User talk:Jack Frost/Archive 2

Sorry
I did not realize that the link was banned on Wikipedia I thought it was a good link for the Constitution of the United States — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constitutionus (talk • contribs) 11:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019


Hello ,

More new features are being added to the feed, including the important red alert for previously deleted pages. This will only work if it is selected in your filters. Best is to 'select all'. Do take a moment to check out all the new features if you have not already done so. If anything is not working as it should, please let us know at NPR. There is now also a live queue of AfC submissions in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to review AfCs, but bear in mind that NPP is an official process and policy and is more important. Articles are still not always being checked thoroughly enough. If you are not sure what to do, leave the article for a more experienced reviewer. Please be on the alert for any incongruities in patrolling and help your colleagues where possible; report patrollers and autopatrolled article creators who are ostensibly undeclared paid editors. The displayed ORES alerts offer a greater 'at-a-glance' overview, but the new challenges in detecting unwanted new content and sub-standard reviewing do not necessarily make patrolling any easier, nevertheless the work may have a renewed interest factor of a different kind. A vibrant community of reviewers is always ready to help at NPR. The backlog is still far too high at between 7,000 and 8,000. Of around 700 user rights holders, 80% of the reviewing is being done by just TWO users. In the light of more and more subtle advertising and undeclared paid editing, New Page Reviewing is becoming more critical than ever. NPR is triage, it is not a clean up clinic. This move feature is not limited to bios so  you may have to slightly re-edit the text in the template before you save the move. Anything that is not fit for mainspace but which might have some promise can be draftified - particularly very poor English and machine and other low quality translations. Remember to use the message feature if you are just tagging an article for maintenance rather than deletion. Otherwise articles are likely to remain perma-tagged. Many creators are SPA and have no intention of returning to Wikipedia. Use the feature too for leaving a friendly note note for  the author of a first article you found well made or interesting. Many have told us they find such comments particularly welcoming and encouraging. Admins are now taking advantage of the new time-limited user rights feature. If you have recently been accorded NPR, do check your user rights to see if this affects you. Depending on your user account preferences, you may receive automated notifications of your rights changes. Requests for permissions are not mini-RfAs. Helpful comments are welcome if absolutely necessary, but the bot does a lot of the work and the final decision is reserved for admins who do thorough research anyway. School and academic holidays will begin soon in various places around the Western world. Be on the lookout for the usual increase in hoax, attack, and other junk pages.
 * WMF at work on NPP Improvements
 * QUALITY of REVIEWING
 * Backlog
 * Move to draft
 * Notifying users
 * PERM
 * Other news

Our next newsletter might be announcing details of a possible election for co-ordinators of NPR. If you think you have what it takes to micro manage NPR, take a look at New Page Review Coordinators - it's a job that requires a lot of time and dedication.

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost. Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Why do you delete my page Dial4242
Hi Jack, Jeetendra25 (talk) 08:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Hope you are doing good.

Wanted to check Why did you delete the page Dial4242 which was created by me. I am the owner of this ambulance service start-up. In india ambulance are very difficult to get and hence this startup has been formed. There are numerous cases where people have died because of not getting an ambulance. This si something we changing and a page on wikipedia will be helpful for lot of ambulance users. I hope you understand the same and reconsider your deletion. Also if this violates certain guidelines, I will be happy to change them. Kinldy let me know how to go about the same
 * Hi Jeetendra25, your article was deleted by one of our administrators as it appeared not to be written in a neutral, encyclopaedic tone as well as being about an organisation which did not appear to meet Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. As you are associated with Dial4242, you must comply with Wikipedia's policies on conflicts of interest. You can find more information about this on your talk page. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 09:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Humayoon Shams Khan
Hi, Just received a message (User_talk:SidhardhRamesh). I got the same texts from his Facebook About section (FB About) and another page, and I found that it was there in Imdb also only after you message me. So what should I do now? Edit that section or remove the texts which matches in the imdb page or any other? Pls help. S idhardh Ramesh &#128172; 11:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I have re written it. Please check. Talk:Humayoon_Shams_Khan/Temp S idhardh Ramesh &#128172; 14:57, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , looks OK, however I will leave it for one of the copyright team to assess. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 09:44, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, the issue was solved, and then I edited the article to maximum avoid puffery/peacock. Could you please check the article for removing the issues? Thank You S idhardh Ramesh  &#128172; 07:01, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

RentSeeker Inc
Hi Jack Frost, you just nominated a page for deletion RentSeeker Inc. I request you to please check all references again. It might be possible few references i missed. However for your information, Rentseeker is a notable company in Canada. The notability is justified on various trusted news websites such as Huffpost, Daily Hive, CTV News, Global News, RenX, Torontostoreys and others. These resources are reliable and independent of the subject and not the press releases. It is also listed on BBB. JPKSingh (talk) 11:57, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , my view is that that that coverage does not meet the threshold of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Jack Frost (talk) 09:42, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Circular review system
Thank you, Jack Frost. I used text regarding Iron Vision system from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava#Iron_Vision_helmet-mounted_display_system. Can I delete also this text from Merkava article in Wiki?--Swadim (talk) 04:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I cannot find a copyright violation on that page; if you have identified one then please let me know. Also, copying content between articles on Wikipedia is not always acceptable.  Please have a look on the plagiarism guideline for further information. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 10:04, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

This page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava#Iron_Vision_helmet-mounted_display_system appears to be a direct copy from oruzhie.info/en/tanks/6-tank-merkava-mk-4-technical-specifications-the-weight-dimensions.--Swadim (talk) 10:15, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks for letting me know, I'll have a look into it. Cheers, Jack Frost (talk) 10:49, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

