User talk:Celestina007/Archives/2021/January

New Year's wikilove

 * @, Thanks M, i try my best. Happy new year mate!! Celestina007 (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Yandex.Mail
I'm starting to have some doubts about this one. It's a major part of a major internet suite, very important in its own country. Perhaps it and otherservice should be merged into te main article. not just listed there. If you disagree, I guess afd is the way to go.  DGG ( talk ) 06:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey @, to be honest I’d just let another editor take over that one. I’ve been mentally drained for a while now. Celestina007 (talk) 06:50, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
 * yes, I find that I too prefer to do what can be done easily, in a single short period of editing, and which will not require followup. Someone else will probably pick up this one.  DGG ( talk ) 06:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Requesting explaination for speedy deletion
I request you to provide the reason for speedy deletion on the page I created Being Human (Music Producer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForBeingHuman (talk • contribs) 06:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I certainly do not appreciate the commanding tone. However the reason is self explanatory. Celestina007 (talk) 06:11, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I have added citations to prove the significance of this article Being Human (Music Producer). Please verify and remove the restrictions on this page
 * @, really dude? Is this the route you have chosen to follow? Writing an autobiographical article? Using a blatant alternate sock account to remove the A7 tag? Move-warring? Using Wikipedia for self promotion? and other counter productive activities? Its not a bright idea believe you me, just stop. Celestina007 (talk) 08:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, This is not at all for self promotion. Why is this page not significant to be on wikipedia? If it is for self promotional purposes, I would have given links to promote and attract people. I have written this article from a neautral point of view. I have'nt included any links in the articlee except for the citations.  And that too for verification.
 * @, because it falls short of our general notability criteria. You haven’t still addressed why you used a sock account to remove the A7 speedy deletion tag. Using more than one account to game the system is a very grievous offense here did you know that? Well now you do! Celestina007 (talk) 08:33, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, Ok. I apologise for what I did. Can you please show me a way to get this article on Wikipedia?
 * @, As of now it is impossible. The subject of the article is an 18 yr old that woefully falls short of WP:GNG(how we roughly test notability) & also falls short of WP:MUSICBIO. Of course I doubt that what I’ve just told you would deter you from editing the article any further but you’d be wise to adhere else you risk landing yourself a block. You are already afoul of many grievous offenses, you are editing disruptively, using Wikipedia for promotional purposes, engaging in COI editing without declaration, and most worrisome is that you are currently and actively still socking. Celestina007 (talk) 09:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, no no. I didn't use it for promotion. I have drafted every page I've created. And now I am just reying to have an article on wikipedia just like evry other artists. I have a good number of montlhy listeners and followers. Why am I not eligible to have an article on Wikipedia?

@, I just told you above that the subject of your article (apparently per your responses, that is you!!!) isn't notable enough to have a Wikipedia article per WP:GNG & WP:MUSICBIO You can’t have a Wikipedia article “just like every other artist” because Wikipedia isn’t like LinkedIn where anyone can create biographical resumés on themselves. Biographical articles you see here are on notable persons who have passed our notability test & have been created by volunteers not the artists themselves randomly waking up on a Wednesday morning and deciding “it’s a good day to have a biographical Wikipedia article” Look! do you even bother to read my responses? or do I just go straight to report you for being a single purpose promo account? Celestina007 (talk) 09:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Need review
Greetings! I recently edited the draft Draft:Danish Siddiqui. I noticed that it was earlier created by a person about themself and it didn't meet the notability standards. I have updated the page with information about a notable person who goes by the same name. Since you last reviewed it, I thought you could have a look at the draft and re-review it. Indianite (talk) 19:58, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, hello, I think it would be best if you submit it for review as it doesn’t appear you have done so, then wait for a different reviewer to go through it as I currently have my hands full. I’m sorry. Celestina007 (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry but I did submit it for review on 1 January. User Victor Schmidt invited you to the discussion as well (see) Since there was no update from any other user, I reached out to you.. Indianite (talk) 20:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @ the draft article you linked above as of now is currently not submitted for review or am I missing any cogent point here? If you need quick responses to your answers, my tp unfortunately isn’t the best place for such. For swift assistance or response to your questions you may go straight to the WP:TEAHOUSE I’m afraid I can’t be of help any longer. Celestina007 (talk) 21:04, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * @, The history of the article is very much shady, & with the manner in which you have 'coincidentally' created the article, there’s little possibility any afc reviewer would accept it. Read WP:YFA.Celestina007 (talk) 21:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I can see why you would say that the article has a shady history. I was somewhat amused when I saw that a person had tried to submit an autobiographical article... But was it wrong for me to use the same name for this draft? It was suggested that I create a separate draft and use a disambiguated title. Guess I'll go ahead with that suggestion Indianite (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, that’s the best route to follow. Celestina007 (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Open to suggestion
Hi Celestina007

