User talk:Feminist/Archive 17

Orphaned non-free image File:OneJet logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:OneJet logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:34, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you! WMF Surveys, 18:25, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Adminship
Hi, as I've mentioned elsewhere I'm going through users that I think might have a chance of passing RfA, and seeing if they're interested. You've got a good mix of content to maintenance work, so is this something that interests you? I think being able to view / restore deleted content may be a particularly useful tool in your instance. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:58, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your offer. I can see how having the tools would benefit me + Wikipedia as a whole, but I am not considering adminship right now. feminist (talk) 05:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Qualcomm Snapdragon
Hi Feminist. You and have each participated substantially on this page in the past. You did the GA review almost three years ago now. I proposed some updates to the page here to remove editorialized language, restore the infobox, add new products, correct statements about products that are now discontinued, etc. You may remember I have a COI and thus am not allowed to make potentially controversial changes directly. Since you had some interest in the page before, I thought I'd see if you had the time to take a look at my proposed changes. I've used bold and strikeouts to indicate additions and trims respectively.

My thanks in advance if you do make the time to chip in, take a look, and implement whatever changes you feel are sensible. CorporateM (Talk) 16:22, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Email alert
Hi, have sent you an email regarding a confidential issue. Any help appreciated!Ladybird1003 (talk) 04:38, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, I've read that email. While I don't doubt that the convictions are true, they can reasonably be considered controversial enough to merit not being mentioned in the article. It can go either way, but the way users have added and removed content quickly to/from the article does not help. Even if the proposed additions were OK, I would prefer not to edit the article directly now that I have been involved, per WP:PROXYING. I understand why you would prefer to discuss the issue with me privately, but would you mind if I post some of the email content on wiki for discussion? Perhaps a WP:RFC may help. I'm sorry for your experience, but to be honest, Wikipedia policies and guidelines are often enforced inconsistently. feminist (talk) 08:02, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm...I saw you rollback at Keilana's t/p and your comments over here.Check email. ~ Winged Blades Godric 09:28, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Frankly, that edit does not merit a WP:Rollback. Rollback should only be used to revert obviously problematic edits, which is not the case here. As an administrator, you should have known better and supplied an edit summary. feminist (talk) 12:51, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I am not an administrator and I don't have any qualms as to using roll-back against outside-agenda-driven meat-puppeting BLP violators. ~ Winged Blades Godric  13:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, confused you with another editor. But even if that edit is inappropriate, you should also have supplied an edit summary. feminist (talk) 04:59, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Feminist, sent you another email. Some details are confidential, so cannot post here directly. Thank you! Ladybird1003 (talk) 02:15, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

· Just saw that you have posted my email contents which is fine but can you remove my name and location from the talk page? I know people have already seen it but still not comfortable with my details being public. Also, request confidentiality for certain portions of my second email please. Thanks again.Ladybird1003 (talk) 10:05, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Just as a note, feminist, you really should know better than to publish personal information sent via email (and not otherwise shared on Wikipedia). I know the edit was made in good faith, but do try to be more careful about outing others in the future. Primefac (talk) 11:56, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was careless and should have been much more careful with information sent via email. I was wrong. feminist (talk) 04:48, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@feminist: letting you know that I am retiring from Wikipedia. Thanks for all your help. Ladybird1003 (talk) 14:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey
Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks! WMF Surveys, 01:24, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

'''If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again.''' We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. WMF Surveys, 00:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Bhutanese passport (meme) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bhutanese passport (meme) 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/Bhutanese passport (meme) until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. eh bien mon prince (talk) 10:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Modern sporting rifle
Thanks for closing up the redirect of the Modern Sporting Rifle page. I removed the pejorative name tag as it isn't a pejorative name. I know some editors say it's a euphemistic name but it's also one used in the press. I just wanted to let you know I didn't remove it to be petty or anything like that. Thanks for the cleanup work! Springee (talk) 10:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Yongchang County, Zhelaizhai & Liqian
I have made some changes to the Yongchang County, Zhelaizhai & Liqian pages, the ones about the Roman soldiers in western China. Let me know what you think of the edits so far, and please make some edits if you are interested. Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much
The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,  &mdash; The Transhumanist   08:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please ping me. Thank you. -TT