ACC
Hi Jack Frost! I just wanted to message you and ask if you've heard from the ACC team regarding your application to be a tool user. Have you heard from anyone? I'm just getting online and back after being busy with work and other life matters, so I apologize for the delay checking in with you about it. Please let me know (ping me in your response here so that I'll receive a notification); I'll be happy to check on your application if you haven't heard anything and if it's still pending. :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I still haven't heard from anyone. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I took a look at your application, and it looks like it was declined at 2019-05-25 11:22:38. The reason was because you were not identified to the Wikimedia Foundation when you applied. Looking at the Access to Nonpublic Information Policy Noticeboard, you appear to be listed and hence identified to the Wikimedia Foundation now. All you need to do is submit a new ACC tool user application so that you can be considered now that you're all set as far as the noticeboard and the agreement goes. :-) Please let me know if I can help you with anything else, and I'll be happy to do so. :-) Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:09, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I realised that and then waited to be listed as identified. The issue is the system itself will not allow you to submit a second ACC tool user application... I tried emailing the enwiki-acc-admins list as suggested, however the emails kept bouncing. Hence, I resorted to your userpage... Any further suggestions would be gratefully appreciated. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 09:21, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh! Interesting! I didn't know that you can only submit one ACC application... Other than contacting the ACC tool admins via the email list, I'm not sure how you'd update or respond directly to your application if it was declined and you wish to be reconsidered... I'll need to discuss this with the ACC tool admins and figure out why this is the way that it is. :-) I'll see what can be done and how an admin would reset an application and get back to you...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:05, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I've sent an email to the ACC admin team with some questions and thoughts regarding this process. I'll update you once I hear back... :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:13, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , I've been away for a couple of months, and on my return have realised I never heard back about this... Any update? Jack Frost (talk) 08:36, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Jack Frost! I apologize for such a delay responding to your message here; I was busy with real-life things and I'm just getting over being sick this week... I'm just now getting all caught up with the Wikipedia messages, emails, requests, pings, and responses that I've received. :-) I'll check your application today and see what's going on...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   19:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've just started a new ACC admin group discussion regarding your application for ACC tool user access and asked the group to take a look at it, evaluate your contributions and your fit as a tool user, and respond with their thoughts and their "support / oppose" vote. I'll keep checking on it and let you know as soon as the discussion has come to a close. I apologize that your application and request for access has taken so long to get to...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , No worries!! I've been away from Wikipedia for a while so it didn't affect too much! Cheers, Jack Frost (talk) 03:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Glenn Rawson (2nd nomination)
Since you were involved in the first time this article was deleted, I thought I'd bring it to your attention once again as the rationale is identical. Toddst1 (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019
Hello ,

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.
 * Backlog

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.
 * Coordinator

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for  making  the occasional  mistake while  others can learn from  their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.
 * This month's refresher course

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.
 * Deletion tags

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.
 * Paid editing


 * Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
 * Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent  enhancements to  the New Pages Feed and  features in the Curation  tool, and there are still more to  come. Due to the wealth  of information  now displayed by  ORES, reviewers are strongly  encouraged to  use the system now rather than Twinkle; it  will  also  correctly  populate the logs.
 * Not English
 * A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.
 * Tools

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019
Hello ,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon. There are now holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action. Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays. Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox. Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards. Admin has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers. Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources. Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13. The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights. There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion. To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting the queue to 0
 * Coordinator
 * This month's refresher course
 * Tools
 * It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
 * It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
 * Reviewer Feedback
 * Second set of eyes
 * Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
 * Do be sure to have our talk page  on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
 * Arbitration Committee
 * Community Wish list

New Page Review newsletter December 2019


This year's Reviewer of the Year is. Having gotten the reviewer PERM in August 2018, they have been a regular reviewer of articles and redirects, been an active participant in the NPP community, and has been the driving force for the emerging NPP Source Guide that will help reviewers better evaluate sourcing and notability in many countries for which it has historically been difficult.
 * Reviewer of the Year

Special commendation again goes to who ends the year as one of our most prolific reviewers for the second consecutive year. Thanks also to and  who have been in the top 5 for the last two years as well.

Several newer editors have done a lot of work with CAPTAIN MEDUSA and DannyS712 (who has also written bots which have patrolled thousands of redirects) being new reviewers since this time last year.

Thanks to them and to everyone reading this who has participated in New Page Patrol this year.

(The top 100 reviewers of the year can be found here)

A recent Request for Comment on creating a new redirect autopatrol pseduo-permission was closed early. New Page Reviewers are now able to nominate editors who have an established track record creating uncontroversial redirects. At the individual discretion of any administrator or after 24 hours and a consensus of at least 3 New Page Reviewers an editor may be added to a list of users whose redirects will be patrolled automatically by.
 * Redirect autopatrol

Set to launch early in the new year is our first New Page Patrol Source Guide discussion. These discussions are designed to solicit input on sources in places and topic areas that might otherwise be harder for reviewers to evaluate. The hope is that this will allow us to improve the accuracy of our patrols for articles using these sources (and/or give us places to perform a WP:BEFORE prior to nominating for deletion). Please watch the New Page Patrol talk page for more information.
 * Source Guide Discussion

While New Page Reviewers are an experienced set of editors, we all benefit from an occasional review. This month consider refreshing yourself on Notability (geographic features). Also consider how we can take the time for quality in this area. For instance, sources to verify human settlements, which are presumed notable, can often be found in seconds. This lets us avoid the (ugly) 'Needs more refs' tag. Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * This month's refresher course

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020
Hello ,

The first NPP source guide discussion is now underway. It covers a wide range of sources in Ghana with the goal of providing more guidance to reviewers about sources they might see when reviewing pages. Hopefully, new page reviewers will join others interested in reliable sources and those with expertise in these sources to make the discussion a success.
 * Source Guide Discussion

New to NPP? Looking to try something a little different? Consider patrolling some redirects. Redirects are relatively easy to review, can be found easily through the New Pages Feed. You can find more information about how to patrol redirects at WP:RPATROL.
 * Redirects


 * Discussions and Resources
 * There is an ongoing discussion around changing notifications for new editors who attempt to write articles.
 * A recent discussion of whether Michelin starred restraunts are notable was archived without closure.
 * A resource page with links pertinent for reviewers was created this month.
 * A proposal to increase the scope of G5 was withdrawn.

Geographic regions, areas and places generally do not need general notability guideline type sourcing. When evaluating whether an article meets this notability guideline please also consider whether it might actually be a form of WP:SPAM for a development project (e.g. PR for a large luxury residential development) and not actually covered by the guideline.
 * Refresher

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7095 Low – 4991 High – 7095

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Vasily Sokolovskiy
I think Vasily Sokolovskiy is an R from alternative transliteration rather than an R from misspelling, as you've tagged it. However I don't really know anything about romanisation of Russian, and have never understood the point of redirect categories, so I thought perhaps you're more clued-up on one or both of those topics than me. Any thoughts? Keep up the good work, – Arms & Hearts (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * , Oops... Thanks for the heads up; I've fixed it. You're quite right, I hadn't twigged there was a category for transliteration. Have a good day! Jack Frost (talk) 04:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Peanut Butter Blossom Cookies
Hi! I was hoping you could give me some suggestions as to how to improve my page. I have read the "What Wikipedia is Not" and I don't believe I created a page that goes against any of these items. I also have referenced other wiki pages like Snickerdoodle, Thumbprint Cookie, Chocolate Chip Cookie, Apple Pie, Brownies, etc and cannot figure out why those qualify and this does not. Do I have to remove certain references? Though I don't think it is promoting a particular company. I thought maybe Pillsbury, but it isn't a Pillsbury recipe, it is just the historic competition that the Cookie was created from is under their name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfarren23 (talk • contribs) 19:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thank you for your contributions. I was referencing that Wikipedia is not a recipe database or cookbook; that is, the article (as it stands) reads like an entry in a cookbook or magazine, rather than an impartial, informational encyclopaedia article. I am also not convinced that the sources evidence significant coverage, in reliable sources sufficient to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I also note that just because a similar article exists, doesn't mean this should get a free pass. If you would like, when I have a chance to sit down and dedicate some time to it, I'll see if I can help edit the draft a little? I wish you all the best, and if you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask! -- Jack Frost (talk) 22:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Jack Frost. I will work on this. The explanation was very helpful! And if you have any pointers when you get time, feel free to send across!! I appreciate you taking the time to help guide me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfarren23 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft: El Nukoya
Dear Jack, My recent Draft on El Nukoya was nominated for speedy deletion for violation of Copyright. Can you kindly specifically note the parts that violated this right and also tips on how to improve it for subsequent submission. Funmilola Olojotuyi (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Funmilola Olojotuyi
 * Hi Funmilola Olojotuyi, the article was almost entirely copied from a National Mirror article (found here}. Wikipedia has strict policies regarding Copyright material. Basically, things have to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. These articles might also be helpful. It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you can get help at the Help desk or the Teahouse. Thank you, --Jack Frost (talk) 14:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much for this. I will keep in touch. Funmilola Olojotuyi (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Funmilola Olojotuyi

