk) 08:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, for the moment I've put it as a dad with one entry and re-tagged for clean-up, while I see if anyone else has some good ideas. It's a tough one - it should probably redirect to the incoming link which gives most information about him, but as there are several incoming links, it's hard to judge. I'll keep an eye on it and see what others think. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 17:57, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

John Thynne (disambiguation)
I imagine it isn't your fault if a policy on such pages has changed, but the older format seems to me more straightforward and more useful. I can't help wondering, in a case like this, how do you decide which is the primary subject? Is it done subjectively, or is there some objective method? Moonraker2 (talk) 14:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hello. The steward is currently on the primary page, as he is at John Thynne with no title or disambiguator. This of course doesn't mean it's correctly positioned, but it seems to be here. The steward has more than twice as many page views. He also has about six times as many Google hits. Those are the main ways to judge, although they're not definitive. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I suppose both page views and Google hits are more a measure of public interest than of objective importance – and in the first case a snapshot measure which could easily be distorted by some recent news story – but at least it's not completely subjective. Moonraker2 (talk) 19:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick Young
In reference to your reversion of my edit at the above DAB page, i would point you to the very MOS:DABRL you referenced. There it says, A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when an article (not just disambiguation pages) also includes that red link; if you look at List of male performers in gay porn films there is, indeed, that same red link. You could have found that by using "What links here", as MOS:DABRL suggests. Might i suggest you revert yourself? Cheers, LindsayHi 17:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in responding, another message was sent shortly after yours and so I missed this. I did go to 'What links here' and saw that the actor was not redlinked in any articles, just on a list page, therefore I removed it. Best wishes, Boleyn2 (talk) 13:35, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Greenberg (disambiguation)
Replied at User talk:Jerzy. --Jerzy•t 01:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Anne Boleyn
Hi Boleyn. Somebody has removed the Holbein portrait of Anne from the article. There's been a spate of vandalism to it recently. I tried to fix the image to no avail. Could you please take a look at it? Thanks.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I must have been in a haze, I don't know why I thought he would have an article. -- Banj e b oi   16:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem, perhaps he will one day and we can then add it to the disambiguation page. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Revert
I reverted your Douglas Wilson edit and I sincerely hope you do not take offense. You have no doubt contributed much more than I have, and are probably a much more refined editor. I believe, though, that the organization established by the categories in the aforementioned article will provide a much more suitable framework for further expansion than a freeform list. I would welcome your thoughts. Sweetmoose6 (talk) 03:51, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Stratton
Hello Boleyn. Thank you for the info on disambiguation. I had forgotten to add this article to my watchlist, and therefore had lost track of it a little (I am still without a clue as to whether the gentleman is still alive or not, someone added "living persons" cat. and tag but couldn't find any concrete info across the net) This link here provides descendancy information which may become useful once the above question is clarified. . Regards. Cretanforever (talk) 07:18, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 13:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Joe McElderry
The AfD for Joe McElderry which you participared in closed as Redirect to List_of_The_X_Factor_finalists_(UK_series_6). There is a proposal now at Talk:List_of_The_X_Factor_finalists_(UK_series_6) to restore an independent article and your opinion would be welcome there. I42 (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know. Boleyn (talk) 13:24, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Mary Abbott
Please check the name. If you search Mary Abbott you'll find John Abbott redirected from Mary Abbott. Abbott disambiguation would be helpful rather then John Abbott. Thank you for your attention. (Salmon1 (talk) 20:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC))

I added redirect to Mary Abbott as well as to John Abbott. Please correct if you find a better way to get to Marry Abbott (artists) using: Search. Thank you. (Salmon1 (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC))

Thanks for contacting me, Salmon, I think I've got it sorted now. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I am very concerned...
Hello, Boleyn. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I was very concerned with the pattern of edits I described here. I am not suggesting bad faith, but I am very concerned that your dab initiatives can be interpreted as giving the appearance of bad faith.