I have resubmitted the article because I believe it meets criteria after I made minor edits to it, I also made a few comparisons to existing articles with similar pages as guides, I am open to suggestion to help review the content of the article to make it better and meet standard, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tundealuko (talk • contribs) 23:41, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Fixed it up...I think
Hey Celestina007 how are you? I came across an article you checked out a while ago and did some touch ups (with the help of a few folks from the teahouse). Would love to hear what you think of it now (I also left some notes about it on the talk page). Here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Roam_(musician) IronThumb3000 (talk) 14:35, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Consider
In the middle doing NPP I looked at User talk:Northern Escapee's talk page and noticed you had asked about previous accounts. Ok, so I continue on with my NPP and I find this odd entry on Special:Contributions/Brookefort's contributions page. Odd, I do say. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:38, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

What are your thoughts on this
Hello, hope things are well with you. I was wonder what are your thoughts might be about this new article: Isiolo Massacre?

Best wishes from Los Angeles,  // Timothy ::  talk  16:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, hello my friend, I’ve been following the news and it’s really a sad thing going on in America. Now as for what you asked, are you asking about the article being unsourced? If yes, then you may search for sources yourself and include it to the article because It appears to be an encyclopedic article of value. If you asking if it is notable or not, my take would be yes it is. I would go ahead to move the article from Isiolo Massacre to Isiolo massacre as the M ought to be in lower case. Have I answered your question mate or do you have any other peculiar questions? I’m always here to answer them. Celestina007 (talk) 18:27, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Four years ago I would never have believe this would have happened and it looks like it is going to get worse.
 * As far as the article goes, I can't find much of anything under the name Isiolo Massacre, other than in the body of one of the soures and an AllAfrica mention, and I'm not sure its actually a proper name. I know this was a violent time and their were massacres, but I am wondering if the name is correct.  // Timothy ::  talk  02:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I share your concerns but like you said it appears the AllAfrica source actually has two pieces (this & this) published that specifically references “Isiolo massacre” so I think for now it’s a decent enough title. Celestina007 (talk) 04:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Clarification
Hello, I am Hud by name, Nigerian and I did not have any other account on Wiki beside this Hudlag, regarding this I never know any person among the contributor to this article.

I created this article due to the fact that, in My State (Kano State) we are almost 20 Million but I don't think we have up-to 10 Wikipedia-contributors that are active as I am now and who will pay for an article of a dead person? but I know the Man contributed a lot during his life time and he even wrote a book about his life called "The Making of a Nigerian Engineer" Published by (Safari Books Ltd) ISBN: Cased 978-978-57696-0-9 Paperback 978-978-57696-1-6.

I have no interest of doing anything that will make my account to be blocked from editing an article on Wiki, because I can say I am the only Contributor from Kano State Nigeria that will dedicated his time on Wikipedia for others to get general information about Kano State because the information on Wikipedia is very poor and I wanted to improve it and I will appreciated if you will be guiding me on writing and editing article with Pictures on wiki