Vote
Since you have been involved in the recent discussion on talk:Kim_Hee-chul%23Personal_life_section, I’m contacting you to please add either your support or rejection in the vote Talk:Kim_Hee-chul. I think you are the last one from the initial discussion that still has not provided his/her opinion. CherryPie94 &#x1F352;&#x1f967; (talk)
 * Thanks for letting me know; I've never heard of the guy, I stumbled across the article through recent changes and found the arguments for deleting the content entirely unpersuasive. Cheers, --Jack Frost (talk) 10:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Actions at AfD
Hi Jack. I was looking through the AfDs that were closed today and I noticed Articles for deletion/Wide Eyes which was eligible for a soft delete. In these scenarios please do not do a non-administrative relist (more is said at WP:RELISTBIAS). Thanks and best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'm back with a few more concerns. I don't disagree with your interpretation of consensus at Articles for deletion/Visions of the 10th Chamber Part II or Articles for deletion/The Lasses (band) but WP:NACAFD says non-sysops should only be closing beyond a doubt keeps. There is also Articles for deletion/Ssard where there is some argument to be made that the correct consensus is delete and redirect an outcome you obviously could not implement. And then there is Articles for deletion/New Union Party (2nd nomination) which isn't necessarily wrong but I know that I would personally relist as you only have one editor making, in my reading, a policy/guideline supported keep rationale. is something which deserves little to no weight. Normally in a situation where 1 week after nomination you have the nom and two keeps I would relist. If you are interested in working deletion some of the other XfD forums are more open to non-administrative actions than AfD - or alternatively you could always consider a Request for adminship. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Sorry for all the notifications. Barkeep49 (talk)


 * Hi Barkeep49,
 * Thank you for your messages.
 * Firstly, I agree with your pointing out the eligibility for soft delete, I realised yesterday that these were eligible for such, and stopped re-listing them immediately, then re-visited deletion policy, AFD policy, and WP:RELISTBIAS to ensure I didn't cock it up again. Mea culpa.
 * In terms of consensus, it appears you agree with my read of consensus on all but Articles for deletion/New Union Party (2nd nomination) and Articles for deletion/Ssard?
 * Regarding Articles for deletion/Ssard:
 * Nomination by stated "Appears to fail WP:GNG. Not finding third-party coverage of the character."
 * I note there was a !vote for delete and re-direct and one for re-direct.
 * stated "Redirect to Eighth Doctor#Novels, this character fails GNG, as the only source given is just a passing mention, but he is mentioned with a bit of description at the target so redirecting is the best choice."
 * stated "Delete and redirect per Devonian Wombat. No appropriate sources. May have some value as a search term."
 * My view was that consensus was clear for redirection (acknowledging the small number of participants); as you have identified, the question was whether the appropriate outcome was for redirection alone, or deletion and redirection.
 * Both editors, and nominator, agreed that there was insufficient sourcing available to meet the threshold of GNG. Prior to closing, I also had a nose around, and also couldn't find appropriate sourcing (if I had, I would have (1) added it to the article, and (2) !voted rather than closed the discussion).
 * Given the existence of content at the target raising the possibility of merging content from the subject article into the target (although I could not see value in doing so personally), and lack of strong consensus on  deletion  (rather, a consensus that the article failed to meet the GNG and therefore did not warrant existence in mainspace); I noted the consensus for redirection, and blanked and redirected the article


 * Regarding Articles for deletion/New Union Party (2nd nomination):
 * Acknowledging it was the first round through AFD, so relisting may have been a relatively cheap and painless outcome; there were three !votes in addition to the nomination.


 * Setting aside the opinions of the nominator; I noted their review of the sourcing and policies as their rationale for deletion.
 * 's statement that "American political history is under told. This should be kept" was given no weight as an opinion which cited no policies, guidelines, or sources.
 * , amongst expression of their opinion (which was given minimal weight) provided an analysis of the sourcing and expressed their view that the article did meet the hurdle of the GNG.
 * Disregarding the obituaries, which don't contribute very much toward the threshold of significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources; Namiba puts forward coverage in the books as meeting GNG.
 * stated "Keep, for a party on the U.S. left in the 1980s, pulling thousands of votes in a single district isn't all that bad. Article has potential for improvement. http://www.slp.org/pdf/statements/nup.pdf has more detail on the split with SLP, from SLP perspective. An article on NUP, https://books.google.com/books?id=xlIMANRajC0C, p. 117".
 * Disregarding the opinion, there were two further sources provided. Editor appeared to be expressing the view that the article, with the inclusion of the new sources which they identified; meets the threshold of GNG.
 * Given two apparently policy based rationales regarding sources meeting WP:GNG; I felt that consensus was reached for the article to be kept. I do acknowledge that re-listing was another option open to me, however you stated yourself that my decision was "...[not] necessarily wrong...".


 * In terms of non-administrator closures:
 * My understanding of both WP:NACD and WP:BADNAC is that they essentially state that (1) established editors, that are (2) independent of the discussion, where (3) the result is uncontroversial, and (4) which the editor has the technical ability to implement; may close discussions.
 * Hence, my view was that all of the above closures were in line with both policy and guideline. Although I note that I may have been on the fence regarding controversiality (given you have raised questions) and I shall take that on board.
 * I'm therefore surprised to find that this (quite poorly worded) section, apparently states that NAC is limited to only clear keep results at AfD. I have never come across this before, and I had certainly not interpreted this section that way before.
 * I'm also surprised given my reading of this discussion (amongst others) is that the general understanding is that this is not the case?
 * I'd appreciate if you could point me in the direction of some clarification (i.e. policy discussions, RFC; esentially where this was established)? Mostly because I'm curious whether I'm the outlier here in my understanding, but also because I might have a crack at making that page clearer for dills like me.