Candidly Geo Swan (talk) 23:46, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for alerting me, I have read the admins' comments and responded. Boleyn3 (talk) 13:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I wrote to User:Orderinchaos about his or her deletion of Susan Manning (disambiguation). I wrote, in part: For the record I do not believe, and didn't mean anyone to read into my comments, that I suspected the other contributor had set out to abuse policy. What I remain concerned has happened is that a long term quality control volunteer, who is doing a task that other quality control volunteers consider important, has innocently slipped into a pattern of editing that lapses from what is best for the project over-all. We are all supposed to be accountable for what we do here, and what we say. With circumscribed exceptions at the highest level, our decision-making is supposed to be made in an open and transparent manner. I remain concerned that the other contributor's use of multiple userids is not open and transparent, but rather is opaque and obfuscates their accountability.


 * I saw, in your note to User:Orderinchaos, that my comments upset you. Upsetting you was not my intent.  In the interest of not further upsetting you I won't write more now.  And I am going to assume that the pattern of edits you made that disturbed me was not intended to upset me.  Maybe the note I see you referred to on Talk:Susan Manning (disambiguation) addresses the concerns I raised there.  I am going to ask the administrator who deleted the talk page to email me its contents.  Geo Swan (talk) 22:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Les Balsiger and Les Balsiger (activist)
3RR?! I count one. I'm really confused. Please read the discussion and the Afd. I don't like the arrangement of this pretty-much-single dab page either but it was vetted by Wikipedia's legal counsel at the time per private e-mail (today it would be OTRS). Please assume good faith--I've never been accused of 3RR before. Pretty shocking to wake up to. More later, I've got to run now. Katr67 (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm very sorry about that, my error. I have read the discussion and the strange AfD, but the entry nonetheless does not meet MOS:DABRL and is not a valid entry. If/when it becomes one, it can be readded. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your apology. I'm not entirely sure that "does not meet WP:DABRL" trumps "saving Wikipedia from legal repercussions", however. I won't revert again (a second time) but I'm going to see if the parties involved are around and I may reopen the Afd. I didn't agree that there should be a dab page at that time, but I stand by community consensus and the consensus was to keep the dab page. I'm not sure you should unilaterally reverse that decision. This is actually a very serious matter beyond "it doesn't follow the rules". I'll let you know what we decide. Cheers, Katr67 (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Meinl edit war
That was banned User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg. I have blocked his newest ban-evading sock Richard Egger. I am surprised that he never gives up. We used to have a specialized cleanup project to deal with his articles at SU; perhaps we need to restart that (but it has become harder since he started account hopping like crazy). — Kusma talk 16:18, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this seems to have been going on since 2004! Thanks for your swift action. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 16:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello Boleyn. I removed your 3RR report from WP:AN3 due to a formatting issue which I could not fix. Per the above, I assume the problem is already addressed. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 18:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for trying, I just couldn't work it out. The editor has now been blocked, but just repeateed the edits from an IP address! Thanks, Boleyn3 (talk) 20:06, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not just from one IP address... see Sockpuppet investigations/Sheynhertz-Unbayg. Happy editing, — Kusma talk 20:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Warning
Please be aware of MOS:DAB. All links on Calbuco (disambiguation) are valid DAB links. Your edit is against MOS:DABTrueColour (talk) 22:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

This was a difficulat dab to clean-up, but you'll find JHunterJ is a very experienced editor, and his/her version is correct per MOS:DAB. If there are reasons you object to parts of it, please discuss it on the dab's Talk page, rather than sending warnings to editors. Boleyn2 (talk) 22:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * JHunterJ made up a definition of when to include red links. If you are all blind I can't help you. MOS:DABRL has nothing like his requirements. I cannot judge whether he is experienced. If he is, then this label has no value here. He cannot correctly read MOS:DABRL. TrueColour (talk) 23:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Please don't start being insulting, including calling people blind and questioning JHunterJ's ability to read English. You've only been on here two months, so it's not surprising that you have misunderstood MOS:DABRL, but re-read it - it is pretty clear. Boleyn2 (talk) 07:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

re: your recent edits
Hi! May I ask why you deleted James Andrew Davis, but did not delete James Davis (Australian politician) and Jim Davis (mayor) from here? Best, Invest in knowledge (talk) 09:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