AWB vital article
Hi Feminist! I am currently adding Vital article templates to art-related articles' talk pages that need them. According to wp:TPL the template should be below Talk header or if the page has it, GA. I caught some of your addings on my watchlist and saw that they all conformed to wp:TPL, with the VA template automatically being placed below talk header. Do you use a custom module for this? If yes, may I borrow it? Thank you, Zingarese (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If it’s very long, you may email me it. Zingarese (talk) 21:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No, I simply turn on Apply general fixes in AWB. feminist (talk) 03:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. But how is your program set up to add the templates? Do you use append/prepend text or find/replace, or which thing? Thanks so much, Zingarese (talk) 03:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I use User:Kingbotk/Plugin and add article assessments manually. However, because is now adding VA templates, I think it's no longer necessary to add these templates with AWB. feminist (talk) 04:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Zingarese (talk) 05:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Your Q29 at the RfA
Maybe I'm missing some context here, but your question is loaded as it assumes the candidate believes the closure was inappropriate. I'm not sure what you're after, but I'd rephrase it.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. feminist (talk) 12:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Much better, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Cats
Why are Domestic short-haired cat and Domestic long-haired cat tagged as vital articles? These could both actually merge into Cat, which is the vital article. The main reason we have these two pages at all is just WP:SUMMARY style to keep the main article tight, and because people are often confused into thinking they are breeds rather than mongrel populations, and we're able to get the distinction across clearly in the lead section of each. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  05:20, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note that there was a recent discussion to list Domestic short-haired cat as a level 4 vital article. If you would like to discuss whether Domestic long-haired cat deserves to be a vital article or not, start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5. feminist (talk) 05:23, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Vital articles
I noticed that you recently tagged a number of primate articles as "vital articles." I am wondering what criteria you are using. For example, why is squirrel monkey a vital article but howler monkey is not? Why is tamarin a vital article but marmoset is not? Thank you. Rlendog (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The articles I tagged are from the list at WP:Vital articles/Level/5. You are welcome to add articles to the list as you like. feminist (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You may want to start with Vital articles/Level/5/Biological and health sciences/Animals. Add any articles you feel should be listed since the list is incomplete and currently under construction. feminist (talk) 16:52, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Could you do this via bot? There's way too many to do it all by hand, and it's filling up watchlists like crazy. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Is there any method for getting consensus on which articles are "vital" or is it just random decisions by individual editors? Rlendog (talk) 15:25, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Disputes on whether an article should be "vital" or not are usually settled on the talk pages. Because the Level 5 vital articles list is still under construction, any editor may add articles that they feel should be part of a list. I expect this to change when the list is close to completion, i.e. additions/removals would require discussion. You can see such a system happening with lower level (i.e. levels 1 to 4) vital articles. feminist (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Barn Owl
Hi Feminist: I notice that you tagged the barn-owl article with the "vital article" template. Are you sure you didn't mean to tag the barn owl article instead? The former is about a biological family (the tytonidae). The latter is about a species and is the one on the vital article list. MeegsC (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm sure, Barn owl is already listed and tagged as a Level 4 (i.e. more important) vital article. feminist (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

IABot bug
In two cases an edit you are responsible for were done incorrectly: and  (duplicate archiveurls). I reported the bug to the bot owner. In the mean time, always check bot edits and report errors to the bot owner - bots are sort of like cruise control on a car, it can still make mistakes it's not totally hands off, and designers depend on user feedback to continually refine and improve. -- Green  C  14:01, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay. feminist (talk) 14:50, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Discussion about The Sun
There is a discussion about retargeting The Sun from Sun to a disambiguation page. Because you have participated in the previous discussion, I am inviting you to participate in the current discussion here - Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_July_25. The editor  whose username is Z0 07:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Your BRFA
Your recent BRFA, Bots/Requests for approval/SSTbot 4, has been approved. Best regards, — xaosflux  Talk 01:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Invitation
Dear Feminist,

You are cordially invited to join the Portals WikiProject.

This is a very active project. We are in the process of completely revamping the entire portal system, and cleaning up the portal namespace. After these are done, we'll be greatly expanding the collections of portals. We have many design discussions going on, and many task types to choose from.

We also have a newsletter, that covers the progress of portal development, and the latest toys.

If you are interested, please feel welcome to sign-up at WikiProject_Portals.

By the way, I'm very interested in what you think of portals. What do you like most about them? What do they lack that they should have? What can't they do, that you would like them to be able to do?

I look forward to your replies. &mdash; The Transhumanist  09:19, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

P.S.: Please me in your reply. Thank you. -TT

Dubious vital article claims on games
How do you justify Cornhole and Sport stacking as "vital article"s? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:12, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * These two articles are on the list at Vital articles/Level/5/Everyday life. If you would like to dispute their inclusion you may start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5. feminist (talk) 15:56, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5 So "vital article" is just a joke then?  I'll stop worrying about it. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:59, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I also do have to wonder what the process is for determining this sort of thing.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:03, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Funnily enough, a small part of my small brain has spent the last few weeks wondering how Midnight (horse) -- ranked as Low-importance by both of the Wikiprojects he's included under -- trotted into a vital article classification. I suppose I'll go and have a look at the talk page mentioned above. (A horse walks into a bar, the barman says Why the long face?) MPS1992 (talk) 17:05, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Category:Male critics of feminism has been nominated for discussion
Category:Male critics of feminism, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. TM 20:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Removing "coeducational" from the lede of college and university articles
You're correct: only a handful of U.S. colleges are still single-sex institutions. I remove that from the lede of articles when I see it, too. ElKevbo (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