 * Thanks again for taking the time to let me know; I'm always open to (and do actually appreciate) feedback. Cheers, --Jack Frost (talk) 02:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the thoughtful reply I genuinely appreciate the non-defensive way you've responded. On their own I'm not saying anything about 10th Chamber or Lasses as I think you're right that there is mixed messaging in our writings. As can be seen at WT:NAC (where FWIW I think there has been general consensus to implement tighter restrictions at AfD but not at other XfD we've just never tried to formalize wording) this is something that's bothered me longer than I've had the bit. And Ssard shows the reason why. It is a borderline call between redirect and delete and redirect. Psychology tell us that you are, if only subconsciously, inclined to close the kind of edge case as redirect. That's not what, in my view, should be the determinant on borderline calls. It is also what RELISTBIAS is talking about in the case of Wide Eyes. (Quick tangent: when you were saying "these" in terms of articles that caused you to review, I hope you weren't referring to Articles for deletion/1st Round Enterprises which was not eligible for SOFTDELETE, though it might be after 7 more days) I have not reviewed your work beyond that 1 day and so the one mistake and two borderline calls could be a fluke - once when was re-engaging with AfD I came across a few closures that raised an eyebrow without looking kind of like here but which proved to be nothing when I took a more comprehensive look - or it could be something. I'll just close with the same thought I offered before: if you're interested in this kind of work some other XfD venues are far more welcoming of NAC and of course there is always RfA. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

ACC tool access request approved
Thank you for your interest in the account creation process. I have verified that you have signed the confidentiality agreement for nonpublic information and approved your request.

You may now access the interface here pending a tool root marking your account as identified in the tool database. Before you begin handling requests, please ensure you have read and understood the account creation guide and username policy to familiarize yourself with the process.

Please subscribe yourself to the private ACC mailing list following the instructions on that page. I also advise that you also join us on IRC where a bot informs us when new account requests come in and you can get real time advice on how to handle requests.

Please note failure to correctly assess requests will result in suspension of tool access. Account creation is not a race, and each one should be handled diligently and thoroughly. Releasing personally identifying information (such as IP and email addresses), whether intentionally or unintentionally, is treated very seriously and will generally result in immediate suspension.

Currently you are allowed to create up to six accounts per day, and you won't be able to create an account with a similar name to that of another user; these requests are marked as "Flagged user needed" on the interface. However, if you reach the limit frequently, you can request the account creator permission at Requests for permissions/Account creator.

Please don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you have any questions. Thank you for participating in the account creation process. Again welcome! —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 07:00, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the team! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:30, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * &, thanks to both of you! Jack Frost (talk) 11:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You bet. Welcome!!! :-D  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:34, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Creation: List of reviewers by subject notice
Hi, you are receiving this notice because you are listed as an active Articles for Creation reviewer.

Recently a list of reviewers by area of expertise was created. This notice is being sent out to alert you to the existence of that list, and to encourage you to add your name to it. If you or other reviewers come across articles in the queue where an acceptance/decline hinges on specialist knowledge, this list should serve to facilitate contact with a fellow reviewer.

To end on a positive note, the backlog has dropped below 1,500, so thanks for all of the hard work some of you have been putting into the AfC process!

Sent to all Articles for Creation reviewers as a one-time notice. To opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Regards, (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

RedWarn - Quick Survey
Hello Jack Frost! Thank you so much for testing RedWarn so far. I kindly ask that you fill in a short survey regarding the future of RedWarn and to help me visualise general user opinion surrounding certain features.

To access the survey, visit: https://devices.edxt.net/redwarnSurvey

Thank you again for your continued feedback and support, it is greatly appreciated. Ed6767  talk!  22:16, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

If you'd like to opt-out of receiving messages regarding RedWarn, or have any questions, please let me know on my talk page.

Account creator granted
After reviewing your request for the "accountcreator" permission, I have enabled the flag on your account. Keep in mind these things: If you no longer require the right, let me know, or ask any other administrator. Drop a note on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of the account creator right. Happy editing! stwalkerster (talk) 20:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The account creator right removes the limit on the maximum number of new accounts that can be created in a 24-hour period.
 * The account creator right is not a status symbol. If it remains unused, it is likely to be removed. Abuse of the account creator right will result in its removal by an administrator.

Divizion is a Soviet special-to-arm term for an artillery battalion
..like the Royal Artillery call their roughly-battalion-sized units, "regiments". Buckshot06 (talk) 02:01, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Bollocks, I thought it was a misspelling from the context. I've learnt something new, thanks for letting me know! Jack Frost (talk) 02:19, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse Host
Dear Jack Frost, thank you for volunteering as a host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, and by following our expectations, you are helping new users get a hold of the ropes here at Wikipedia, and helping experienced users who just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Here are some links you may find helpful as a Host:
 * Helpful scripts you can install to make Teahouse responding easier,
 * templates to use and, of course:
 * the question forum itself.

Editors who have signed up as hosts, but who have not contributed at the Teahouse for six months or so may be removed from the list of hosts.


 * If you fancy choosing an image to go with your Host entry, that'd be great. (We've got an awful lot of default teacups. No pressure though. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello Jack Frost. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know, however, that there is consensus that we shouldn't tag pages as lacking context (CSD A1) and/or content (CSD A3) moments after they are created, as you did at 7 Networks Worldwide. It's usually best to wait at least 10–15 minutes for more content to be added if the page is very short, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Tagging such pages in a very short space of time may drive away well-meaning contributors, which is not good for Wikipedia. Attack pages (G10), patent nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.  Passenger pigeon  ( talk )  09:37, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer newsletter June 2020
Hello ,

NPP Sorting can be a great way to find pages needing new page patrolling that match your strengths and interests. Using ORES, it divides articles into topics such as Literature or Chemistry and on Geography. Take a look and see if you can find time to patrol a couple pages a day. With over 10,000 pages in the queue, the highest it's been since ACPERM, your help could really make a difference. In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.
 * Your help can make a difference
 * Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate
 * Discussions and Resources
 * A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
 * Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
 * A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
 * Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the comment and review request
Hi, thank you for leaving the welcome message on my wikipedia talk page. I am new on Wikipedia and I really appreciated your feedback. As it is mentioned in your post, I just wanted to ask you if you could please review my draft for approval again? Because I did not acknowledge the fact that my username could cause a COI, I changed it. I am a master student in public policy and I have been personally interested in creating the content that you read; and as you will be able to see, there has been another reviewer who has also seen my draft after you and mentioned that the "prose and refs are mostly fine". I hope you could help me, thank you in advance for all the help! (StarkRules (talk) 08:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC))
 * Hi and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm more than happy to re-review the draft, however before I do I wanted to ask; do you have a Conflict of Interest to International Public Policy Association? It is OK if you do, however Wikipedia has some strict policies that you will need to abide by. There is a simpler explanation of these policies available here. Could you please read through those policies, especially the requirements regarding disclosure of Conflicts of Interest, prior to responding. Thanks, -- Jack Frost (talk) 08:44, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Jack Frost! Thank you so much again for your kind response. To be honest I interned at the organization; so after reading everything you send me I would have no problem saying that I had a COI to it as I have no issues allowing others to edit and publish the article instead of me - which is what I understand is going to happen, right? I wanted to inform people with "International Public Policy Articles" related on Wikipedia, for students who like me, wanted to know about organizations and people that work in the field of political science and public policy, as I have seen in other articles and profiles, such as from the IPSA or the APSA, and so on; therefore my interest to write about it. I think I have a neutral point of view and enough references about the object of the article; plus I submitted it for review as well. Could you please guide through what to do to publish it? Thank you so much again for all your help! (StarkRules (talk) 09:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC))

