User talk:Duffbeerforme/Archive 11

Nomination of Max & Bianca for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Max & Bianca is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Max & Bianca until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Allied45 (talk) 09:02, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Love Is a Dog: Revision history
Friendly reminder, some one forgot to sign.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Tag removal request for the page - Richard Ludlow
Hi Duffbeerforme,

This is regarding the page Richard Ludlow. I have removed the promotional content on his page via an edit request on his talk page. I request you to please remove the notability tag on his page as now the article meets WP:ANYBIO, the person has received a well-known and significant award or honor. He also meets WP:CREATIVE, the person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work.

Taking these into consideration, I request you to please remove the notability tag on the page. Thanking you.

PANGIfroth (talk) 21:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hell no. More at that talk page. duffbeerforme (talk) 05:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Hamiltonstone
Hi there. You left me a note at my user page, about my username. I have read wp:CORPNAME. I'm not clear why you think there's an issue. Can you explain in more detail? hamiltonstone (talk) 13:04, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Christopher Kaelin
No personal relationship exists between any editor on the article. your application of random templates is unwarranted and presented with no evidence. The opinion about a properly referenced primary sourced block-quote is discussed on the talk page and has no consensus for removal. It is also not policy. Please stop this activity. I will look for the NPOV that you have called out.

I hope to work with you on the project under different circumstances soon. All my best User:Lightburst 15:03, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
 * This reply proves Lightburst is a liar. Lightburst claimed that he had taken a personal photograph of said individual at their wedding while above he claimed no have no personal relationship. Lying about taking that photo showed it was yet another copyright violation by Lightburst, complete with a false claim of ownership of someone else's work. To hide his latest violation Lightburst proceeded to rename his account, make false accusations of outing and slander others whilst giving them no avenue of redress. He also did the equivalent of taking his bat and ball and going home. The above article no longer exists because after rudely and aggressively claiming clear notability of said subject he proceeded to call himself a liar and nominated the article for deletion on the grounds of non notability. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:27, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Deletion of Matt William Knowles
Theos1919 (talk) 06:24, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

You deleted this page I created. Can you check this again? There are many sources for this and it was edited by several different users, not just the one who approved it. The page has has problems in the past, but I think it was up to standard.
 * Theos1919. Late reply. As you had already seen before making this post I have not deleted that page (and I lack the power to do so). I moved it, your editing after that move shows you already know that. The better question. Why did I move it? The draft was approved by a sockpuppet. That in itself is good reason to reverse. Taking into account the history around this individual of sockpuppets and paid spamming makes it a slam dunk. Wait until someone independent moves it back, but given the history that may take longer than usual. Karma to whoever has been paying. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:34, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Sara West for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sara West is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Sara West until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – Dave | Davey 2010 Talk 20:14, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hint for the future before nominating a film actress for afd. BEFORE. Check the obvious place. imdb. that would have made it very clear she has been in more than just one film. Before nominating any individual, try googleing their name, in this case it would have made it clear to you she had been in more than one film. For any article, check the existing references, in this case it would have made it clear to you she had been in more than one film. Simple really. Instead of expecting others to do all the work. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Your comment on Articles for deletion/Andrez Bergen
The AFD is closed but your logic is flawed: The comment  is a footnote for WP:NSONG, not WP:MUSICBIO.

Using your flawed interpretation of that footnote, just having one of their works reviewed would make any artist notable. If that were the case, every musician, backup singer, sound engineer and producer who participated in recording song or album that was reviewed would be notable. They are not.

Your opinion carried the AFD. Oh well. Toddst1 (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alice Keohavong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page All Saints ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Alice_Keohavong check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Alice_Keohavong?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:44, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Biting the newcomers - i.e. Snow King Mountain
If you haven't had the pleasure - speedy deletions burn. They take the entire collaboration and consensus model of Wikipedia and throw it in the dumpster, and then lock the lid. I presently have about 20 tabs open on my screen for this article and I've spent the last week reading through this seemingly endless history. These are some of the best historical sources I've come across for a subject Snow King Mountain, and enough that I've considered writing a book about it. I stumbled on the article and found a godawful promotional mess copy pasted straight from the resorts pages on "activities" etc. I went through claims line-by-line and deleted, while trying to keep something meaningful where I could. I saved the history section for last because this required the most amount of research to evaluate and rewrite. My work on the article, though significant, begins mere days ago. The problematic content on this article has sat on the page for around five years. The CSD tags which were applied to this article apply to specific edits, but instead of taking the time to consider that, the entire last five years of edits were deleted and and hidden (and the page was functionally blanked), punishing me in the process and throwing days of my life in the garbage. Like so many others, this may be the turning point for me where I decide that Wikipedia is captive to it's 1,000 admin and I'm delusional to believe that outsiders could ever meaningfully participate without devoting valuable time every day to political and structural games and alliances. (anecdotally: someone is nominated to admin right now who has a decade of history and over 10,000 edits and yet has only tried to navigate the perils of page creation a handful of times.) Like many others they arrive at their high tower of edits by using bots and gaming technical edits to accomplish as many as 400 edits a day while adding little to Wikipedia but IMDB copy-paste. Should I just delete my account? WP:DONTDEMOLISH WP:DONTBITE Luke Kindred (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Luke Kindred has posted this same text to the talk pages of four editors. JBW (talk) Formerly known as JamesBWatson 20:08, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 18
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Indigenous Music Awards, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page No Fixed Address ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/National_Indigenous_Music_Awards check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/National_Indigenous_Music_Awards?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Your changes to Novus Summit
Hi there, Duffbeerforme. You recently reversed my contribution to this page. Acknowledging my contribution was paid, can you please expand on the notes you made, namely "revert paid pr. promotional, undue, sources that don't verify content", and explain why you deleted the entire contribution? Many of the sources came directly from the UN.

