User talk:Giraffer/Archive 2

Your "fan club"
I got a chuckle out of that. Thanks for the smile. [snarky but well-deserved personal attacks against obvious targets - NOT YOU - removed before saving edit, rules are rules] davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  16:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Haha... I'm glad you liked that :D Giraffer (talk·contribs) 16:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Counter-Vandalism Academy Graduation

 * Thank you for all your help, Cassiopeia! Giraffer (talk·contribs) 08:35, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Avishai11 -- Avishai11 (talk) 15:41, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

ga-online.org
i cannot understand why my sources doesnt (for the page ga-online.org) are not considered reliable sources. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trytohelp123 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It appears you are referring to Draft:Society for Medicinal Plant and Natural Product Research. I suggest you provide additional independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of this society to demonstrate that it meets Wikipedia's requirements for inclusion, called "notability" - see Notability (organizations and companies).  Happy editing!  GoingBatty (talk) 00:24, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Purple Dark Theme.png
Thanks for uploading File:Purple Dark Theme.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 15:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Green Dark Theme.png
Thanks for uploading File:Green Dark Theme.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 15:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Well I'm stupid... big thanks to for helping sort that out. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 15:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Socks
Hi Giraffer, they just keep coming in bunches. Oshwah has semi-protected the SPI since its looking like they won't stop. I like what you did with your talk page. :) -- Ashley yoursmile!  05:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * great, thanks. It's not too much of a problem. I'm glad you like what I did with my TP tho :) - Giraffer (talk·contribs) 08:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Its very organised. ;) How can do I install global Twinkle? As in if I'm to request global locks for any socks/LTAs that I come across, I think the tool would be helpful and I don't wish to do that manually. Ashley  yoursmile!  08:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , I did some digging and it seems like you have to add the code at meta:User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal to your common.js on meta. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 09:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Giraffer, thank you very much! I just installed it. :) Ashley  yoursmile!  14:04, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 23:01, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election
The article Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:43, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election
The article Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kncny11 -- Kncny11 (talk) 15:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅, that's probably why no-one was looking at it... Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:18, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi
What’s your favourite colour? PeterBread&#38;Giraffer (talk) 10:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Social media in the 2016 United States presidential election
—valereee (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Happy Vesak!




 Happy Vesak , Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and a Happy and Blessed Vesak'' to you and yours! User:JaMongKut (talk) 18:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Contesting Speedy Deletion
I am an editorial writer and editor with a long (and traceable) history in the world of journalism and information science. I am working on a project that sheds new light on the evolution of kitchen systems throughout history, from the Middle Ages to the present, and Henrybuilt is the only American-based outfit producing the kind of performance kitchens that define the most recent shift in a new era of kitchen design (the rest are in Europe). Thus, I’d like to create an ecosystem where what they do lives in the context of a larger historical design shift that tracks with systems theory and product language. Please let me know why I am being deleted. Wafflesbarnwell (talk) 23:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Follow up + Note of Appreciation
My work is always grounded in probable facts. Note that I didn’t create the page in question with skewed statements or conjecture. It was simply an effort to take long-standing, grounded, and authenticated information about a 15+-year endeavor (with citations from numerous agenda-free organizations attesting to the veracity of the page contents) to include a commercial venture with cultural impact into the wikipedia sphere—and if it’s helpful to acknowledge precedent among administrators, I am happy point to many other business-based entities who have established pages. Thanks so much for reconsidering the submission and/or offering feedback for strengthening my efforts. So appreciate you and welcome any guidance. Wafflesbarnwell (talk) 01:50, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Clarification
Me again. Hi. Just wanted to pull all the threads together in one note. I’ll follow up with you on Discord, as well.

First off, thanks for reading this As a long-time writer, editor, and journalist, I so appreciate you and the work every administrator does to protect the sanctity and veracity of the vital resource that is wikipedia. I’d love to discuss the recent Speedy Deletion action you initiated on my page.