updating?/question
Hi, I have question to you. In this edition I have tried updated counts on vital article project page but I am not sure my editions were right. When I checked number of articles in section Miscellaneous, I have noticed that number is fewer. When you have updated number of counts, the number was higher, although as 6 August there were(?) 523 articles in this section. Is this mistake of AWB or my mistake? Or bots' mistake? To by my honestly I do not understand what AWB excatly is. I'm just making sure my editions/updating were right. Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 19:27, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Article counts on that page are updated by User:Bot0612. I'd say the bot is wrong (i.e. you are wrong but it's a common mistake) and I was right, as there are obviously more than 523 articles on that page (e.g. 290 businesspeople + 184 explorers + 250 people in crime is already 724 people). WP:AWB is software that automates editing; it also has a Make list function that I used to count the number of articles on each page. feminist (talk) 03:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. Now I see clearly that it was my omission. Anyway propably we will should updating this page soon, for this discussion. Dawid2009 (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you can update counts again? Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 07:17, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There's no rush. feminist (talk) 06:09, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

What do you think about updating quotas month after month? In Wikipedia talk:Vital articles we have table where is describe how a lot of articles has been corrected for last years. To Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5 we could add table which describe how a lot of articles has been added to the level 5 for last months Dawid2009 (talk) 09:17, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Code Required
What code do I need to use in AutoWikiBrowser to calculate the numbers present in Vital articles/Level/5 page. I am not going to do it in english wikipedia. Instead I need to use it in malayalam wikipedia. If that code cannot be mentioned here, please do sent me an email. Adithyak1997 (talk) 17:24, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't use any special code. I use the Links on page option in Make list, input the page title (e.g. Vital articles/Level/5/People/Writers and journalists), then filter the list to include only mainspace pages. feminist (talk) 06:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Qatar Amiri Flight editing
Your edut is wrong that plane got Handed/Gifted to the Turkish Goverment if you dint belive me go and have a look BuckShot38 (talk) 05:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I know a 747-8 was gifted. This doesn't mean the whole airline was handed over to the Turkish government. feminist (talk) 06:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Korean melon RM closure
There clearly is not 'consensus against the move'. Did you actually read the discussion? There were only two commenters, one of them supported a move to the scientific name, which I supported, and one was arguing about what the scientific name was. Clearly the correct response was to relist for more input, and I will ask that you do this. If you do not, I will file a move review. RGloucester — ☎ 18:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
 * There were not two commenters but five. You disappeared three of them by first retracting the proposal, then reinstating it a whopping 73 minutes later. You somehow forgot to notify the editors whose contributions you thereby removed, although you did go to other editors' talk pages in the matter. Damvile (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I infringed on your Austrian-related articles territory. I'll do better next time. Can we dispense with the absurdities and focus on the god-damned article title criteria? No? We'd rather have politics, politics...never again will I edit one of your articles, so can you just read the proposal as a neutral observer? No? Why am I wasting my time on this god-forsaken hell-hole....? RGloucester  — ☎ 14:05, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

vital articles
Hi, Do you can check my changes here and later add them to Wikipedia space in right technical way (I do not know ENwiki's cod because of I am redaktor from PLwiki). Alpine Snowboarding, Alpine Skiing and Corss-country skiing should be certainly in the same category. Also every tabletop game should be in tabletop games category. It would be very valuable for our project. Because of when we will make new selctions by nomination and votings... People will be confused if seleciton is broken from start point/position and suggestions for new sections such like specific sports etc. would be very hard to disscussion (too many explainings these complicated things at talk page) regards. Dawid2009 (talk) 21:39, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
 * What do you think about new section called: "Surface Water Sports" (water sport section+ surfing section + maybe something else?). In my opinion we should have this section else. Dawid2009 (talk) 21:00, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Personally I don't have an issue with it and I think no discussion is needed, but if you want to discuss this, better do so at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5. feminist (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Boycott Eurovision 2019
Hi, I made an article that I saw its necessary to be created because it has been presented a lot in the news. You redirect it to Eurovision Song Contest 2019 article saying POV "nightmare"! Do you really have a legit reason to redirect an article that as I mentioned very well represented in the news? . Thank you. SharabSalam (talk) 13:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Calls for a boycott of Eurovision 2019 have been sufficiently covered in the article for the event. There is no need for a separate article, in fact a separate article would be harmful as it presents a particular viewpoint, violating WP:NPOV. You may also want to take a look at WP:NOTNEWS. feminist (talk) 13:49, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