Complaint that was posted on your user page
Just as a heads up, someone posted this on your user page when it should have gone to your talk page. I reverted it but just wanted to let you know about it in case you wanted to talk with them.  bibliomaniac 1  5  05:47, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'd missed that entirely; I'll endeavour to respond to them today. Jack Frost (talk) 05:59, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Message on userpage
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (your reason here) --Yeswolf (talk) 06:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I know the previous submission and the deleted page were lacking information. I have secured the services of someone who fully understands how to write a proper Wikipedia article, complete with references/footnotes (or whatever they are called) but we need the old page restored so we can replace it with the new article once it is written.

FYI -- I am an established Hollywood character actor working in the industry for over 30 years who has appeared on over 100 television shows and in a variety of movies. I am a member of the Screen Actors Guild, the American Federation of Radio and Television Artists, Actor's Equity Association, the American Guild of Variety Artists, and the Television Academy (producers of the Emmy's) -- please note, an actor does NOT get in any of these organizations, particularly the Television Academy, without extensive credits and career exposure.

Even TV Guide cites me as a "celebrity" https://www.tvguide.com/celebrities/van-epperson/276086/.

Among my credits, I have appeared in three different Star Trek series (the Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, & Enterprise) and am one of less than a handful of actors who has appeared in both the Star Trek and Doctor Who universes (I made an appearance on the Doctor Who spinoff series Torchwood). https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0258371/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1

In 2016, both the MIRROR and the SUN newspapers in London, England cited me as one of only three actors ranked as "3rd place for the most underrated television actor ***OF ALL TIME***" www.VanEpperson.com/press, based on research that compared the all time top TV shows with a list of actors to see who had appeared on them more than any other actors (again, you can see that article on my website at . I am also a respected acting coach, acting teacher, and personal mentor for actors in Hollywood. Yeswolf (talk) 06:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for your message which I have copied across from my userpage to answer here on my talkpage. In relation to the article about you; Wikipedia has a number of specific policies relating to articles about people. The key thing is that for anyone or anything to have an article on Wikipedia, there must be signficant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. Some specific guidelines also relate to actors. I want to note that creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged; if what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. I also want to highlight that there are specific guidelines relating to people who edit with a conflict of interest or who are getting paid to edit; the person whom you have secured must comply with these guidelines if they do go ahead and edit on your behalf. In relation to accessing the article which has been deleted; please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Best wishes, --Jack Frost (talk) 10:46, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

aivo´s page
Hi, how are you? thanks. Why do you think I work at aivo? Im not. Plus, I only want to put the same article in english, would you do it correctly? I will not going to read or get into a wiki editor to do it, if this doesnt work, I will never come back and I will never recommend to be a contributor of wikipedia. My reason? simple: keep it simple.

best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drawinstoned (talk • contribs) 13:22, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I am not saying you work at Aivo, I was asking whether you might have a conflict of interest such as getting paid to create the page. I am asking because that draft looks very much like a promotional article. For the article to remain on Wikipedia, it will need to be written in a neutral encyclopedic way. You will also need to find significant coverage in reliable secondary sources which demonstrate the company is sufficiently notable to warrant an article. You can find further assistance at the Teahouse or by placing on your talkpage. All the best, -- Jack Frost (talk) 13:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi and tks jack frost, but if you read the article in spanish (already published) I only want to put those words on english, just that. Not even trying to sell anything or add more words, just put the exactly same article in english. As a matter in fact, all wikipedia shall do that with spanish articles. If is that complicated, just forget it.

thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drawinstoned (talk • contribs) 15:34, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

About koli people Wikipedia page
Dear friend as i am Indian and coming from this community i have knowledge about religion of koli people. And also in data of government of india, religion of koli people is Hinduism.And you also known that in Hindu this caste exist. This caste is not exist in any other religion like islam, Christian and other.and if you think koli hindu convert into islam then they will also loss identity of Hinduism and free from using it caste system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:830d:66a:8dc8:a6f:7576:61bf (talk • contribs) 13:32, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, as discussed in my response to your edit request, please provide reliable sources that support the changes you want to be made to the article. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 14:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Need your help please Jack
Hi Jack, saw your comment on the page about the article being taken down. It said 'Helped'.

I wanted to know how I can get the article back up so it meets Wikipedia's requirements please?

Can you help me with getting it back up into a form where it's acceptable please?
 * n.b. Responded on talkpage. --Jack Frost (talk) 08:57, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Mail Notice
Celestina007 (talk) 21:26, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of military brats
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of military brats. 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. 2601:199:4181:E00:917:9F8:2A7:8420 (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks
First of all, thanks for accepting my submission, and for cleaning the article up a bit. I do have a few questions for you (mostly about your edits). Not biggies, but if you get the time to answer, it would be much appreciated.


 * You seem to have changed a load of things to "English", instead of British. Her nationality is British and that is cited in The Mirror article (in the headline: "Brit jihadi mum..."). It doesn't specifically mention that she is English, just that lived in England.
 * The article, as it reads now, suggests that the subject was born in Hayes. But there is no conclusive suggestion that this is where she was born. The Mirror has the exact same ambigious statement, to be fair. But generally I think that would translate as "she was born and lived in / comes from Hayes". She may have been born elsewhere in the UK, or even outside the UK. I think it's likely she is English, and maybe even born in Hayes, but we don't know for sure.
 * You also changed or removed, I think two instances, of the word 'terrorist'. It seemed succinct to me, so why change it?
 * The headlines 'Kindness' and I think 'Radicalisation'? Changed to 'Early life' and 'Support for terrorism'. Could you explain your thinking on those?
 * Minor changes, I guess out of preference for your own personal language usage... like "had been" to "had come"; "stopped" to "ceased" and "engaged in" to "became active on" aren't specifically to my taste! lol But I'll not quibble, except to say that I'm going to change "had ceased" to "ceased" because I feel it reads better grammatically that way. The tense has changed though, with my original having been purely simple past tense, to the current which is a kind of mixture between the past tense (past perfect?) to something that feels more like present tense (maybe past continuous?).

I'm not trying to be a pain in the arse here! I'm just trying to judge my own contribution against yours and get some sense for some of the changes you made. Other changes (and corrections to my typos!) seem great to me. :) Oh, and I'm not trying to protect 'my' article, either!

