User talk:Gabinho/Valeria Solovieva

Requested move
User:Gabinho/Valeria Solovieva → Valeria Solovieva – clearly passes NTENNIS ( G a b i n h o >:) 13:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC))
 * Moving pages from userspace to articlespace is beyond the scope of the Requested moves process. Please submit your request to Articles for Creation. You can do so by adding subst:AFC submission/submit to the top of the article. Happy editing. Cliff (talk) 16:32, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Gabinho, I restored this article to your userspace on the condition that you would cite everything in it, to which you enthusiastically agreed. This is the second time now that you've attempted to move the article to mainspace without citing anything in it. If I don't see you citing all information in it in the next couple of days, I'll delete it again. Jayjg (talk) 23:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The article is sourced now. Move it to namespace. ( G a b i n h o >:) 17:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC))
 * Please read my comment above. You must submit the article to AFC. Cliff (talk) 21:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I tried. That template is not working. ( G a b i n h o >:) 21:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC))
 * Are you joking? You added three sources, the vast majority of the article is still unsourced. Where is the source for the claim that she plays "Right Handed (Double Handed Backhand)" or is "1.63 m (5 ft 4 in)"? Either source all claims in the article or remove them please. Jayjg (talk) 00:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Mister Jayjg, I think you have some issues. Seriously... ( G a b i n h o >:) 20:16, 28 July 2011 (UTC))

The template works, if you want my help, I offer it gladly. However, Jayig may have a point, and I think that the folks at AFC might agree. Let me know if you want my help in submitting your article. Cliff (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Jayjg clearly has some issues regarding this particular article. The article looks fine as far as I am concerned. If four sources are not enough for an article about a tennis player that meets at least 3 criteria per NTENNIS, tehn I must retire as an editor... ( G a b i n h o >:) 20:16, 28 July 2011 (UTC))
 * I take WP:BLP seriously. All you need to do is source the material that's in the article, or delete it. If you have no intention of doing so, please let me know, I'll re-delete it, and let someone else create a proper sourced article. Jayjg (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * So you say material in article is not sourced? Player info. sourced. ITF wins. sourced. Grand slam junior win. sourced. I don't get your point... ( G a b i n h o >:) 05:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC))
 * Did you read my comment above? Where is the source for the claim that she plays "Right Handed (Double Handed Backhand)" or is "1.63 m (5 ft 4 in)"? Put a citation beside each item, or source them in the article, or delete them. Jayjg (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * To infobox does not need to add sources, if you meant it. Check out other articles about tennis and compare to them. ITF and WTA (external links) are sources for infobox. --Stryn (talk) 06:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The infobox is exempt from the WP:V policy? I can't find that exemption anywhere on the policy page, can you point it out to me? Jayjg (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK... considering most low level tennis biographies are fairly sparse in data this article looks relatively sourced to me. I've seen far far worse that are up and running with no problems. What exact things that are likely to be contentious are not sourced as compared with most low level tennis players on wikipedia? Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I, too, fail to see any unsourced material. Her ITF biography has everything in it. Sellyme Talk 09:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you read the comments above? Where is the source for the claim that she plays "Right Handed (Double Handed Backhand)" or is "1.63 m (5 ft 4 in)"? If the ITF biography "has everything in it", then cite it. Jayjg (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you listen to our concerns? None of the other tennis articles site those items unless they are contended...see Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal. Why are you holding this bio to a different standard than most of the rest? Do you have some personal beef with this editor I don't know about that is influencing this stance... maybe problems in the past? Because if not it would seem you are being unreasonable. Fyunck(click) (talk) 22:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm holding this bio to the standard of WP:BLP, nothing more. If other tennis articles violate WP:BLP, then you should fix them; that doesn't give permission to violate BLP in this article. I have no "personal beef" with this editor; focus on complying with WP:BLP. Jayjg (talk) 03:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see the problem. Those items are not contentious and are not likely to be challenged. I think it conforms close enough to WP:BLP. However I guess those two items could be cited since you are obviously challenging their validity. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * This isn't some game where you say "everything is cited", I point out something that isn't cited, then you cite that specific thing, while grumbling that it doesn't actually need to be cited. Cite everything in this WP:BLP or delete it. I'm not planning to repeat this statement. Jayjg (talk) 17:16, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't say "everything is cited" nor does everything have to be cited per WP:BLP and wikipedia precedent. And that's fine if you don't plan on repeating but I'm taking this elsewhere for some other opinions. I didn't create this article but the standards you are applying to it would seem to invalidate most wikipedia articles. And administrators I've worked with through the years have been very helpful with exact details of what they want... that doesn't appear to be the case here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:BLP: "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Jayjg (talk) 18:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Jayjg, this article is sourced. MOVE it to namespace. What is so hard to understand here?!?! ( G a b i n h o >:) 18:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC))
 * FWIW I'm not sure demanding, from a long time administrator, to move a page is going to get you very far. I'm talking to others about this to figure out how to move forward. It's best just to proceed rationally through proper channels. Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:58, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Jayjg, the keyword there is "contentious". Do you want us to source the fact that 1+1=2 in every article containing basic mathematics as well? "Anything likely to be challenged" implies a certain amount of common sense about what requires challenging. I'm going to be blunt. The article is completely sourced, even to your claims that things like the height and weight should be (Which they don't, by the way). There is no BLP issue, and nothing contentious. The very first reference had a large box saying "Height:" and "Weight:" on it, so I don't see what more you'd want. Sellyme Talk 11:36, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The keywords here are "WP:V" and "WP:BLP". Just source it already, stop arguing that you don't have to. Jayjg (talk) 16:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)