AfD
Hello Femenist: I am requesting that you please undo your closure of Articles for deletion/Dick Bros Record Company and reinstate the AfD template to the article. With only one !vote following my nomination, I feel that this should be WP:RELISTed, rather than abruptly closed. Sorry, but also, your closure comes across as a WP:SUPERVOTE. North America1000 14:14, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I do not consider my closure to be controversial. Both you (the nominator) and the other commenter agreed that a redirect would be appropriate, and considering that blanking and redirecting a non-WP:N article is common practice that generally does not require discussion, a "redirect" closure reflects the consensus between all participants at the AfD. Per WP:NOQUORUM there is no minimum participation required for uncontroversial cases. But sure, I'll let someone else close it. feminist (talk) 14:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I actually may be for deletion, and then potential redirection after deletion. North America1000 14:33, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Non-admin move closure at Crimean Bridge (Crimea)
I see that you performed a non-admin move closure at Crimean Bridge (Crimea). Your closure read: "The result of the move request was: move. General consensus to move." This gives the impression that you simply counted the number of editors who supported the move (5), and the number who opposed it (2), and took no account of policy reasons given. Is this impression correct?-- Toddy1 (talk) 09:42, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No. I consider the supporting arguments to be generally stronger. And in cases where the arguments on both sides are of equal strength, numerical consensus applies. feminist (talk) 09:54, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Then please could you make this clear by amending your closure. The bridge currently under construction is a contentious issue.  One editor got a topic ban for his edits on it a few weeks ago.  With a bit of luck, the bridge will collapse this winter, and in a few years time everyone one will have forgotten it.--  Toddy1 (talk) 11:30, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I have amended my closure to add an explanation. If the bridge does turn out to be a flash-in-the-pan bit of history then a new RM can always be started. feminist (talk) 13:10, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Move review for Nanjing Massacre
An editor has asked for a Move review of Nanjing Massacre. Because you were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. STSC (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

NAC at Articles for deletion/Karen Paba
Hi, I did not see a consensus for keeping. Would you mind undoing the close, and either relisting the discussion or letting an admin close it? --K.e.coffman (talk) 17:01, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Done, although I expect an admin closure to have the same result. feminist (talk) 14:38, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I've closed it as "keep" too, giving a rationale why. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:42, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Proseline
Hello, F. When you said Martin Garrix has proseline issues that need to be resolved before a GA nom, were you referring to, for example, "On 23 February 2018, Martin Garrix released his second collaboration" at the start of every paragraph? What do you recommend I do to fix that? Is the format improper or there need to be more sentences? Flooded  with them hundreds 16:11, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:Proseline. feminist (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've read that but I don't see how the article doesn't pass the criteria? <u style="font:1.1em/1em Arial Black"><u style="color:#7f2ed1">Flooded <u style="color:#bfa6d8"> with them <u style="color:#7f2ed1">hundreds  16:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am exactly referring to the "On [date], Martin" sentences, these are improper and the sentences should be rephrased to reduce the emphasis on the date. feminist (talk) 16:33, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Non-admin closures of RfC
Greetings. I noticed you recently closed the RfC on nominatons in the Brett Kavanaugh article. I understand that you're not a Wikipedia administrator. Let me suggest the inclusion of the usual template indicating that yours is a non-admin closure. It does not affect the validity of the closure but, per standard practice, provides clarity to the reader. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 12:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * My experience is that the template is not typically expected for non-admin closures of RfC discussions. If you want to add it I won't stop you from doing so, but I don't find it necessary. feminist (talk) 12:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

VA5 cities and urban pop
I went out and got the urban population of most world nations. I can send you it if you want. I may want to revise my quota proposal based on that. p b  p  15:16, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, feel free to send it to me. IMO, quotas should serve simply as guidelines and flexibility should be allowed (e.g. plus-or-minus ~15% of quota) because I consider making a list based on a fixed number of cities for a country to be counter-intuitive. feminist (talk) 18:37, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

DYK for Party for One
Vanamonde (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Unusual RfD closure
you closed an RfD as "restore article" which is very unusual given three users voted delete and three voted restore article. That should be a no consensus and the redirect left alone. Legacypac (talk) 05:17, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTVOTE notwithstanding, the nominator has stated that the nomination was a mistake, and the only reason he did not withdraw the nomination was that someone else had already commented on it. Therefore, only two editors support deletion via the RfD process. I've also taken into account the context of the "restore article" votes: the argument was not that deletion is inappropriate, but that it should be handled via the AfD process, not RfD. You are free to nominate this article for AfD. feminist (talk) 05:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The Blade of the Northern Lights evidently meant to nominate a redirect that pointed at the List redirect (easy to do when using Teinkle) but they specifically said they support deletion of the List redirect. I'm seeking the maintenance of the status que List redirect which is where we would be if the nomination had not been made by mistake. Legacypac (talk) 05:40, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I consider there to be sufficient consensus that AfD is the place for a deletion discussion in this case. The point that RfD should not be used for "proxy deletion" of an article has not been refuted by editors who commented delete. No case has been presented that deletion at AfD would be inappropriate as opposed to deletion at RfD.
 * If anything, there is a clear consensus that the status quo is inappropriate. Editors either want the redirect to be deleted, or the article to be restored. Editors who want the redirect to be deleted can still create or comment on an AfD discussion. The discussion closer has the discretion to perform a closure that best satisfies the intentions of editors who commented at the discussion. feminist (talk) 05:48, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You may not supervote. Ping User:The Blade of the Northern Lights as their position was misrepresented here. Legacypac (talk) 05:54, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 18
I have initiated a discussion specifically about the redirect at Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 18. Cheers! bd2412 T 16:09, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