Cheers. --82.21.97.70 (talk) 11:43, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey IP; no worries, great article! I'll try and give you my thinking for my changes:
 * I added categories which were as specific as possible; knuckling down to English rather than British, info seems to be she was born in England, lived in England, and committed her crimes in England, hence; English. I didn't change any prose regarding her nationality.
 * I read the info as being born / raised in Hayes. Happy if it's changed.
 * I changed "...British woman convicted of a terrorist plot to place a bomb..." to "...British woman convicted of plotting to place a bomb at..." to make it active voice. I also changed "...Shaikh started formulating a plan which involved various targets..." to "...Shaikh began formulating a plan for a terrorist attack involving various targets..." - for context.
 * I changed Kindness to Early life to fit with the majority of our articles. In hindsight, it wasn't all early life, but Kindness didn't seem to provide enough context as a heading. I didn't change Support for terrorism; that's what was there.
 * The language changes were more preference for what felt like it flowed as I worked through the article, with a smattering of MOS changes. I'm not particularly wedded to any of it; this link shows you exactly what I changed so you can change any of it back if you wish.
 * Hope that explains a little about what my thinking was, and please don't hesitate to let me know if you need anything else (although I suspect you'll actually just want me to leave the article alone :-D ). Cheers, Jack Frost (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * On the contrary - have at it! I take no ownership of the article. I'm happy to have had it accepted. I really no longer have much time for editing Wikipedia, anyway. I keep my contact with it to a minimum these days, as I had such a bad experience in the past. I might read over it again in the future (or if I learn anything more about the subject), but I'm happy for it to just go its own way. Thanks very much for taking the time to explain your edits to me. Means a lot to have these kinds of positive interactions from the place! Cheers. --82.21.97.70 (talk) 03:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Category: Lо∨ifm_Top_Songs
(Post removed)


 * Hi User:178.120.12.34 or User:Q-WKPA, welcome to Wikipedia. I'm unsure why you copied that section of a page here, although I assume it is because I have nominated Category:Lо∨ifm Top Songs for speedy deletion. This is because this is not a category, and appears to be a test page. If you wish to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you were trying to create an article, you can do that here. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 10:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 *  Nevermind... Long-term Abuse case that I wasn't aware of... Now indef blocked. Bah humbug. --Jack Frost (talk) 11:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC) 

Dropping a line
Could you find me on IRC when you have a few minutes? I might not be fully around, but I should be around shortly after. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 19:54, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Jack Frost (talk) 05:26, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Swatis (Pashtun Tribe)
Thanks for the concern the content of this page is well referenced  while some users like Haider Khan10 who seem to be from this tribe want to change the origin of the this tribe according to their wishes as Afghans. They don't have any substantial  proof to their claim but keep changing and editing different  Wikipedia  pages to enlist this community  as Afghans. Something I fail to understand  why. Swatis are race of Dihgan origin and got Pashtunized but this group of editors want to change the fact. Please keep a look on this page as these guys have been making edits to other Wikipedia pages also to substantiate  their claim. Regards Azmarai76 (talk) 08:27, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Page mover granted
Hello, Jack Frost. Your account has been [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJack_Frost granted] the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect, move subpages when moving the parent page(s), and move category pages.

Please take a moment to review Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when  is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:
 * Requested moves
 * Category:Articles to be moved, for article renaming requests awaiting action.

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! Primefac (talk) 01:12, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Any plans to clean up after your move of Life of Samuel Johnson (1787) to Life of Samuel Johnson (Hawkins book) without leaving a redirect (outside the policy linked above)? The move broke 74 existing wikilinks to the old title (no way to tell how many offwiki links it broke; it's been at the old title for 12 years), in addition to breaking the display title. --Xover (talk) 09:28, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * PS. Don't forget the two now-redlinks to the talk page. --Xover (talk) 09:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , firstly, my sincere apologies. And thankyou for taking the time to bring this to my attention. I have firstly reinstated the redirect; which will address any existing external / internal wikilinks (it's clear that I royally fecked that up). Secondly, I have searched high and low, and cannot for the life of me find any other redlinks to the old title or talkpage? It might be that I'm just dim, but could you point me in the direction of one of them so I can fix the lot? Thanks, -- Jack Frost (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Have now:


 * Fix double redirects resulting from the move (handy link) ✅
 * For any non-free media on the page, check their fair use rationale and update the links to the new title.
 * For any navboxes pointing to the old page, fix the links to point to the new title. ✅
 * Make appropriate DISPLAYTITLE, DEFAULTSORT, lead, and hatnote corrections to the moved or affected pages as needed. ✔️
 * If the old title becomes a disambiguation page, or points to a disambig page, disambiguate incoming links.
 * Update talk page and notifications. ✅
 * Welp, that was a cock-up... --Jack Frost (talk) 10:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * (ec) Everything on Special:WhatLinksHere/Life of Samuel Johnson (1787) was a redlink until you recreated the redirect; most (but not all) through the link in . And the two on Special:WhatLinksHere/Talk:Life of Samuel Johnson (1787) are still redlinks because the old talk page hasn't been redirected to the new talk page yet. As WP:POSTMOVE says: even when leaving a redirect, links in infoboxes and navboxes should be cleaned up; and when suppressing redirects you definitely need to check WhatLinksHere and fix them. Page moves also tend to break WP:DISPLAYTITLE (because display titles must resolve to the actual page name, which has just changed) so that's usually a good thing to check too. --Xover (talk) 10:16, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , fixed. Alongside the other articles moved. Thanks. Jack Frost (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. And don't worry overmuch about it: we all make mistakes (been there, done that). --Xover (talk) 10:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Overlapped
Hey,

Just FYI, we overlapped on some of those recent moves. Looks like you moved one after I moved if (The Profitable Arte of Gardening). I'll let you resolve it so we don't overlap again :).