best regards, I really appreciate your effort Celestina007

Hudlag (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 06:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, This was the message I left on your talkpage & no where in it did I say you were getting paid for the creation of the article & neither did I insinuate that in any which way so I’m surprised you are bringing that up. What I asked you was why at least 12 newly registered accounts had their first edits straight to that article & told you to read both WP:SOCK & WP:MEAT, so like I said I’m not sure why you brought up the issue of paid editing when I clearly never referenced that, or is there something subtle I’m missing here? Celestina007 (talk) 10:52, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Robert Bassmann
I am really trying to figure out why my moving Robert Basmann to the possibly living category was overridden on the very insulting claim that doing so was somehow "incompedtent". It clearly sounds like an insult to me. Beyond this, As best as I can tell none of the sources demonstrate that Bassman has been alive for the last 25 years. Bassmann is 94-years-old. The guidelines for possibly living is over 90 and no sourcing showing them alive in the last 10 years. What am I missing here?John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Actually on further review, the most recent source is 28 years old. There is a source that was gathered in 2015, but it is evidently the primary source for his birth. There is also the website of his most recent employer, but the link there does not work.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I am really getting annoyed at this. The edit summary used to revert my edit on Gene Barge is really uncalled for as well.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not see how any of those sources show anything recent, but even if they did the edit summary is uncalled for.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:03, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Stop being an uncivil lout, JPL. If you want to complain about me, I have a talk page that somehow appears to have escaped your attention. Instead, not only are you posting to uninvolved editors' talk pages. trying to drag them in, but you're dishonestly trying to shame me by presenting faked quotes from my edit summaries with misspellings I hadn't made on each talk page you posted to. I can spell "incompetent". Here, it looks like you can't. That's at best ironic, or it would be if it didn't appear deliberate. Bluntly, you don't understand the instructions for the category. It doesn't say "sourcing". It says "documentation". Any documentation that indicates the subject has been alive within the last decade prevents application. It doesn't have to be in the article, or even be related to something notable enough to be in the article. A photo of them at their 75th high school reunion in their local paper would be good enough. It would be time- and effort-wasting to require that editors prove that elderly article subjects have done something noteworthy at an advanced age to prevent them from being classified as only possibly alive. It's also weird and creepy. Of course, in the case of Gene Barge, which you whine about, a source already in the article, the subject's IMDB page, showed multiple credits over the last decade, mostly music writing credits, but also onscreen appearances in news shows and documentaries. You didn't bother to check. You also didn't bother to do a simple Google search. If you had, you would also have found a recent newspaper interview. Few newspapers interview people who aren't definitely living. Face the truth, JPL, your indolent, slipshod editing and searching practices are corrosively damaging to this encyclopedia. You've already been responsible for one of Wikipedia's worst public embarrassments. Your attitude seems to be that you're such a special, privileged editor that those who disagree with you must prove their points and explain them to your satisfaction before altering your work. That's not the case. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo).  Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006.  Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 03:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The above is exactly the totally rude and uncalled for attacks that I am talking about. I did not intentionally misspell anything, and bringing it up in that way is exactly the type of rude, uncalled for behavior that is being exhibited here. Then there is the downright character assasination and the false trying to blame me for both starting the category Category:American women novelists and by implication being the one who put Amy Tan and other notable women novelists in this category and not in Category:American novelists. Both of those are outright lies, and that nearly 8 years later people are attacking me for it is an outrage. I see no reason to comment on the talk page of someone who is both so rude and so willing to just insult other people and starts with an extreme assumption of bad faith.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:12, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I do agree with, that some of the statements or comments you made are borderline rude and are uncalled for, I believe as adults we can be civil when trying to make our points, JPL has been bullied so many times & its really a shame seeing as he is one of the few editors here who is actually putting in work and effort. I do understand your frustrations, but I do believe there are better ways to make your points without that 'tone' as you know we are all volunteers here and to be nice to one another especially long standing editors isn’t too much to ask. I hope you both settle your differences amicably. Celestina007 (talk) 18:04, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Message
Happy new year, please help me go through this page and let me know your thought Wofai Fada Amosflash (talk) 20:31, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, the subject of the article (Wofai Fada) simply is not notable, her role in oloture is at best negligible, she wasn’t the lead or supporting actor, Sharon Ooja and Omowunni dada were, she also makes cameos in other movies she has featured in thus far so per WP:NACTOR she doesn’t qualify. She has won no significant award neither has she been nominated for one so per WP:ANYBIO she doesn’t qualify. A general google search shows she doesn’t possess in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources, so per WP:GNG she doesn’t qualify also. I’m afraid she isn’t worthy of a standalone article at the moment. I’m almost tempted to nominate the article for deletion because I don’t see the subject becoming notable in the foreseeable future & incubation at this point in time doesn’t seem feasible because like I said I don’t see her becoming notable anytime soon, however, in other not to discourage you I would move the article back to Draftspace. There are a plethora of deceased notable Nigerian individuals you can choose to write about which are of encyclopedic value, an example of an encyclopedic article would be an article I created named Clifford Orji such articles are of immense value. I’m generally skeptical of articles on actors,musicians, organizations, businessmen, as in such areas it is easy for Indian and Nigerian editors or any editor for that matter irrespective of nationality to perpetuate UPE. I’m going ahead to draftify the article, please when you are done, submit it via the WP:AFC process. Aha!!!! Lest I forget visit WikiProject Nigeria and scroll to the part which says request for uncreated articles which is a list of notable Nigerians who don’t have biographical articles on them & start create articles on them because invariably they are always notable persons, Thank you for understanding. Celestina007 (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of Erica Nlewedim
Hi Celestina, Thank you for the work you do at Wiki. I started working on the page Erica Nlewedim and noted that you voted to delete the page last year as she did not meet the notability criteria. I have since updated the page with citations and will appreciate a review of status. Erica has a vast portfolio when compared to 2 other Big Brother Naija housemates who have wiki pages. Kindly help review it. Thank you. --Kemmiiii (talk) 01:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I have rejected your submission. Being famous & notable aren’t the same thing, she is famous but not notable. I also do not appreciate the fact that you are an spa dedicated solely to the subject of your article, you may not use Wikipedia as a means of promotion. Please relay this message to your client/friend or whatever she is to you. Celestina007 (talk) 02:38, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Celestina, I am a fan of hers and consider her notable especially in Nigeria. Kindly read about the Elite League. I will like you to reconsider considering the fact that [|Laycon] and [|Prince] both have viable Wiki pages and she's more notable than them from the same show. Kindly review and reconsider. Thank you. She also meets the WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG criteria --Kemmiiii (talk) 02:46, 25 January 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kemmiiii (talk • contribs) 02:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, the links you provided aren’t showing any page, who & who exactly are you referring to? Celestina007 (talk) 03:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Laycon 'Olamilekan Moshood Agbeleshe'https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laycon and Prince Nelson Enwerem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Enwerem Kemmiiii (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, the former won the show, the latter was Mr.Nigeria at some point in time so I don’t see how Erica Nlewedim tops that. Celestina007 (talk) 05:26, 25 January 2021 (UTC)