Thanks. Streetways (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Paul Atherton
You've reinstated the COI & Third Party on this article, I deleted, as the page has been radically edited by HouseOfChange with small participation from myself & verified as notable by can you please explain what else is required to correct? Itsallnewtome (talk) 15:30, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Uh oh....
Er, I just did this. It looked so legitimate! Can we add references to show it is also scam of some kind? (if it is a scam, which I am actually not entirely certain it is not although the refs here seem to check out). A loose necktie (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

MVA33 reverts
You have been reverting a lot of work by with the rational "revert MVA33". For me this is not an adequate edit summary to explain WHY you are reverting these edits, which are not blatantly disruptive and I cannot even tell what is "wrong" about them. Care to explain your actions a little bit more, for those playing along at home? Elizium23 (talk) 05:29, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Will do. FYI MVA33 is a disruptive editor who is posting a lot of original research. This kid has posted an autobio multiple times, all since deleted, writes about and promotes family and fails to provide adequate verification. duffbeerforme (talk) 05:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Makes a lot of sense. Carry on, good man! Elizium23 (talk) 05:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Tag removal requests for the page - Brian Metcalf
Hi Duffbeerforme,

This is regarding the page Brian Metcalf. Why have you added several tags COI, notability and autobiography to this page? There is nothing autobiographical nor do I have a close relationship with the subject as it is all information taken from major press releases. Also, he has won a number of major awards in his field such as two Platinum Remi Awards and his films have been release to wide audiences around the world along with playing in major festivals. His page has been up for many years without issue. Kellyannasmith —Preceding undated comment added 05:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you.PKIhistory (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Akin (band)


The article Akin (band) has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Appears to fail WP:NBAND."

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. The SandDoctor Talk 03:03, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ARIA nomination satisfies WP:NBAND#8. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:21, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Deletion tagging
Hello, Duffbeerforme,

Just a reminder that when you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/CFD/TFD, etc.), you should place a notice about this tagging on the talk page of the page creator. If you use Twinkle to tag pages, it will automatically post a notice for you once you set up your Twinkle preferences. Without a talk page notice, page creators have no way to know what happened to their deleted articles as they have no access to their deleted contributions. Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 22:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I do sometimes forget but for the most part there is reasons for not leaving a notice. I am not here to help spammers keep their adverts, not here to help socks. not wasting time informing editors that have not been here for years. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:46, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

G11 tags
Hi Duffbeerforme -- Please don't request deletion G11 with the edit summary "wikipedia is not an advertising brochure"; your summary should make it clear that deletion has been requested. I've declined two of your requests (Binder Park Zoo & Camp Manitou-Lin); G11 is only for the worst cases where there is no text that isn't pure advert, and not for articles on (possibly) notable topics where a bit of clean up could fix the problem. It generally should not be used for long-standing articles, for which Articles for deletion is preferred. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:49, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

ANI
Just a formality, but thought you might like to know you were mentioned at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 16:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Just a head up related to this, that you were mentioned in this edit. It’s obviously spurious but the IP is blocked regardless. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Emma Swift for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Emma Swift is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Emma Swift until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  DGG ( talk ) 10:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Elizabeth Best for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elizabeth Best is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Elizabeth Best until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Also, I would like to apoligize for not informing you earlier when I nominated the article for deletion.  Just ' i ' yaya  08:01, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Greylevel tagged for speedy deletion
Thank you for your efforts in patrolling new pages. I wanted to let you know that I have applied a speedy deletion tag to the article Greylevel, which you proposed for deletion, because I believe it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion; in the future, please tag blatantly inappropriate pages for speedy deletion first if they meet the criteria. I have left the prod tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks!  Spurrious Correlation  06:33, 3 September 2021 (UTC)