User talk:DGG/Archive 194 Mar. 2023

St Giles Centre
Hello, I'm writing to you as you deleted the St Giles Centre page as it was proposed for deletion back in 2007. I think there is enough on the centre and the adjoining bus station to warrant an article. Sources include: Could you please restore it so I can work on improving it? Thanks for your consideration Garuda3 (talk) 20:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Elgin shopping mall celebrates 25 years in pictures
 * Bus move boosts shop hopes
 * Makeover lined up for Elgin bus station
 * Concerns Elgin bus station becoming a no-go area
 * Shutting up shop!
 * St Giles Centre problems worry business community


 * Hello, just to let you know I ended up going to WP:REFUND and the page has now been restored. Garuda3 (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jean-Marcel Goger


The article Jean-Marcel Goger has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Only partially translated for well over a year and clearly copy and pasted with no regard to proper formatting. If an article is wanted for this subject, it would be better started from scratch than trying to fix this"

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 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 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.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

"History of the the Jews in San Francisco" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_the_the_Jews_in_San_Francisco&redirect=no History of the the Jews in San Francisco] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at until a consensus is reached. Randi Moth (talk) 19:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Looking for talk page stalkers
Hello, DGG, it's been good to see your name again recently. I hope things are okay.

I'm here with an invitation to you and your talk page stalkers. The Editing team is working on a new (pre-publication) reminder system. The first version will remind editors to add citations to their content. I'm hoping to find some folks who would put this page on their watchlists: Edit check and then help them out. They're going to have some questions in the coming weeks/months, and I think they would benefit from hearing from people who are reviewing the edits afterwards, in addition to the people who are making the edits. (Folks who are really interested might also put Edit check on their watchlists, too.)

Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 06:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure I've seen you reference this essay
WP:TALKINGSOFASTNOBODYCANHEARYOU. Is my memory that faulty? I can't find it, and it's possible the syntax isn't precise. Did you use this a sort of irony? I seem to remember you used the link to represent bullying behaviors. I'm seeing one such user who seems to be wanting to turn the entire AfD process on its head by using such a technique. BusterD (talk) 11:48, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * I have sometimes used pseudo-links like these as a statement for their own sake, without writing an actual essay. I remember saying something like this, but I can't find it. I think this one  was TALKINGSOMUCH...  -- but I can't find it either. As for the problem, I've commented extensively at AN/I: , and will comment at the RfC also,  But don't confuse the reasonable message, with which I am in agreement -- that Deletion Policy is overbalanced towards deletion, and one step towards rebalancing it would be to require some version of WP:BEFORE --  with the unreasonable way it is being over-expressed.   DGG ( talk ) 23:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, David. I was a debater in school before "talking so fast" became the current style. I feel anything which games the system deserves appropriate response in order to keep the system sound. I appreciate your valid concern about deletion procedures being over-weighted toward one outcome. Thanks for your valuable comments in those forums. Be well. BusterD (talk) 23:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah yes, I had forgotten that context. And so was I, in college--a very valuable experience, especially in facilitating the sort of intercampus experiences only the athletic teams otherwise gave occasion for. But the stimulus is interesting: if I take a turn at NPP, the amount of junk turns me for a while into a deletionist before I catch myself and stop being so unfriendly to all the newcomers. If I take a look at AfD, the number of unwarranted nominations makes me inclined to give a similarly snappy and unjust response to all of them, with the less than rational thought that if I argue against all of them, maybe there's a chance the good ones will make it. Several good inclusionists have run into trouble here falling into such temptation.    DGG ( talk ) 23:58, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Your talk at 16 Years of Wikipedia
Heard your lightning talk just now. I support both the "Radical solutions to promotional paid editing" proposals you announced on notability and restrictions on anon editors around companies newer than 1999 foundation. Are there some written proposals to refer to? - Brianhe (talk) 20:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * there will be--one of the reasons I gave the talk was to get some feedback about just what to propose, and I am already getting some. Watch this space tomorrow.  DGG ( talk ) 20:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I will evangelize to the communities I'm part of, as soon as there's something to show them. - Brianhe (talk) 20:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, DGG! I'd like to hear that too. Link? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Video from the lightning talks is now available via Commons. DGG's lightning talk is the first one, proposal #1 is detailed at 2:15 and #2 at 3:00. - Brianhe (talk) 06:31, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Combative deletion rebuttals

 * In the past, most paid or other promotional editors, when their articles have been deleted, have simply gone away and tried again, generally under another username. For a while now, an increasing number of them have been adopting the practice of arguing. Many admins ignore them; my response unless they are ridiculous altogether is to explain why, sometimes in detail. If they are a good faith but promotional editor who simply has not realized, they usually understand, though it sometimes take a second round of explanation. . If they are professional paid editor with any sense, they realise they;re not going to get anywhere, and go away--and try again usually under another name. Zealots with a unpaid COI  have very often continued to argue, sometimes indefinitely. The best thing for us to do here is the traditional remedy, to ignore them. Some paid editors are now doing the same, hoping to wear people down. The best technique here is to block them. If they show up for the same purpose again, they can and should be summarily blocked as behavioral meatpuppets--though we usually run a checkuser for possibly helpful additional information. The danger, as has become clear, is catching a good faith but imitative editor.   There are only 3 solutions: accept promotionalism, be able to investigate who people actually are, or accept there will be occasional injustice. I will oppose the first as long as I work here, I will continue trying to change consensus to permit the second, and , alas, be forced to accept the third.          ..  .  DGG ( talk ) 03:56, 13 February 2017 (UTC)