mistakes on vital article list
I have noticed that we have some mistakes at templates and other things on the VA. Mark Twain has template vital article-level 3 although actually he is at the level 4. Geoffrey Chaucer have template vital article-level 4 and he is not listed at the level 3 but at the level 4 he is marked as "level 3". These issues are in other sections at 1-5 levels as well because of people when archive discuss not always mark these things in every level. Hansel and Gretel recently have been have removed while they were not on on the list! If you check archives you find that we removed them two times. First time in 2016 in right way and this year we have started nomination while actually they should not be on the level 4 already. Is this possible to correct these issues by your bot? Cheers. Dawid2009 (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I think 's bot can handle these issues. I only started tagging pages using AWB because it seemed he was no longer operating his bot. You would have better luck asking her on that. feminist (talk) 16:09, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Between a rock and a hard place
You shouldn't close an RfD with an outcome that redirects a page to itself. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 17:50, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reminder. Fixed. feminist (talk) 17:53, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Gamergate (disambiguation) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Gamergate (disambiguation) 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/Gamergate (disambiguation) 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. w umbolo  ^^^  18:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Featured portal candidates listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Featured portal candidates. Since you had some involvement with the Featured portal candidates redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. funplussmart (talk) 22:01, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposed renaming of Nantucket
Hi, please be advised that there is a proposal to move the Nantucket article back to "Nantucket, Massachusetts" at Talk:Nantucket. Note that the current name was determined by consensus a year ago at Talk:Nantucket. HopsonRoad (talk) 00:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Atheism in Turkey
Hello, Feminist,

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username Hughesdarren and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I’ve proposed an article that you started, Atheism in Turkey, for deletion because it meets one of the relevant criterion.The particular issue can be located in the notice, that is now-visible at the top of the article.

If you wish to prevent the deletion:


 * 1) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit Edit the page]
 * 2) Remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) Click   button.

But, please remember to explain why you think the article should be kept on the article's talk page and improve the page to address the raised issues. Otherwise, it may be deleted later by other means.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Hughesdarren (talk) 03:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Notice
In response to your request for arbitration, the Arbitration Committee has determined that arbitration is not required at this stage. While the Committee takes community concerns about wheel-warring seriously, they agree that in this instance the issue has already been resolved by the parties, and does not require further examination. For the Arbitration Committee, Bradv 🍁  15:19, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Seriously?
You want a deletion review for a redirect from a title with the definite article and a mis-spelling, just because people didn't have long enough to say the obvious? That is the most absurd waste of Wikipedia project resources I have seen this year. Guy (Help!) 08:06, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Halvad railway station
Closure of this topic, deletion of this particular railway station article was correct. I would like to broach the topic in larger terms. I assert that many of India's 8,500 railway stations are not notable, in a general sense or by WP rules. There are hundreds of stub articles and railway articles with hundreds more red-links. An article about a station with ground-level platforms and two database references to support the article is simply not useful to a reader. I understand that any discussion start with detail on the talk page. Here is an example that has gotten no response.: Talk:Sanjan railway station. What is the logical next step for this discussion, Third-party, RfC, or take it up with the project? Rhadow (talk) 08:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think an RfC would be the best option, preferably held at a relevant WikiProject. I agree that starting a discussion on any of the railway station articles concerned is unlikely to garner any response. There is no need to start any discussion on an article talk page, especially if the article gets few edits or views, because after all the purpose of a discussion is to canvass opinions. feminist (talk) 14:12, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I took your advice.  Here is the result: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains. Rhadow (talk) 16:56, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Email from Amorymeltzer
Not urgent. ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 20:31, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Odd closure". Thank you. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:53, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Transsion Holdings
Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Bad faith edit
I've almost gotten to a point of openly being cynical about the intentions of other users on this site. Regarding your recent deletion campaign, I don't understand. A lot of these senators have sections in the political positions portions of their articles with the subheading of "Abortion". If I cannot put a vote relating to that topic there, what else can go? And as far as it being "not particularly relevant" is claimed, how does that apply to Doug Jones? He was literally one of only three members of his entire party in that chamber that voted that way. There's even a section on the Joe Manchin article for such votes. So when I see that revert in particular, I can't conceive of your input being anything other than trying to erase regardless of circumstance. - Informant16 February 27, 2019 —Preceding undated comment added 20:50, February 27, 2019‎
 * if you're looking for a genuine answer to this question, you may want to rename this section. I agree with Feminist's edits, and don't consider them bad faith at all. Bradv 🍁  21:12, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, I may have been too hasty in performing my reverts, but out of all those additions maybe a few of them are suitable for inclusion. I agree that Doug Jones voting differently from other Democratic Party senators is notable enough, and I have reinstated your edit. A problem with this vote is that it's likely to be irrelevant quickly. Bills attempting to impose or reduce restrictions on abortion rights are proposed all the time and I just can't see how this bill is particularly noteworthy. feminist (talk) 09:11, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