The others meet MOS:DABRL; they have incoming links. Best wishes, Boleyn3 (talk) 11:33, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Onel5969. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Pablo Goncálvez, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

 Onel 5969  TT me 12:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that - misclicked.  Onel 5969  TT me 12:11, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Regarding article cite sources
Hello, Greetings! As per our previous discussion, I had added tag 'cite sources' into this article. But its removed stating as it dosen't imply. Can you please have a look? --Ganeshprasadkp (talk) 15:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, for putting the tag back in the article. --Ganeshprasadkp (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, happy to help, Boleyn (talk) 05:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:
 * WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags
 * Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:
 * A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons
 * There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy
 * Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English News Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.
 * Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
 * The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Ways to improve Lake Svetloyar
Hi, I'm Boleyn. Zeugma fr, thanks for creating Lake Svetloyar!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add your sources.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 13:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you please respond? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 05:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Boleyn,
 * I just added a very rough (average between google translate, bing translate and my own understanding of Russian) translation of the Russian page, which basically is a dump of my draft edit. Hence there is only one ref added out the 3 from the original page. And in Russian, not in English, sorry.
 * Also, a small side note: you should be a little less dry when asking for an answer... Basically, if I understand, with the "source" template present, the page is not counted, not referenced, and stays in the Special:NewPages. If you'd like it to move out of the list, don't bite, as I don't have the time and bandwidth to do a lot on WP/EN. And yes, 3 weeks is a short time in these circumstances.
 * --Zeugma fr (talk) 19:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Russian sources are absolutely fine, they don't need to be in English. No, articles with an unsourced tag do not remain in the New Pages Feed, my message was sent as I approved the article and it was then available to be indexed by Google and other search engines. As I had taken the move to approve it, I needed to check I'd done the right thing. My response was polite, not bitey, but yes, somewhat dry. Thanks for solving the problem, Boleyn (talk) 18:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

2018 Leinster Senior Football Championshp
I need to talk to you on my talk page. Please respond as soon as possible. (Spierce64006 (talk) 16:55, 27 May 2018 (UTC))
 * I've responded at your page, . Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 19:12, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Mos:dabrl listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mos:dabrl. Since you had some involvement with the Mos:dabrl redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. — Godsy (TALK CONT ) 00:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, . Boleyn (talk) 19:13, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination - Successful
Hey Boleyn

You have been successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandisegiveaway@undefinedwikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! Seddon (WMF) (talk) 00:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , thanks, that's a lovely surprise! Boleyn (talk) 19:15, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Draft moves
Happy to talk here, but I think this issue raises broader policy issues of interest to the community. (I don't think you're the only person with this practice, by a long shot. I'm genuinely interested in when the community thinks it is okay to move to draft and your edits were quite a few examples I saw in the deletion queue.) Particularly now that promising drafts cannot be saved in draftspace indefinitely, I'm concerned about moves to draftspace under any but the most stringent conditions. Policy currently only seems to permit these moves during new-page patrol, and that limitation makes sense particularly now that moves are effectively a slow-motion speedy-deletion. I think it might be more appropriate to apply prod than move to draft, because at least the prod categories are more closely monitored. Speedy deletion is not appropriate for articles that "were written by problematic editors, who had refused to engage in discussions about where they had got their information and were possible copyright infringements or WP:OR" (except if the copyvio is blatant, obviously). So I don't see why moves to draftspace should be appropriate... Anyways interested in your feedback, not necessarily limited to the particular articles at issue. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Bigger policy issue I'll note separately
Part of the problem, in my view, is that there are several silos of editors working in different areas and each silo ends up developing policies and practices that don't all work well together. We have AFC editors that don't like to take a chance on accepting articles (almost any article deleted after AFC acceptance is viewed as a bad accept). We have draftspace maintainers (somewhat overlapping) who don't want to permit promising drafts to hang around. And we have NPP folks that don't want junk in mainspace so move stuff to draft (which ordinarily would seem like a good idea except drafts mostly just end up in the trash bin and therefore the moves are effectively deletes, because of the other two groups of editors). In my view, there is a lot of dysfunction resulting from several systems that don't make much sense in tandem. Unless the goal is to fundamentally expand CSD without really acknowledging it.... Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I don't tend to move articles to draft very often, which is probably why your examples were from a few months ago, when I was quite new to NPP. Anecdotally, I found most I moved to draft were made into reasonable articles within a short amount of time and moved back. I agree that different projects develop their own ways which does need to be discussed. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 04:38, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Boleyn as this is my first and all the help is greatly appreciated. Thank you so much. Orangecones (talk) 06:33, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Moving Rajneesh to Osho
Hi boleyn,

I request you to consider moving Rajneesh page to simple osho.