Some background/context: I am working to create a factual, unbiased timeline that tracks the evolution of kitchen systems throughout history, from the Middle Ages to the present, because there is a connection to the larger (and more deeply documented) fields of pattern language and product systems. I created a page for Henrybuilt because they are the only American-based outfit producing the kind of performance kitchens that define the most recent shift in a new era of kitchen design (the rest are in Europe) and I think, as such, they pass the notability test. From here, my hope is to submit a full “Kitchen System” page that speaks to the world of kitchen engineers and design specialists in terms they use that are relatively unknown to (but have long impacted) people across the world. Again, this work is about formally documenting an established and observable design movement that elsewhere through factual and historical examples and citations—this is not a theory, nor am I advancing any agenda beyond the recognition of an important area of interest to many different groups of readers. I’d like to create an ecosystem where the concept of a “kitchen system” is formally recognized as a the worthy and proven topic of interest and research that it is, and the long-standing global entities who are directly related to this field are easily findable within the wikipedia sphere.

Thanks so much for reconsidering the submission and/or offering feedback for strengthening my efforts.

Best, Jessica Wafflesbarnwell (talk) 13:32, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your message. The page was deleted per our speedy deletion policies U5 and G11, which essentially mean that the page was unsuitable for Wikipedia and written in a promotional tone.
 * I am not an administrator (and therefore I cannot see the deleted page), but I do not have any objections if you wish to write about Henrybuilt. If you choose to do so, I would appreciate if you could review our neutrality and verifiability policies to ensure that your writing complies. Anything expressing a personal opinion or similar (e.g. "world-class", "highly praised", "widely acclaimed", etc.) violates these. Additionally, if you have a conflict-of-interest with anything which you intend to write about, please disclose it on your userpage.
 * Our Article Wizard is a great way to get started writing articles—it covers the basics of article writing quite nicely, and helps you set up a draft where you can work. When you are finished with the draft, it will be reviewed by a user experienced in our notability policies, and published in mainspace if accepted. More information on the process is available here. Don't hesitate to ask here or at the Teahouse if you have any further questions. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Our Article Wizard is a great way to get started writing articles—it covers the basics of article writing quite nicely, and helps you set up a draft where you can work. When you are finished with the draft, it will be reviewed by a user experienced in our notability policies, and published in mainspace if accepted. More information on the process is available here. Don't hesitate to ask here or at the Teahouse if you have any further questions. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Our Article Wizard is a great way to get started writing articles—it covers the basics of article writing quite nicely, and helps you set up a draft where you can work. When you are finished with the draft, it will be reviewed by a user experienced in our notability policies, and published in mainspace if accepted. More information on the process is available here. Don't hesitate to ask here or at the Teahouse if you have any further questions. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the response! So appreciate it. I’ll revise the draft and aim to submit a better, cleaner version next go round. Also will likely take you up on your offer of additional guidance moving forward. 🤓 Wafflesbarnwell (talk) 01:53, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

One additional question: If you are not an administrator and didn’t delete the page, who did? Or does that happen automatically via machine-learning-type software on the back end? Wafflesbarnwell (talk) 01:55, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , did. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 06:18, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!
 Happy Birthday! Have a very happy birthday on your special day!

Best wishes, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:48, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment regarding Draft:Partnership for Assessment and Accreditation of Scientific Practice
Dear Giraffer,

Thank you so much for your comment regarding the COI on this page. I didn't know that this has to be done, since I had never seen this before but I have included a remark now.

I like and use Wiki a lot and also make regular donations. Hence, I am also very much interested that articles are neutral and I tried to write it that way. However, have you had the feeling that it is biased? If so, would you mind to have a look at it again and mark these parts for me? I would try to redraft in a neutral way or delete completely since I would want it to be as objective as possible. Warmest regards, Bgerlach

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgerlach (talk • contribs) 18:44, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , the draft is well written and actually seems to be pretty neutral. It's quite difficult to explain, but just it read like it was written from someone who was connected with the subject.
 * From what I can see, you don't need to change the tone – it seems perfectly fine as it is. Many thanks for speedily complying with the conflict-of-interest police. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * From what I can see, you don't need to change the tone – it seems perfectly fine as it is. Many thanks for speedily complying with the conflict-of-interest police. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Giraffer, thank you for your feedback. I understand your point and the goal of Wikipedia. Since we got now feedback from stakeholders why we are not having an article on Wiki, I wanted to write. I looked for similar articles and found several that or of the same level or worse. I am just wondering how they did it. Anyway, wish you a great weekend. Best, Bgerlach (talk) 20:48, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Happy editing. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 21:07, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment regarding BIMBO changes
Hi. First of all, thank you for allowing the dialogue on this point.