RfA?
Hi there,

I've just been going through the most recent archived set of RfA candidate polls, and I spotted that you were one of the few to get a high average mark. A 2 minute look shows that you've also done more stuff in the areas mentioned - I was wondering if you were still thinking of going for the mop? Nosebagbear (talk) 21:12, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * -- Tavix ( talk ) 13:53, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Abelmoschus Esculentus' User Scripts
Dear all. Recently, our community lost a dedicated user,. Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of Abelmoschus Esculentus' scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.

If you have any questions, please reach out and talk to me. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Nao Tōyama
Hello and thank you for promoting my DYK nomination. However, as you can see from the discussion, while the article is approved, the hook was not, and there were issues on which hook was to be promoted, and if it should be in the image slot at all. It would have been nice if you could have consulted first before promotion, to see what can be done. If possible, maybe you can either revert the promotion and/or leave Yoninah a message first? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I consider the hook to be sufficiently interesting, but I've made the changes. I don't see any reason why this shouldn't be in the image slot. Do you have any ideas? feminist (talk) 11:16, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Reliable sources/Noticeboard
Ignore the notice of an revert. I misclicked because of a slow screen fresh. Sorry. Meters (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation
Hello

Our team at the Wikimedia Foundation is working on a project to improve the ease-of-use and productivity of wiki talk pages. As a Teahouse host, I can imagine you’ve run into challenges explaining talk pages to first-time participants.

We want all contributors to be able to talk to each other on the wikis – to ask questions, to resolve differences, to organize projects and to make decisions. Communication is essential for the depth and quality of our content, and the health of our communities. We're currently leading a global consultation on how to improve talk pages, and we're looking for people that can report on their experiences using (or helping other people to use) wiki talk pages. We'd like to invite you to participate in the consultation, and invite new users to join too.

We thank you in advance for your participation and your help.

Trizek (WMF), 08:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please participate to the talk pages consultation - link update
The previous message about the talk pages consultation has a broken link.

The correct link has been misinterpreted by the MassMessage tool. Please use the following link: Wikipedia:Talk pages consultation 2019.

Sorry for the inconvenience, Trizek (WMF), 08:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Looking for help
Hi,

I was looking for some small help.Recently I created a new article en:Kithaab i.e. es:Kithaab-a play about women rights issues- which has been copy edited and is ready for translation in various languages.

Looking for your possible help in translating the article en:Kithaab es:Kithaab to your language zh: Wikipedia. If you are unable to spare time yourself then may be you like to refer the same to some other translator to get it translated in their own respective languages.

Thanking you, with warm regards

Bookku (talk) 09:24, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sophia Somajo
Hello! Your submission of Sophia Somajo at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:43, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/The Great Migration: Journey to the North
Hi, since both and I were involved with this nomination, could you promote it to prep? Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 12:54, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. feminist (talk) 13:04, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 13:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Apple Inc.
Hello ,

You've been identified either as a previous member of the project, an active editor on Apple related pages, a bearer of Apple related userboxes, or just a hoopy frood.

WikiProject Apple Inc. has unexpectedly quit, because an error type "unknown" occured. Editors must restart it! If you are interested, read the project page and sign up as a member. There's something for everyone to do, such as welcoming, sourcing, writing, copy editing, gnoming, proofreading, or feedback — but no pressure. Do what you do, but let's coordinate and stay in touch.

See the full welcome message on the talk page, or join the new IRC channel on irc.freenode.net named. Please join, speak, and idle, and someone will read and reply.

Please spread the word, and join or unsubscribe at the subscription page.
 * RhinosF1(chat) (status)(contribs) and Smuckola on behalf of WikiProject Apple Inc. - Delivered 15:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Adoption of DYK nomination for Government Employee Fair Treatment Act
Thank you for adopting the nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Government Employee Fair Treatment Act. Also, thank you for ALT1. I noted one possible concern on the nomination page about paraphrasing, and the possibility for a photo hook. Thank again! Flibirigit (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Raja Koduri
Hello! Your submission of Raja Koduri at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 21:11, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Sophia Somajo
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

DYK help
Thanks for your help in adopting some DYK nominations. It is much appreciated. If you have some time, I need some help with Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Lindblad. I'm struggling with this one. A new set of ideas would help! Thanks. Flibirigit (talk) 16:35, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'm usually terrible with hooks. feminist (talk) 02:23, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/La Région Centrale
Feminist, the QPQ that you requested in your review has just been provided. Please stop by when you get the chance. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Thessaloniki Airport Makedonia
Hi, quick notice for a page that was speedily moved a while ago by you, after a talk page request. I have requested it moved again and awaiting comments. In the summary you had mentioned it an uncontroversial move, but unfortunately (in the context of the Macedonia Naming Dispute) it is anything but that. Currently made the news in Greece ("Tsipras’s reference to Thessaloniki airport by its former name, Micra, instead of Makedonia – its name since 1993 – raised eyebrows in Greece, with many reports wondering whether he did so intentionally").