There are already many redirections with the title osho, osho(guru), Osho rajneesh.

He chose his name osho in the end of his life. http://www.osho.com/pdf/Osho_Name_Change_Information.pdf Accesscrawl (talk) 11:46, 10 June 2018 (UTC) Accesscrawl (talk) 11:46, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello,, I've looked it over and proposed this move. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 12:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The move request was rejected - you may want to propose it at WP:RM. Boleyn (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Boleyn, can you see this article Mahmoud Zamani Qummi
 * Kurdistantolive (talk) 21:16, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks good, thanks for writing it. Boleyn (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Umang Singhar
Hello Boleyn. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Umang Singhar, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Being a member of a state legislature in India is enough to demonstrate notability. See WP:POLITICIAN.''' Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:28, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive! Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
 * Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: NPPbarnstar SE.png. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: RR3217-0014 100 rubles USSR 1989 Gold avers.png, Swiss-Commemorative-Coin-1991-CHF-250-reverse.png, Coin of Kazakhstan 500Thinker averse.png, US-$1000-SC-1878-FR-346a-PROOF.jpg.
 * Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Benigno Andrade
Hi, and thank you !

I focused on the WP Spanish version of the article (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benigno_Andrade), and contrasted it from Carlos Fernández article in the "La Voz de Galicia" article from http://web.archive.org/web/20030306152352/http://www.lavozdegalicia.es:80/inicio/noticia.jsp?TEXTO=100000018773. There is a copy of the article at this site http://paisajesdelaguerrilla.blogspot.com/2010/04/galicia-vida-y-muerte-de-foucellas.html.

I have edited the article and added the reference. DeepCurl (talk) 18:27, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you, Bolelyn, for your prompt reviewing of Hideo Haga...much appreciated!--Jamesmcardle(talk) 00:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem,, thanks for taking the time to write it. Boleyn (talk) 17:14, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Predrag Keros
Hello. I just got message about taking article I started to draft again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Predrag_Keros

I understand a part about lack of resources. I added some but obviously to few. The problem for me is to find resources in English, since dr. Keros was Croatian and worked in Croatia all his life. Still he managed to discover new body part known in medical circles as Keros classification. That I did ad in resources.

The other part about article being writen as advertisment is a bit odd to me. I put his biography. I have intention to add resources but can they be links to Croatian resources or must they be in English? Please advise me since I admit I am new but still dr. Keros deserves wiki article in English.

One more thing. In your comment you mentioned biography of a living person. I don't know if it changes anything but dr. Keros died this year. Dmajdic (talk) 14:08, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks,, that wasn't clear in the orignal article. Sources can be in any language, including Croatian. 'External links' just means 'suggestions for further reading'; it needs to be clear what your sources are. Please see WP:INLINECITE to make them clear. The whole article reads as if it is written to promote the person. It just needs work in draftspace, then submitting via WP:AFC preferably. Thanks for your hard work, Boleyn (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you Boleyn for your swift reply. I'm trying to include sources now in article but if you read carefuly you will find that article is just an extended biography of realy important (not only localy) doctor and scientist. When I try to find link to confirm everything in his biography I find some pages with his biography that confirm almost everything said in article. So I'm not sure what to do now. I put few links and if you read those pages they confirm almost all that is said here (only in croatian language). For instance: https://hrcak.srce.hr/199866 or https://www.jutarnji.hr/komentari/otisao-je-jedan-od-najvecih-popularizatora-zdravlja-u-hrvatskoj-preminuo-predrag-keros-omiljeni-doktor-kojega-su-cesto-zvali-renesansnim-covjekom/7078233/ Should I do more and what? Dmajdic (talk) 06:56, 19 June 2018 (UTC)