I explain why the edits on the Bimbo page: I am making the edits as a way to contribute on Wikipedia about an important company, which had no relevant information. That is why my changes were not periodic and in indefinite periods of time. If you check the previous version you will find that all the information is referenced to third party sources to avoid being advertising. At no time is there any allusion to the purchase of products, assets or any type of proselytizing.

Also, the user who reverted the changes alluded that several tables were "badly formatted", which I do not believe is a reason to eliminate important parts of information such as the brands that make up this corporation.

Similarly, it is mentioned that "it is not an investor site" and this is correct, but Wikipedia should be a primary source of information for all types of people, including those on the corporate side. At no time are opinions on this topic omitted and only what is already on the Internet is published with information sources from various media outlets.

I would ask that these changes be reviewed, reading the version before all the changes, and reinstated for the benefit of complete information for everyone to form their own opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbrInge (talk • contribs) 18:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)


 * please read WP:PURPOSE first. Wikipedia is a tertiary source, not primary. Also, your additions to the page were clearly promotional in tone.  Java Hurricane  18:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

But you are erasing the corporate structure of the company, which includes who its directors are. It's like erasing that Elon Musk runs Tesla. It is public information that everyone who reads about the company should know. Please check the page, because this user has his own interests.
 * give good sources, better than the ones you gave ( which were unreliable), and write the prose neutrally. Also, please be frank: have you been paid to make these edits? If yes, by whom? If you are not frank, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia for violating our terms of use.  Java Hurricane  18:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * are you being paid to edit Wikipedia? Giraffer (talk·contribs) 18:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC)


 * The sources were direct from the company, the reference was in direct link on their web page in Spanish, where their corporate center is located. What happens is that the sources are in that language and are from unbiased media in Mexico. Please, please, turn to someone who knows that language to corroborate that my additions are unbiased and not paid. Otherwise, it would not be a good reason to make a whole dialogue defending myself.
 * , regardless of the sources (or their languages), the content you added is un-encyclopaedic, and the article is better without it, as shown by the numerous removals of said content. I'm also concerned as to why you added a long list of accolades that serve little to no value to the reader, especially given that the page has a history of single-purpose accounts, and undisclosed paid editing. You didn't answer my question above, so I'll repeat it: are you being paid to edit? Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

I answer each of your points:

1. no, I am not a user paid by Bimbo to enter information, in that case I would have to enter that they support the company or buy their products from them.

2. Okay, maybe the Accolades section doesn't go, but you deleted the corporate structure, which as I mentioned is important to know which people run the company. It's like if you delete who are the CEOs of Samsung, Apple or any company.

3. They also deleted the information of the brands that run the company in each part of the world, this is key for those who want to know which company produces the products they consume.

4. "The numerous removals" were made only by 1 user who was the person who alluded "that the tables had ugly formatting" and then by who did not check that the part he deleted had a direct link to the company's page.

5. I would propose to review each section that was deleted, review the sources that are from unbiased third parties, and not just delete 42k characters all at once.
 * , the difference between the current version and your version is that 5 section are missing: Corporate Structure, Internationalization, Brands by region, Sustainability, and Accolades.


 * Corporate Structure – this is undue weight. You compared it to Tesla – but Tesla's board of directors has much more relevance to its article that Grupo Bimbo's does. Compare the search results for the two companies: Tesla and Grupo Bimbo. The former has lots of secondary sources and in-depth coverage, whereas the latter does not.
 * Internationalization & Brands by region – again, this is undue weight. A breakdown of brands per continent plus a complete list of brands is unnecessary, especially when the entire thing is only cited to the company's website.
 * Sustainability – this isn't particularly helpful to the reader either. General Mills has one sentence on sustainability, Kraft Foods & Kellogg's don't mention it at all, and Nestlé has a paragraph on it, but it is tagged with being too long, and the article has a long history of problems with UPE. Sustainability may be worthy of inclusion, but at most just a couple sentences.
 * Accolades – this is just an advertisement.
 * Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

But under your arguments you say that Tesla's corporate structure "has much more relevance" and so yes it can be added, but that comment is not unbiased since the information is intended to do just that: to inform, and the structure of a company is essential to know who manages it and the decisions it might make.

You mention that the information shouldn't be there because "it can be found on their website" but in that case, much of the information on Wikipedia can be found elsewhere, Wikipedia is supposed to be the compendium of that, that's why it's relevant and helps the user to have it here. You miss the point, having to go into Wikipedia, then go to other websites and then come back again.