Check this discussion in arbitration for more if it interests you Naming_conventions_(Macedonia)/2019_RFC

Many thanks for your time! Shadow mor ph ^"^ 09:18, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Justice Medley listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Justice Medley. Since you had some involvement with the Justice Medley redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Richhoncho (talk) 12:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Sword and Scale
Hi Feminist. Not sure if you remember Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 260, but you seemed to be of the opinion that mamamia.com wasn't reliable enough for this type of BLP content per WP:BLPSOURCES. Anyway, someone has recently been trying to add content using that particular mamamia article as a source once again. Would you mind taking a peek to see if anything has possibly changed with respect to both the source and the content being supported by it just to make sure I'm not being unnecessarily cautious here by removing it? -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with your removal. The problem is that Hannah Blackiston, the author of that particular article, has only published two articles on the site, and the site doesn't mention anything about her, so we don't know if that article is reliable. feminist (talk) 11:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Fight the New Drug


A tag has been placed on Fight the New Drug requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:38, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I've never seen the deleted version of the article (so this literally cannot be a repost of deleted material), but if it were purely POV-pushing, my article would certainly not meet G4. Much of it is negative. feminist (talk) 07:41, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Then you should press the "contest this speedy deletion" button. The previous article did include criticism at a certain point, but failed to show WP:N. Tgeorgescu (talk) 07:47, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I am confident that my article will not be deleted under G4. The article shows WP:N clearly with the Atlantic, Daily Beast and Deseret sources which all cover the subject in depth. In addition, I've also found more sources in researching for this topic, which I haven't used. I am confident that this would survive a possible AfD. feminist (talk) 07:51, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I am sorry that you worked for nothing. Generally, a request should be submitted for the restoration of a deleted article, summarily presenting the sources which make it notable. Also, you should not take the word "repost" in a narrow meaning, it simply means recreating and article without following due procedures. Also, it is not clear to me your purpose: bash them or promote them, but that is in the end irrelevant, since we're an encyclopedia, not a PR outlet. Tgeorgescu (talk) 13:13, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Please WP:AGF. I am aware of the relevant policies and guidelines, thank you very much. A request is unnecessary as long as the newly created article does not suffer from the same problems that led to the previous deletion. My purpose of creating this article is clear: I was looking up this topic, found coverage in a number of sources but no Wikipedia article, so I created it. feminist (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi – I saw this discussion turn up on my watchlist, and skimmed through both versions of the article - the one which was deleted as a result of AfD and the latest version created by Feminist that was later nominated for speedy deletion under WP:CSD. Based on a cursory review, it *does not* seem that the new version was substantively similar to to the old one (which was subject to the AfD), and at the same time the latest version asserted notability through the presentation of valid sources. This does not, in and of itself, establish notability, but I think it entitles you to make a case to the deleting administrator for reconsidering their decision. If you like, I can send you the two deleted versions of the article via email. — Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  13:56, 13 April 2019 (UTC)  FYI. Thought I'd give you a heads-up regarding this discussion. — Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  14:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The article previously had a long and troubled history, so it is hard to say that the later deleted version does not resemble the earlier deleted version, at some point in its history. There was criticism there, but it was removed due to the petty nature of its sources (local newspapers, journals written by university students, blogs or similar). Anyway, the gist is this: recovery has to be properly demanded, otherwise everyone and his dog could overturn with impunity deletion decisions. If I had to decide, I would lower the threshold for notability, since this way there would be more information about otherwise unknown people and organizations, which comes handy for everyone who seeks reliable information upon less known topics. But rules and decisions have to be obeyed. Tgeorgescu (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no rule that says that an article cannot be re-created when the situation merits it. For your reference, the old version of the article was not deleted with prejudice to its re-creation. I have seen the previous version and compared it with the one feminist created. Both versions are substantively different, and the sources included in feminist's version also assert notability which means that to delete the article you need to take it through the regular AfD process. — Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  15:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, feminist's sources aren't new. They were included in the previous version, and then removed from it as unsatisfactory. There were heated debates in the talk page of the previous version. Tgeorgescu (talk) 15:53, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Nearly Headless, for some reason I did not get notified of your ping. You have my full permission to do whatever you like with the article. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:02, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the response, RHworth. Since feminist has chosen to take this to WP:DRV, I am content with letting it run its course there. Also, as Tgeorgescu correctly points out, almost all of the sources used by feminist had been discussed on the talk page of the article previously. This context will have to be considered by the editors commenting on the DRV. —  Nearly Headless Nick   {c}  20:08, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Portal:Halo
Portal:Halo, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Halo& and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Halo during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 08:57, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of NationBuilder