 * There is an unsourced section about the Keros classification at Cribriform_plate: it would be useful to expand that, with a source, as this is an aspect of his notability. Pam  D  07:42, 19 June 2018 (UTC)


 * wow. Thank you. Didn't know about this one. I'll try to connect it once the article is out of draft. Dmajdic (talk) 07:58, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Edinburgh Dungeon
Dear Boleyn, I would be grateful if could help me with some reliable sources as I am currently struggling. Thank You DC. ( DanColmer 15:34, 20 June 2018 (UTC))

Hi,, I'm happy to help. Where did you get the information from when you started the article? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 14:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

New page reviews
Thank you for reviewing the following new pages : 2018-19 Aizawl F.C. season and 2014-15 Hyderabad C.A. season -Sagavaj (talk) 15:01, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your hard work, . Boleyn (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding citations
Yes, I can add the citations to my articles when I create them. Sorry. I promise I won't ignore your messages again. I do love creating football articles.

FastCube (talk) 15:39, 20 June 2018 (UTC)FastCube
 * Thanks,, can you please add your reply at the ANI and add the references to the articles I've contacted you about over the last eight months? I'm glad you enjoy creating the articles. Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Sure, if i can find them. I'll definitely start with 2005–06 in Australian soccer

FastCube (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2018 (UTC)FastCube

Kind request to review an article Suggestion
Hi Boleyn, as an autopatrolled user I created an article about an actress called Yashika Aannand and automatically reviewed it. By the time some of the other editors changed the spelling of the actress by moving the article title according to their perspective ideas and also left the article to be unreviewed. Can you please help me in this situation? I hope that you would have known me earlier. Thanks. Abishe (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course, I'm well aware of your great work and hopefully your creations will be autopatrolled soon. I've done this, happy to help. Boleyn (talk) 11:24, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your great help by reviewing the article and I will always recognise your contributions to Wikipedia. I once again thank you for your understanding on my efforts. I should mention you that now I have autopatrolled rights and you are one of the reasons to obtain the relevant rights to me. The new page reviewers won't have the necessity to review my articles in the future. Abishe (talk) 11:46, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I thought I'd put you forward, I now understand why this was not reviewed. Not that reviewing yours ever took long. Keep up the good work! Boleyn (talk) 12:15, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Team From Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT)
Dear Sir, I am trying to post the bio of Amr Talaat, the ICT Minister of Egypt, but whenever I post it, it is removed by you. Kindly be informed that we are the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology and we need to post the bio of our ICT Minister Amr Talaat. We are responsible for posting this content related to the ICT Minister. Kindly advise us how to fix this problem.


 * our MCIT website is http://www.mcit.gov.eg/
 * My email is rsorour@mcit.gov.eg
 * Amr Talaat the new minister page on wiki is,
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amr_Talaat

Your prompt reply is highly appreciated. Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT) Boleyn (talk) 01:39, 21 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roosh200516 (talk • contribs)

, my only connection with this article appears to have been reviewing it (meaning I agreed it should be indexed by Google). However, you cannot have an article on someone just because you are connected to them, and writing about people you are trying to promote is highly discouraged. It does appear to be on a notable person. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 15:42, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * First, your additions to Amr Talaat were removed because they appeared to be copy-pasted from mcit.gov.eg, which would make them copyright violations. If you hold the copyright to that text, or are authorised by the rightsholder to share it, that issue would be solved. Please read WP:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions on how to properly donate your content to Wikipedia.


 * Second, since you appear to be editing for your employer, you are required by the Terms of Use to disclose this relationship. See WP:DISCLOSEPAY and WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY for instructions and further information.


