User talk:Garuda3/Archive 4

Your submission at Articles for creation: KC Lights has been accepted
 KC Lights, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=KC_Lights help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing!  scope_creep Talk  23:47, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

 * Thank you. Nothing better than a hot cup of tea! NemesisAT (talk) 17:17, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Incident as Wikipedia Administrator noticeboard
There is an incident at the Wikipedia AN board where you are directly involved.  scope_creep Talk  14:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Mario Cerrito AfD

 * Hello- I saw you recently voted Keep for Mario Cerrito. It was quickly closed after your Keep vote- and what I’m guessing is out of spite. The closer describes himself as a deletionist and I think he saw that it was leaning towards a Keep consensus. We laid out the facts and they ignored it. On top of everything else it was relisted to develop more of a consensus and wasn’t supposed to be done until Wednesday. I’m not a very experienced editor but I see you are. I don’t think it was handled right. WexfordUK (talk) 02:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Please see my message on their talk page. If they don't reconsider their close, you can always take it to WP:DRV. If you do, I recommend acknowledging the sockpuppetry but repeating what you've said about how the valid keep votes from experienced editors were given too little weight. I wouldn't mention the bit about spite. Best wishes NemesisAT (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:05, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:30, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice
Hey just a quick message to say thanks for your edit on Draft:Brunswick Wharf and the advice in your in your edit summary on the article. Maurice Oly (talk) 00:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)


 * no problem, and thank you for all your work in improving British railway articles.
 * It looks like your draft already has a good level of sourcing. Railway station and line articles are seldom deleted once they are created. NemesisAT (talk) 09:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:24, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, NemesisAT

Thank you for creating QuayCity Q3.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with. Please remember to sign your reply with ~.

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

North8000 (talk) 23:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Coastliner 36
Hello, NemesisAT. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Coastliner 36, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 19:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

April 2022
Your recent editing history at Draft:Diesel Trains Ltd shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you do not violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Stkngjo (talk) 04:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Just move the text to Rail transport in Great Britain with an edit summary stating as much? Not sure what I'm missing here. Seasider53 (talk) 11:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's probably what I'll do. Just a bit puzzled and frustrated that two dormant accounts have popped up out of nowhere to try to turn the "merge" outcome into a "redirect". I'll probably merge to History of rail transport in Great Britain 1995 to date as suggested by Klbrain at Draft talk:Diesel Trains Ltd. Thanks again NemesisAT (talk) 11:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That does seem odd. Sometimes dormant for over year, in the case of Stkngjo. Hopefully not puppetry in action. Seasider53 (talk) 11:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Deprods
Fair move on your part. I'm moving everything you deprodded to User:TenPoundHammer/TV cleanup. I admit I went overboard, and creating the TV cleanup list is a more organized way to approach that. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, NemesisAT,
 * It was a lot of nominations in one day. But I've now looked over the PRODs, both the existing ones and the ones you de-PROD'd and there are truly quite a lot of marginal articles on one season reality shows. One I came across one that involved two guys breaking things with their bare hands. That was the entire program, watching two guys tearing things apart. Definitely not encyclopedic and I expect to see it later at AFD.
 * I think in the future, TenPoundHammer will stick with decaf and not tag so many articles in one sitting. But there are definitely a lot of limited series cable reality shows that no one would miss. We just have to adopt a process that satisfies all editors, those who tag pages for deletion, those who review the tagged pages and those who review them one last time and delete them. Liz Read! Talk! 03:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Liz and TenPoundHammer, firstly I'll admit that part of what I love most about Wikipedia is seeing things that are either ridiculous (like the program you mentioned) or just wouldn't belong in a physical encyclopedia. That's what's so great about being WP:NOTPAPER, there is no space limit. That being said I understand and agree there needs to be some filter (even though I think some of our notability guidelines are too strict) to prevent a flood of hoaxes and unmaintainable content. So I don't have a problem with notability being challenged especially for articles with no sources like a lot of those I deprodded were.
 * The problem here was the nominations were made apparently with little work on searching for sources and are too fast for other editors to review which was why I ended up on a mass deprod spree. Though looks like this was a one-off and, thanks to your suggestion Liz, the nominations will be slower. So I think all is resolved. Thanks again
 * On a side note, I really don't like PROD. In my view it leads to articles disappearing with little notice that may or may not have been on notable subjects. AfD is a much better venue thanks to deletion sorting which hopefully brings more eyes to the discussions, and of course if nobody participates then an article can still be deleted by being treated as an expired prod. NemesisAT (talk) 11:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you.
Hey just a quick message to say thank you so much for finding the evening standard article containing Oswald Laurence‘s marriage date.

I really appreciate you finding that.

With Thanks Maurice Oly (talk) 12:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * No problem. Also, I would keep the BBC link in there. Even though it covers the same things, multiple sources help establish notability per WP:GNG. What it really needs and unfortunately I wasn't able to find with a search on British Newspaper Archive or Newspapers.com is some additional info from before 2013. Best wishes NemesisAT (talk) 12:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Alright I’ll put the BBC link back in. Since you have access to NewsPapers.com perhaps you could help with some of my other drafts. As newspapers.com will be of huge help for these drafts: Draft:Congleton Players, Draft:Congleton Musical Theatre and Draft:Congleton Pantomime any newspapers that give precise past production dates for those theatre groups would be really helpful. Maurice Oly (talk) 12:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

What's your point?
You feel that Monkeys Spinning Monkeys should be merged, but you are not willing to do it. How is that not just being disruptuve for the sake of it? Fram (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)


 * You used the edit summary "Redirect to artist, mainly passing mentions and an unreliable source, can be treated in main article". To me this suggests a merge (in this case just copying the reliable sources over) should take place, but it didn't. So your revert effectively removed verifiable content and useful sources from the wiki. That's why I restored the content - I opposed a simple redirect and felt that you should have added the sources to Kevin MacLeod as your edit summary suggests. NemesisAT (talk) 15:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Not every "useful source" needs to be included in the target article, as that already has enough similar sources. We exclude reliable sources all the time, we have explicit instructions against oversourcing. My edit summary has no suggestion at all that the better sources should be merged, only that if you remove the unreliable source, there is even less left of the article. So again if you feel that either or both sources should be added to the target article, feel free to do so, at the place of your liking. If, on the other hand, you are simply opposed to the redirect, say so but don't hide behind a "you haven't moved the sources over" excuse. Fram (talk) 15:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and done it, but I still think you should have done that when you redirected the article. NemesisAT (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)