 * She was disqualified from the show and was miss photogenic during most beautiful girl in Nigeria 2014. Besides, she has a movie streaming on Netflix which has its own Wiki page. May I point out that Big Brother America Contestants like Diane Henry and Erika Landin both have Wiki pages despite only being known for only big brotherKemmiiii (talk) 07:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, I don’t know how else to tell you that fame and notability aren’t one and the same, this Erica individual is simply not not notable enough for Wikipedia. You have had two AFC submissions declined and rejected. I suggest you read WP:GNG, WP:RS, & WP:NACTOR, honestly you are beginning to become a burden. Are you here to carter only to this Erica individual or are you here to build an encyclopedia? If the former is your reason you can let me know now so I’d report your account for being a Single purpose promo only account. Kindly tell your client, seeing as you have numerous images of her I can’t seem to find anywhere on the internet that unfortunately she isn’t notable yet to warrant a Wikipedia biographical article. Hell, even Tacha from last season doesn’t have one, do you see how serious & high our notability threshold is here? You are more likely to get a Twitter and instagram blue check than you are to get an article on Wikipedia, we don’t play here. Celestina007 (talk) 08:47, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your responses. I guess I’ll continue updating till she’s notable enough. Kemmiiii (talk) 08:52, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of EMB3Rs
Hi Celestina007,

I am writing you regarding the EMB3Rs page you nominated for speedy deletion. I see it was already deleted and would like to kindly ask to retrieve the deleted material for improvement of the page which I would then like to submit for review. As reason for deletion you noted "potential promotion of company, group, product, service, person, or point of view". I understand that this is your concern, but let me assure you that this is not our intention. EMB3Rs is an EU-funded research project. It means that it is funded with tax payer money. So the idea behind a wikipage for this particular research project is to inform the public about how money is spent and what the results/benefits are. Hence, I gladly optimise the page for that purpose until it meets all the wikipedia requirements during the review process.