You mention the issue of sources a lot. Although there were no links on the page itself, all the information had bibliographic citations referring to news sites of various kinds in Mexico and each one justifies the presence of that information.

In the end, I think this shows that each citation was not reviewed in detail and went from having more than 200 unbiased bibliographic citations to only 84.
 * , I disagree, but if you want it to be changed then raise the issue on the talk page, although I doubt you'll get much of a different response. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 20:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

In addition, you mention that sustainability is not important for other companies, but for this one it is, if you go to their website, to the added bibliographic references and search the internet, you will see that for them this issue is a central part of their work. Each company has its guiding principles and that should be respected and it is fair that if it is key for them, it is in Wikipedia.
 * , please continue any discussion you wish to have on the talk page, and not here. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 20:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

I don't think there is much point in writing it in the entry, since you and JavaHurricane will wait for me to put my arguments and minimize them 2 vs 1. But thanks, at least I hope more people read this and know the standards you measure in the entries.

Draft:INDIA KHELO FOOTBALL
Draft:INDIA KHELO FOOTBALL exists in addition to Draft:India khelo football. David notMD (talk) 17:37, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , tagged as a duplicate of a G11-tagged draft. Thanks for the notif. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:40, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * And now gone. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:57, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Draft talk: Syed Sheharyar Ali
Hello!

I am trying to create an article for Syed Sheharyar Ali, a Pakistani businessman, but my recent article is deleted under the G11 criteria for speedy deletion.

If I make another article draft of the same name, how can I submit the draft for approval?

Ahmed.masoom (talk) 07:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

A snack for a remarkable giraffe

 * Thanks Jebbles, I'm glad to see I made you laugh (on Discord). Giraffer (talk·contribs) 22:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-related AN thread
Hi Giraffer, just making you aware of this AN thread, which is related to a SPI you filed. Many thanks - TheresNoTime 😺 17:03, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Seen already, but thanks for the notif . Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:34, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

A for you!

 * , ! Giraffer (talk·contribs) 22:11, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

A drink for you!

 * , thanks! Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:48, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Playmaker and Deal with it (Albums) by Phyno
Why is they no article about this two albums in wikipedia; when this LPs was one of the bestselling albums on their respective years of release? LOve Institute (talk) 12:03, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:55, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Vikrant simha/doc
Hello, Giraffer,

Just a reminder that any time you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/RFD/TFD/etc.), you need to post a notice on the talk page of the page creator so they are aware of the tagging and, most importantly, know why a page might be deleted. This can prevent them from trying to recreate the deleted page and repeating their mistakes.

I find it most helpful to use Twinkle to tag pages for deletion because once you set up your Preferences to "Notify page creator", then Twinkle will post these notices for you which makes things easy and convenient. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , sorry – I usually use Twinkle which automatically notifies the creator for me. This is the first manual tag I've placed in... a while, which is probably why I forgot to notify them. I'll be more mindful in future. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 22:39, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Removal of my age
Hello Giraffer! I understand your reasoning for removing my age, however I have stated multiple times (only on the Wikipedia Discord server since it hasn't come up here until now) that I am perfectly fine with revealing my age as I do not see any way someone could figure out who I am in real life just by knowing my age. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC)


 * So I'm basically asking that you please stop removing my age as it is my own personal choice to reveal my age. Some of my other personal detail I will keep private because of obvious reasons (including my email since it includes my real name which unfortunately means emailing users about things is not an option for me) ― Blaze The Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="position:relative;right:22q">Blaze Wolf#6545 18:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * So you got it oversighted I see. So I guess I have no choice in what information I decide to publicly disclose just because I'm a minor and ANY Personal info AT ALL has to remain private. ― <b style="background:#0d1125;color:#51aeff;padding:1q;border-radius:5q">Blaze The Wolf</b>Talk<sub title="Discord Username" style="position:relative;right:22q">Blaze Wolf#6545 18:32, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * For transparency, I oversighted the content in question. Many thanks ~TNT (she/her • talk) 18:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , I see that TNT suppressed the material and has emailed you – she's (obviously) more qualified to discuss this than I am, but if you have any questions for me then feel free to contact me anyhow. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 19:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you very, very much Kevin! It was extremely interesting to investigate a sockfarm of/with the scale and modus operandi of this one, and I'm glad that it has now been sorted. I see you also shot Blablubbs and MarioGom a message – they are two of the nicest and most insightful editors I've had the pleasure of working with, and I owe a big thanks to them and (let's not forget the technical side!) for their work in this too. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 06:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