A tag has been placed on NationBuilder, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. (See section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Me-123567-Me (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Dirk Beetstra T C 08:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Atheist YouTubers has been nominated for discussion
Category:Atheist YouTubers, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 08:10, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Red-rumped parrot
Could you Featured picture candidates/Red-rumped parrot for me? As the nominator, I obviously can't do it. Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 11:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * How is the procedure different for a multi-image nomination such as this one? It seems like I can't use a script. feminist (talk) 13:07, 28 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's completely manual. But it would be enough if you do step 1, 7 & 8 from Featured picture candidates, than I can do the others. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:45, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

McKinsey
Thanks for fixing McKinsey, I didn't realize that there had been a discussion about primary topic. Since there's still a need for disambiguation, I have moved the entries to McKinsey (disambiguation) (which no longer needs to redirect to McKinsey).


 * Why have you redirected McKinsey (disambiguation) to a surname page? These are fundamentally different things. Readers interested in the surname will go to McKinsey (surname) and readers who are trying to figure out which McKinsey-related article they are looking for can go to the disambiguation page. Leschnei (talk) 14:28, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * It's mainly for convenience. I know they are two different things, but readers looking for other topics known as McKinsey can do so on the surname page. Alternatively, I can move McKinsey (surname) to McKinsey (disambiguation) and reformat it to a disambiguation page with a Surname section containing people with the surname McKinsey. feminist (talk) 15:31, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My personal preference is to keep disambiguation and anthroponymy pages separate, since MOS:DABNAME states that people should only be included on single name disambiguation pages if they are widely known by that single name. I realize that many editors don't agree but I continue to swim upstream. More practically speaking, if the pages must be combined, it would probably be less controversial to have the disambiguation McKinsey (disambiguation) and make McKinsey (surname) the redirect. Leschnei (talk) 17:58, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I've performed the move and reformatted the surname page into a disambiguation page. feminist (talk) 05:26, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

SOLRAD 2 DYK
Thank you for the vote of confidence! :) --Neopeius (talk) 19:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Rama Arbitration Case
You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 10, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Arbitration/Requests/Case/Rama/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:41, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Previous listing as a party
My apologies for the above section stating that you are a party. You are not, I made a mistake with the template. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Raja Koduri
— Maile (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Fight the New Drug
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

CrowdStrike ad template
Hi! Thank you again for helping with my COI edit requests for CrowdStrike last month. I wanted to check in on the template on that article – do you have any thoughts on next steps I should take to address it? Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Keyboards
When you retargetted to Keyboard, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS.

The change broke 2,705 links, which will have to be fixed by hand. Narky Blert (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Basic economy
feminist (talk) 02:03, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Kiwi Farms


A tag has been placed on Kiwi Farms requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

"BLP violations, non notable"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 24.244.23.75 (talk) 04:43, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Ctrl-left listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ctrl-left. Since you had some involvement with the Ctrl-left redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Nowak Kowalski (talk) 05:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review for George Toogood Smith
An editor has asked for a deletion review of George Toogood Smith. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. &mdash; Chowbok  ☠  16:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Me!
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Update about a script you use
Hi Feminist. I'm DannyS712 (talk), and I wanted to send you a warning about a change I am making to a script, User:DannyS712/DiscussionCloser, that you currently import. If you are an administrator, feel free to ignore this message. For non-administrators, you should be advised that I am removing the script's automatic addition of nac to your closes. If you have relied on this to mark such closes for you, please remember to add nac yourself. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk)

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 01:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk)

European Parliament election, 2019 (Untied Kingdom) listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect European Parliament election, 2019 (Untied Kingdom). Since you had some involvement with the European Parliament election, 2019 (Untied Kingdom) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 04:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Help?
Hi .. can you please take another look here, and perhaps help us get this across the finish line with a view given the updated discussion? Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Amy_Wax --2604:2000:E010:1100:C975:B86:C1B6:2636 (talk) 23:47, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Lists of concert tours for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lists of concert tours 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/Lists of concert tours 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. Beland (talk) 19:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 15
Hi, can you back out of your close of ABC 7 News and relist? When researching what is normally done in this situation, I found this discussion in response to a deleted PROD at ABC7. I didn't have time to respond because you had closed it in the interim. -- Tavix ( talk ) 15:39, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!
<div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

美國 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 美國. Since you had some involvement with the 美國 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 50.248.234.77 (talk) 00:04, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ocean One
Hello! Your submission of Ocean One at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:24, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Personal life of Marilyn Monroe listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Personal life of Marilyn Monroe. Since you had some involvement with the Personal life of Marilyn Monroe redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. — the Man in Question (in question)  21:12, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Kyoto Animation arson attack
Yogwi21 (talk) 00:32, 20 July 2019 (UTC)