 * Finally, I suggest that you familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's other policies, especially WP:BLP. If these are not followed, your contributions to Wikipedia may be removed. BegbertBiggs (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

St. John's Cathedral, Nazareth
Johnson.devaraj (talk) 06:35, 22 June 2018 (UTC) Thanks for the tagging. To my article St. John's Cathedral, Nazareth, the sources are from the Cathedral's website, and the Diocesan's website. One another source (Reference) is from a missionary register book (obtained through google books). All these references have been brought under a newly added section called Reference now. Is this sufficient for now for the tag to be removed. Also, I have shared the location of the cathedral using the coordinates feature. This church is a standing witness of my village peoples' spiritual growth and economical development. Hopefully, someone from my village may add a few new references to this article in the coming future Johnson.devaraj (talk) 06:35, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's a great improvement. Thanks for taking the time to write this article and help people learn more about the church. Boleyn (talk) 13:40, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Response
Hello, sorry for being a bit lazy, it's just that the whole bureaucracy of Wikipedia can honestly be too much of a hassle at times. --Julio P. 08:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julio Puentes (talk • contribs)

İpek Öz
Thank you, Bolelyn, for your prompt reviewing of İpek Öz. Sunsirisho(talk) 12:12, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Thanks for reviewing Nadir Sedrati, Boleyn.

Unfortunately Kudpung has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

"Poorly translated or machine translation from fr.Wiki without attribution"

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Today's South Northumberland inquest
Diary found at http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/Registration/Deaths/Funeral.aspx - has published her personal name. You could have easily sourced a reference, but undid my contribution again. 80.234.128.165 (talk) 21:49, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, she was once a director of UK company no. 05977993, so cross-reference to name, address and birth date on the record. 80.234.128.165 (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , the WP:BURDEN is on you to add sources to the information, not anyone else. We have to be especially careful with biographies of living people - sourcing is essential. Boleyn (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

For info
Hi. Thanks for reviewing some articles I've just started. However, I think there's an issue with auto-patrol rights. I've started this thread at WP:VPT.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 13:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Sugar Creek Elementary School
Hi! I noticed you had removed some redlinks from a disambiguation pages at Sugar Creek Elementary School.
 * Manual_of_Style/Disambiguation_pages states: "A link to a non-existent article (a "red link") should only be included on a disambiguation page when a linked article (not just other disambiguation pages) also includes that red link. Do not create red links to articles that are unlikely ever to be written, or are likely to be removed as insufficiently notable topics."
 * Manual_of_Style/Disambiguation_pages states "If a topic does not have an article of its own, but is mentioned within another article, then a link to that article should be included." and "If the topic is not mentioned on the other article, that article should not be linked to in the disambiguation page, since linking to it would not help readers find information about the sought topic."

Based on #2, "Sugar Creek Elementary" would certainly be mentioned in the article if/when it's created (as the schools would be listed). As per #1 it does not mean red links are never allowed in articles, but rather only include them if article creation is likely. School districts more or less always survive AFD, so school districts should be treated as "likely to be created".

Anyhow, I am going to create articles on the two entries. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I created Community School Corporation of Southern Hancock County. Limestone County Schools and Bentonville Schools received redirects to already existing articles. Note that Sugarcreek (one word) Elementary is mentioned in Karns City Area School District. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm afraid you've misread the guidelines. There needs to be a bluelink on the line and the bluelink needs to mention that particular Sugar Creek Elementary School. A dab is an index of mentions/articles within Wikipedia. I'm glad you're creating the articles. Boleyn (talk) 06:25, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Your curation of Tuluhan Tekelioğlu
Hi! I am wondering if the articles I create have to be curated although I have autopatolled right? The queation is just for my information. Thanks for your comment. CeeGee 20:10, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * H . Anyone with autopatrolled rights shouldn't have their articles going through New Page Patrol. However, there seems to have been an issue the last couple of days where those with autopatrolled rights are still going through NPP. It's in hand. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 21:26, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Coto 47
Hi Boleyn! I apologize for not answering before; I havent been as active at Wikipedia for the last seven years or so-even as, like you saw, I still write the occasional airline or boxing related article or general info stub (category which Coto 47 falls, as far as my opinion anyways)

I guess I should put some sources, just have to come around to it! Thanks for your excellent work looking out in that area!

Blessings coming your way! Antonio Rondo Martin (hereeeee's Antonio Martin!!!) 09:06, 30 June, 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanka, Boleyn (talk) 21:27, 30 June 2018 (UTC)