AfDs and socking
In light of your work on Sanketio31, and also your recent post on COIN, perhaps you would take a look at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Sam Markanda? I have only a little experience with WP:SPI, but the behavior pattern looks somewhat similar, and the case might benefit from another set of eyes. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 13:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my late reply, I was offline for a few days. To answer your question, they're definitely related (and blocked as such), and I do suspect it's UPE. I can't really disclose why (because I don't want to tell them what not to do), but ultimately if they've ended up CU-blocked it doesn't really matter whether they're paid or not, I guess. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs)
 * I have very little doubt about UPE. I wish in hindsight that I'd flagged the case as possibly connected with Sanketio31, but I don't have so much experience with WP:SPI, and didn't want to bludgeon or similar.  And, as you say, the end result is going to be fine.  Anyway, I'll look for the Sanketio31 cases that may come back through Academic AfD sorting, and will make an effort to make a policy-based argument.  Thanks for your hard work here!  Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted
Hi Giraffer. Your account has been added to the " " user group. Please check back at WP:PERM in case your user right is time limited or probationary. This user group allows you to review new pages through the Curation system and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or nominate them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is vital to maintaining the integrity of the encyclopedia. If you have not already done so, you must read the tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the deletion policy. If you need any help or want to discuss the process, you are welcome to use the new page reviewer talk page. In addition, please remember: The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you also may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In cases of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, or long-term inactivity, the right may be withdrawn at administrator discretion. ~TheresNoTime (to chat) 16:20, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Be nice to new editors. They are usually not aware that they are doing anything wrong. Do make use of the message feature when tagging  pages for  maintenance so  that  they are aware.
 * You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted. Please be formal and polite in your approach to them – even if they are not.
 * If you are not sure what to do with a page, don't review it – just leave it for another reviewer.
 * Accuracy is more important than speed. Take your time to patrol each page. Use the message feature to communicate with article creators and offer advice as much as possible.

Question about move
Hi! I noticed that you moved Draft:Ameya Prabhu to the draftspace. I'd really appreciate if you could point out which parts of the article come across as promotional so that I can focus on making the article neutral! Schrute123 (talk) 17:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * sure! Some examples include:
 * Having accolades in the lead – Prabhu has been given the designation of a Young Global Leader by the World Economic Forum.
 * Lists of talks The Quint - The Art of the Meal [...] What "Be More" means to me
 * Unsourced sections such as "Positions Held", and "Social Causes". These are unencyclopediatic, and more like something you'd find on a CV.
 * I'd recommend submitting the draft to Articles for creation when you're finished, as the reviewers there can give you more in-depth feedback about how to improve, should it be needed. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:47, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Schrute123 (talk) 17:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

This author's 1st page is flagged for deletion, Edits made to fix the issue
Hello Giraffer, Having read your reasoning for flagging my 1st contribution, I have since edited it and removed any material that could be deemed promotional to the subject. As this was my 1st article, my apologies that I was unaware that pulling claims from cited sources that could be deemed as promotional would be against acceptable guidelines. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and I have since proofread the article to be purely factual with any reference to the subjects business or career as purely informational as per wikipedia's criteria for such topics. I hope you can revisit the article and find the information encyclopedic in it's nature, informative, and helpful to viewers of the page. J.walker203 (talk) 21:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , the tag will be reviewed by an administrator who will take into account your improvements and objections, and then decide whether the page should be deleted or not. Thanks, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 21:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021
<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) 20:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Template removal help
Hi Giraffer,

I am relatively new to Wikipedia, but I noticed this page (Anaplan) has had a lot of edits removing promotional claims, and it has a warning template at the top that mentions paid editing. Multiple editors have edited the page to neutralize the tone, and to address the issues that the warning template mentions. At this point, is it your assumption that the page is neutral and should no longer have the warning template? I have yet to remove one of these so I figured I'd reach out to another editor for some help. TIA. RalphKnowsA (talk) 14:42, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021
<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) 00:46, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Miranda Brawn Article - written like an advertisement?
Hello, Giraffer, you have added a tag to the article of Miranda Brawn suggesting that is written like an advertisement. I am happy to improve the article and remove any parts of it that the Wiki community feels promotional, as it definitely was not my intention. I think I wrote the page from a neutral point of view and linked reliable sources to verify every single sentence of that. However, as I said, I am ready to make further improvements, so I would like to kindly ask you to point on those parts that you find promotional. Thanks, DillonPalm (talk) 15:31, 29 November 2021 (UTC)