Thank you for your help and kind regards, Melanie at ESCI (talk) 07:16, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

HI
@Celestina007 I saw you rejected the publishing of a page "Erica Nlewedim". Please may I know what went wrong so that I can fix it. It's urgent Justfrankleen (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, why & how is it urgent if I may ask? Celestina007 (talk) 09:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, no, I didn’t ask you to 'thank me' for my question, i asked the question expecting a reply. Celestina007 (talk) 12:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Kemmiiii sock ring
They are not just Kemmiii or Justfrankleen, there are more users under the ring. They are Cruiserforlife, Ehizodenoria, HoneyCrispAppleMan, and Lukepicardkirk. You can tell that they're probably the same person by looking at the userpages. They are certainly paid to some extent. They are here since last year. Just recently, I reverted their edits on Sallie Mae, with the intention of promoting the company I believe.  Mario Jump  83!  09:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, thank you for bringing this to my notice, you are very much apt, it’s annoying I missed them but it appears the good, already took care of them by serving each of them blocks. Celestina007 (talk) 17:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I hope I served them properly, haha. The real question is, but Celestina I'll leave this to you, how they should be tagged. I think Sockpuppet investigations/Anniebisilolo, given what appears to be paid editing on a relatively narrow set/type of articles. But keep in mind, on Mer-c's talk page I linked a few socks with each other; I couldn't link them to a master, so that's not, strictly speaking, CU-confirmed as one or the other master. Drmies (talk) 17:07, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , hmmm, although (@), was editing in a similar manner to the new socks I doubt he is the master sock here or even affiliated with this new socks. If I were to make an informed guess I’d say the new socks aren’t related to, as he was vehemently promoting a rival of Erica Nlewedim. Whoever created the first Erica Nlewedim article imho may just be the master sock but as the article has been deleted I can’t view the original creator nor can I view who drafted the second and third one. The recent multiple spa’s socks were due to off wiki canvassing on Twitter spearheaded ferociously by this individual @ and his seditious comments “Erica Nlewedim must get an article today at all cost blah blah” type of speeches(most of which he has deleted) (looking him up was pretty simple, same username & all)  This message showed he did have a financial stake in the creation of the article but he definitely wasn’t the one that created the original article nor drafted the second and third one, whoever did, is likely to be the master sock. I’m sure somewhere here the master sock could be discovered. Celestina007 (talk) 18:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for Cancelling Deletion of We Care STL Page
Hi Celestina007,

I hope you are doing well. I just saw your comment on We_Care_STL,_Inc. and I understand your concerns. The nonprofit organization has visitors to its website and a completed and fully functional page and was also recently featured in a news article by STL Magazine (https://www.stlmag.com/health/we-care-stl-health-insurance/), a prominent magazine in St. Louis with high domain authority. Additionally, all the facts in the Wikipedia page are cited by credible sources, including the magazine as well as the Missouri Secretary of State's office. Could you please provide more details as to how this article violates the Wikipedia Terms? The organization has received quite a presence in St. Louis and has already been partnering with various medical clinics, nonprofit organizations and education institutions. Is there anything else you would like to be added to the Wikipedia page for We Care STL to give it more substance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsahinid (talk • contribs) 21:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, unfortunately, links to the company's website aren’t considered a reliable source for substantiating notability claims as they aren’t independent of the organization. Furthermore, an organization or an NGO needs to have in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources. You may checkout WP:NGO, WP:RS, WP:SIGCOV when you can. In summary the organization in question as of now isn’t reliable enough to have a Wikipedia article on it. Furthermore the source you just made reference is too close to the subject of the AFD for it to be considered reliable in this scenario/context. Celestina007 (talk) 22:47, 29 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you Celestina007. The STL Magazine website is independent of the organization but I understand the need to have more coverage as reliable sources. Would I be able to open the article back up later in the future once it is deleted if there is more in-depth coverage of reliable sources?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vsahinid (talk • contribs) 23:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
 * @, yes you can, furthermore, I see you declared a COI, I don’t know in what capacity that is, but if it is a financial stake you need to state so clearly. See WP:PAID & follow what is outlined there. Celestina007 (talk) 23:08, 29 January 2021 (UTC)