User talk:GB fan/Archive 16

Inquiry on Wiki.gg page deletion
Heya there GB fan, I browsing through and noticed that the page had been deleted quite a while ago, I was just wondering if you could clarify the deletion reason for me please? specifically "which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject", also what would you have improved with the page and changed etc? And is it possible that I could have the deleted pages content sent here, added to my Sandbox or have the page undeleted and moved to a Draft/Sandbox location to be worked on by someone like me or anyone else interested in Wiki.gg please? Thanks! Aeyeu (talk) 07:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * , I have restored and moved to Draft:Wiki.gg. ~ GB fan 22:07, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey thanks for that, could you also possibly do the same for the page Freedom Games please? Aeyeu (talk) 02:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , I will not do that one. I wasn't the last admin to delete it and it was last deleted after an AFD.  You should approach the admin that close the AFD.  ~ GB fan 11:43, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Apology
Sorry for using the wrong rd code. What would be the best code to use if the redirect does not fit the target article if possible? Thanks. Red Director (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * , The only way at this point to get Woody Guthrie Deck and Dee Luong Friedman deleted is to nominate them using WP:RFD. ~ GB fan 17:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks.

Sycamore Shoals
That redirect needs to be deleted so that the Sycamore Shoals State Historic Area article can be renamed! The park is not longer called Area and it needs to be corrected! It cannot renamed as long as the redirect exists.. –ACase0000 (talk) 19:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , if the article should be moved, follow the directions at WP:MOVE. ~ GB fan 19:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I already tried to move it. It said it cannot be moved because article with name already exists (the redirect) so the redirect needs to be deleted. ACase0000 (talk) 19:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , the specific section of that page is WP:MOVEOVERREDIRECT ~ GB fan 19:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I submitted a technical request here, WP:RM/TR. It will not let me move it over redirect either. Sorry for bothering you. Have a great day. –ACase0000 (talk) 19:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

Indy Rahmawati
BLPProd asks for at least one reliable source. Blogspot is not reliable. SL93 (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , This is the first two sentences of WP:BLPPROD (bolding and links as in the original):
 * Unsourced biographies of living people (BLPs) are eligible for a special proposed deletion process, BLPPROD. To be eligible for a BLPPROD tag, the entry must be a biography of a living person and contain no sources in any form (as references, external links, etc., reliable or otherwise) supporting any statements made about the person in the biography. Unlike standard proposed deletion, the BLP deletion template may be removed only after the biography contains a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article.
 * A single source in any form, any reliability is enough to disqualify an article from being eligible for BLPPROD. The blogspot source is enough to make it ineligible.  The reliable source is required to remove a BLPPROD that was entirely unsourced when the BLPPROD was added.  ~ GB fan 17:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * That's odd. The whole purpose of the template creation stemmed from discussions about making sure that BLPs were reliably sourced. SL93 (talk) 21:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * , I don't disagree, it is odd. That is the way the policy is written.  There have been numerous discussions over the years about this and there has never been a consensus to change it to reliable in both cases.  ~ GB fan 23:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

About deleting National Outreach Programme
Would you like to get the ball rolling? No pressure if you don't, but I tend to screw up a step or two with AfDs. Just a suggestion. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not the person who thinks it should be deleted. The rationale you placed in the PROD is a reason to add references to the article not delete it.  You will need to come up with a good reason to delete, see WP:DEL.  AFD is easy if you activate Twinkle in your preferences (Gadgets tab, Browsing section).  It automates the process and completes all the steps for you.  ~ GB fan 12:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Not going to happen (adding references or using Twinkle), but thanks for the clarity and advice. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Ivan De Battista
(Article) I know you removed the PROD tag but do you think it would be ok to nominate at AfD? Would put on talk page, I guess, but it will probably never get noticed there. Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * , AFD is always an option. ~ GB fan 12:08, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:16, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

South Central Cartel
Hello. I noticed that you removed my proposed deletion for the SCC albums. If you believe they should be removed, can you instead have the albums redirect to the SCC wiki page. JuanBoss105 (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * , if you believe the independent articles do not belong, you can redirect them. They shouldn't be deleted, because there is a valid redirect option.  ~ GB fan 14:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok. Can you tell me what I should add to a page to redirect the albums to SCC? JuanBoss105 (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Here are a couple of pages that discuss how to make a redirect.
 * Help:Redirect
 * WP:Redirect
 * ~ GB fan 15:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

History of Varanasi
Hi, it is regarding this. Should we revert back to the redirect as of now, or an AfD is required for that? It is largely copied from the history section of the city article by the creator, but a few sources have been recently added by others, though the content is same. - Fylindfotberserk (talk) 12:07, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
 * , this is an editorial decision that needs to be made. Is there enough history content to justify an independent article with a summary at the main article?  If there is enough then the main article history section should be summarized and a link to the history article.  If the history doesn't overwhelm the main article, any appropriate additions to the history article should be incorporated into the main article and then the history article should be redirected the section.  I don't plan on evaluating the situation to see what is best. ~ GB fan 15:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)