 * , excessive details about her career or life, such as or  even if sourced are unneeded and make it sound like a CV and not an article. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 13:19, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, :, thanks for your response and remark. I felt that these sentences can add relevant info to the "whole picture", but I also understand your point, why do you feel that they can be too much, so I removed them. Please let me know if you have any further suggestions on how can I keep improving the article, or please consider removing the "advertisement" tag. Thanks for your contribution, DillonPalm (talk) 21:39, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Apology
Hello, you pasted part of your talk page in mainspace at Louis P. Boog/Archive 3 – since the contents looked like your Archive 3 plus some more threads, I've moved it to User talk:Louis P. Boog/Archive 4 and tagged the mainspace page for deletion. Apologies if this messes up anything. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 21:35, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * sorry for my error --Louis P. Boog (talk) 01:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank You for your Arbitration Committee Elections 2021 Voter Guide
Hello Giraffer, I would like to thank you for publishing and providing your voter guide for Arbitration Committee Elections 2021 at User:Giraffer/ACE2021. It has been very helpful and useful to me in learning about the pros & cons of all the different candidates with respect to their suitability for Arbitration Committee. It had proper detailed analysis and rationale on every candidate and helped me in voting informatively. Thanks. TheGeneralUser (talk) 01:20, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Giraffer. I liked your guide. I prticularly  appreciated how objective it  was and that  you  (like me) did not  actually  state how your would vote. It remains to be seen how closely it reflects the result. 52% of the votes were cast on day 1 of the ballot. You might find this full analysis of the campaign to be of interest. You are welcome to leave your thoughts on its talk page. Take care, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:04, 7 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you both (and who commented on the guide talk page) for the kind words! I've read your guide Kudpung – I'm always a fan of data, so the charts were very much appreciated. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 07:30, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Why did you nominated The article Marsh Stero for deletion without explanation?
Hey!!

I found that you nominated The article Marsh Stero for deletion without explanation. Please explain that you did you no nominated The article Marsh Stero for deletion without explanation?

Thank you! 2401:4900:52F9:A26B:CC3B:BF09:1F18:4AA1 (talk) 16:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes! Please explain us! Giftyzone (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Giftyzone, did you create this article? Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:07, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Yess Giftyzone (talk) 17:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

And I have added enough references to this article Giftyzone (talk) 17:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

And also deleted unwanted/incorrect information that shouldn't be there in article! Giftyzone (talk) 17:08, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The article still doesn't pass our notability guidelines, and from what I can see probably will not from what I can tell. The existing sources are both self-described personal blogs and do not constitute significant, independent, or reliable coverage. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Regarding the tag you placed on Shanu Kumar for speedy deletion
Hii User:Giraffer I saw the tag you placed on Shanu Kumar for speedy deletion. However, It is already in Discussion. I saw his name mentioned on IMDB Actor's list. Also, I found news articles about him. I've added those references on Shanu Kumar. Please Check it. I respect every Wikipedia Policies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwikihelper (talk • contribs) 10:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I stand by my tag. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 10:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)


 * User:Giraffer Finding More valid references for Shanu Kumar. Also IMDB doesn't allow anyone to create their own profile. Iwikihelper (talk) 10:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrive my NEJM Evidence
As you mentioned on my Talk page, I'd like to retrieve the deleted material for future improvement. And actually, I did contest the nomination already but I am sure why it didn't go through. You might want to check what I posted on Talk:NEJM Evidence. I would also stress that this is/will be an important journal. — Kennyluck (talk) 20:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello? — Kennyluck (talk) 21:27, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Kennyluck, sorry! I thought I'd already responded. The easiest way to resume working on the article is to request undeletion to get the page restored in userspace/draftspace for you to work on. To do that, you'd need to ask the deleting admin,, on his talk page if he can restore the content to a specific user subpage, i.e. User:Kennyluck/NEJM Evidence, or a draft, (in this instance Draft:NEJM Evidence. Since the article was deleted before, if and when you do choose to publish it, I'd advise going through AfC just to make sure the page is suitable for inclusion. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 22:43, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021
<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) 21:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)