Thanks! --  Dane talk  03:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ - As discussed on IRC. Oops. Jack Frost (talk) 03:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Filmax
Thanks for moving Filmax for me, sorry we were treading on each others' toes at WP:RM/TR. I'll check farther from now for whether "International" is actually part of its founding name, but Filmax seems to be the COMMONNAME.... sorry to have trodden on your toes so I will stand off of WP:RM/TR and of course now I can start the discussion on the talk page as usual. Thank you once again. 178.164.132.118 (talk) 07:04, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey IP, I'm a bit confused; the article has been moved from Filmax International to Filmax, as requested. Have I messed something up?? Jack Frost (talk) 07:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Not at all. I was trying to add info to help you at the TR, without going overboard, but you beat me to it by already moving it, so I mucked up my edit to the TR a bit (I didn't expect you to do it so quickly!) I've checked the various other languages and there is actually not in Spanish, Galego, Catalan or Italian any mention of "International" so I think that is a bit of a puzzle, but I'll take that to WP:RFD or something and do some digging to work out whether "International" has ever been part of its official or common name, because I can't find any evidenxce that it has been so that may just be a misnomer, but that of course can be done as part of the usual discussion process. I speak Spanish and Catalan a bit, (native English) and a bit of Italian, enough to check and understand the references, but right now I don't think "International" was ever part of its name ("Filmax Entertainment" is on some other languages' versions) so that is a puzzle I'm willing to solve... 178.164.132.118 (talk) 07:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ohhh, that makes sense. No problems! I also can't find a reliable reference to Filmax International, so I've taken the liberty of an AWB Run to switch links from Filmax International to Filmax if you do ever want to take it to RFD. Good luck! Jack Frost (talk) 08:03, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Well thank you very much for your help, I just chose "Random Article" (lucky dip) and the first couple I had nothing to contribute, then this one required a bit of cleanup so I just got started to make it better. I'm not claiming it is perfect. I'm just a linguist really and not a subject expert on this, to remove all doubt I am not connected to Filmax in any way, indeed never heard of them, so am disinterested in the best sense of the word... I was speaking Hungarian over breakfast then when my wife went out to work I had a couple of hours to kill and said let's do a lucky dip on WP to try to make it better. Yesterday it was Ergonym, I think you moved that for me too, from Ergonyms, and I did the subbing to make sense on that one a bit, though I'm also inclined to think that the term doesn't really exist in English linguistics (the references are mostly to Russian, German and Latvian and I think Finnish sources) but at least, if you see what I mean, it is better to have it conforming to WP:AT where other editors are more likely to see it and improve it. WP:NOTFINISHED and all that... I edit using a Hungarian keyboard layout and occasionally slip because I touch type, but try to correct my slips quickly and put in the ES that it is my slip when I do so. Thanks once again for all your help. Your AWB run may have pissed on my bonfire that now I have to check all the incoming links in case they are piped as "International".... which would have been easier but anyway a bot would have fixed double redirects so I'll check the incoming links, but WP search and indeed Google Search only has "International" pointing at this very article (not even WP mirrors) so I doubt that incomings are piped but will check.178.164.132.118 (talk) 10:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Heh, I fixed the piped links for "International" too :-) Jack Frost (talk) 10:46, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Ach, Jack,in going through the incoming there is a fly in the ointment: There is Category:Filmax International which I can't list at RM TR as the template says it should be at WP:CFD. I can understand the logic behind that, but at least can you create Category:Filmax as a redirect? As an IP, WP doesn't show me hidden categories and so in a few they are in infoboxes and hidden from an IP ed's point of view, so I only just spotted it.... I have done a tiny bit of cleanup that in one article, apparently Filmax was in Italy and another company I forget which was in Spain, that was simply the wrong order in the table and I checked and fixed.... Have can opener, did you bring the worms? 178.164.132.118 (talk) 10:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Jack Frost (talk) 11:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've done a bit more CE to do the cleanup, not far to go now.... they are bordering not WP:N anyway, Filmax, but at least we together have tried to unravel the Spaghetti Western :) 178.164.132.118 (talk) 11:24, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I've had a good go at L'Auberge_Espagnole and CE'd that to remove the rather French rambling style, and silly things like in the WP:FIRSTSENTENCE linking "auberge" and "espagnole" separately to dictionary.com, when the article then explains (which really is a job for Wiktionary) that French idiom for "auberge espagnole" is essentially Going Dutch or taking Potluck, which EN:WP has articles on as you see, and which I've linked, so to WP:DICDEF that is over-egging the pudding in my opinion, WP:NOTDIC. I may have been a little ruthless in cutting there but it did rather lecture the reader "Here is what a Spanish hotel means in French. Now, I'll tell you in the lede. I'll tell you again in the synopsis. I'll tell you again in the plot. And I'll devote a whole section to telling you what it means". Perhaps this is just me, but I teach English to idiot foreigners for a living, so i am quite a good gauge of wha is patronising and what is not. French people may think otherwise. (Je peut parler francais comme un vache espanol, si vous voulez, I can speak French like a Spanish cow i.e. extremely badly. The typing mistakes there are deliberate, well, nearly....) Nearly there. 178.164.132.118 (talk) 12:46, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can ascertain, Fantastic Factory is just a trading name of Filmax and has been for about twenty years, so that is a candidate for WP:MERGE would you not say? ImDB which of course is not of itself WP:RS has it as "Fantastic Factory (Filmax)" and in looking up the various horror movies' credits they all actually credit Filmax, which makes sense as the legal entity. At {http://www.filmax.com/filmax/aviso-legal filmax.com under legal, in Spanish], Filmax is a trading name of "CASTELAO PICTURES, S.L." ("S.L." is just "Inc." or "Co." or "Ltd", and we haven't an article for th holding company Castelao, at least not when I checked, so perhaps that could do with an R to Filmax as but I am not sure about that since we've hardly anything to say about them). We certainly have nothing to say about Fantastic Factory except what ImDB says, but I'm in Hungary so my search will be biased and other editors might find better sources - as it stands I'd propose a merge of that one into Filmax, what would you suggest? 178.164.132.118 (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I got that wrong in that we do have Castelao but that is a person bio, nothing to do with the film company. 178.164.132.118 ([[User talk:178.164.
 * OK there is which has "International Sales" in English but from filmax.com,. which I clicked through to get there, it was in Spanish (would be the same in Catalan) as "Filmax Internacional", bottom of the main page under "Grupo Filmax", I've just called the sales guy there but there is no answer so I presume they are all having a siesta or something... 178.164.132.118 (talk) 13:21, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Nothing further. Jack Frost (talk) 07:03, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

WP:AFD close issue
Hi, Thanks your first. Fahim Saleh article I saw your are close XDF |this article nomination. I strongly believe that is eligible for "Speedy keep" i don't know why you close it before any admin close this discussion. i don't agree your argument look like result keep. 42.0.4.225 (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, I'm not entirely sure what your question is? The outcome of the AfD discussion for Fahim Saleh, which I closed, was: The result was keep. Acknowledging that AfD is not a vote, and after weighting each editor's arguments accordingly; there is a clear and overwhelming consensus that the article should be kept. There are criteria for a Speedy Keep result which outline when this decision may be made, and it is my view that this discussion was not eligible for a Speedy Keep result. It is also worth noting that there is fundamentally no difference between a Speedy Keep and Keep result, except that a discussion may be closed as Speedy Keep prior to the end of the discussion period (typically 7 days). Please do let me know if you have any questions. Jack Frost (talk) 01:29, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Henry Jones, Sr.
Hi. Please move the page back to Henry Jones, Sr.. This is a fictional character named with the comma, not a biography which is what MOS:Jr pertains to. knew this would be controversial, as would any other fictional character moves based on MOS:JR (I didn't check if any others have been moved, if so, please revert). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 20:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , ✅ per request. Jack Frost (talk) 21:41, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree it's controversial. Sorry it got caught up in my dragnet.  But I don't agree to a fictional character exemption; that's just nonsense.  Randy, why are you so fond of commas over modern grammar and style recommendations? Dicklyon (talk) 00:55, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * That last one was about keeping Dr. King's name how he had used it his entire life. On publications, even on his tomb. During the process I asked you and the others to nominate the commaless name change at the King article to bypass the lead up to it, but for some reason it took a long lead-up before the King articles were joined to the discussion. That's why it went on so long. But this one concerns just the creative rights of an artist or writer to name their creations. What if the word "Huckleberry" becomes popularly hyphenated someday as "huckle-berry". Will Huckleberry Finn have to become Huckle-berry Finn? Of course not, the name of the book and the name of the character would go on without the hyphen. There is no difference between the lack of a hypen in that example and the inclusion of the comma in the Jones case, they are both the literal name of a creation by its author, screenwriter, or artist. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

NXT TakeOver XXV
Hi. I see you moved “NXT TakeOver: XXV” to “NXT TakeOver XXV”. The problem is you moved it to a page that redirects it back to the original page. If you can override the redirect, that would be great. Also the talk page and page history should be moved as well. Thanks so much. OldSkool01 (talk) 02:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , the page was moved, however the move was contested, so the page was moved back to the original title. Given this, if you want the page moved you will need to open a Requested Move discussion on the article talkpage. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 07:30, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

COI Adjustments & Suggestions
Jack Frost,

I received your notice and have added a COI Declaration on my user page to clarify the connections to myself and the article on Robert T. McCowan.

With my inexperience being a factor, I invite you to review the article in question and offer any feedback in distinguishing myself as a neutral party, even with my COI connections.

The article contains extensive sourcing and neutrality, so the only area I see that may create an issue is my use of some quotes?

My goal on wikipedia as a new contributor will be to highlight figures in my state who have not yet been noted.

JRM86 (talk) 11:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Help of Swatis tribe page
Please help me on protecting this page as some users want to change the origin of this tribe from Dehqan to Pashtuns, Bettanis or Afghans. Regards. Azmarai76 (talk) 11:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:White Rabbit Radio


Hello, Jack Frost. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "White Rabbit Radio".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 13:49, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol December Newsletter
Hello ,



It has been a productive year for New Page Patrol as we've roughly cut the size of the New Page Patrol queue in half this year. We have been fortunate to have a lot of great work done by who was the reviewer of the most pages and redirects this past year. Thanks and credit go to and  who join Rosguill in repeating in the top 10 from last year. Thanks to, , and who all got the NPR permission this year and joined the top 10. Also new to the top ten is DannyS712 bot III, programmed by which has helped to dramatically reduce the number of redirects that have needed human patrolling by patrolling certain types of redirects (e.g. for differences in accents) and by also patrolling editors who are on on the redirect whitelist.
 * Year in review

has been named reviewer of the year for 2020. John has held the permission for just over 6 months and in that time has helped cut into the queue by reviewing more than 18,000 articles. His talk page shows his efforts to communicate with users, upholding NPP's goal of nurturing new users and quality over quantity.
 * Reviewer of the Year

As a special recognition and thank you has been awarded the first NPP Technical Achievement Award. His work programming the bot has helped us patrol redirects tremendously - more than 60,000 redirects this past year. This has been a large contribution to New Page Patrol and definitely is worthy of recognition.
 * NPP Technical Achievement Award

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 2262 Low – 2232 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here 18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Organised crime in New Zealand


Hello, Jack Frost. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Organised crime in New Zealand".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 06:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Regarding change in a Page called Karna
Hello sir,

I just wanted to request you regarding editing of the page called 'Karna'. I don't know why but no amount of proofs being submitted or anything is making the admin change it. He/she seems to be editing anything. Is there anything that can be done or we have to deal with it and proofs don't matter?

(Dinesh2069 (talk) 05:50, 19 September 2020 (UTC))
 * , thankyou for your message. I assume you are talking about the page Karnabharam which you made a number of edits to back in July, which were promptly reverted for being unconstructive. On reviewing those edits, I would agree with their reversion; they appeared not to contribute anything constructive to the article. It appears that a number of editors have provided you with advice on your talkpage; I would suggest you review that information before editing again. Best of luck, Jack Frost (talk) 07:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello sir,

Actually no. Karna page has been edit locked for a long time. Actually I gave constructive and correct edits for pages like Bhima whicbwere reverted like it's false information. Kindly help me out. I also gave information about Karna on talk page but no admin seems to be interested in reading it. Kindly look into it. It appears unethical to keep wrong information even after the right one is provided. I don't ask for much. Just want to make some edits to Karna page. He is even called rapist' in that which is wrong. Please help me out. Dinesh2069 (talk) 19:11, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Submission declined on 19 September 2020
Hello Jack, thanks for your review. You said, "This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia". If my topic is an advertisement, what other companies are on Wikipedia? Also, my references are independent and reliable. There are tons of blog links on Wikipedia. I am so sorry but you are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamitdmr (talk • contribs) Thank you, I'll edit by taking into account what you say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamitdmr (talk • contribs)
 * Hello U|Hamitdmr, thanks for your message. You are, of course, referring to Draft:Ant Media Server. I reviewed the draft and declined it for two reasons. Firstly, the references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article-that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Secondly, the article reads more like an advertisement than a neutral encyclopaedia entry. Please address these two things prior to resubmitting it for review. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 04:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC).
 * Blocked for sockpuppetry. Funny that... --Jack Frost (talk) 03:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jack Frost. We are authorized by the client to edit their wiki page and already made the disclosure on the user page. Therefore, we would like to amend the page as soon as possible. Thank you.

Help moving a page
Hi, thanks for your recent help with the move of la Rochefoucauld to La Rochefoucauld. Now I've encountered the same situation again. I want to move DeWitt Clinton to the correct spelling De Witt Clinton, but De Witt Clinton already exists as a redirect back to the incorrect spelling DeWitt Clinton, so I get a conflict. Is there a civilized way I can make this change myself, as a non-admin, or do I need to go through the administrative process again? Thanks in advance for your advice. Eleuther (talk) 06:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, unfortunately there’s no way for someone who is not an admin or page mover to swap two pages, as it requires moving at least one page without leaving a redirect. I’m on an iPad at the moment, however when I get back to a desktop I will do the above move for you to save on the paperwork... Jack Frost (talk) 12:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , maybe I'm a bit dim; but there appear to be quite a few sources listing the name as "DeWitt Clinton". If that's the case I'm a bit loath to move the article unilaterally as it would likely be controversial; perhaps it's one for a Requested Move discussion? Happy to discuss. --Jack Frost (talk) 01:16, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks. There's already a brief discussion on the article's talk page, giving some convincing authorities for "De Witt". It's been there for two years and so far no defenders of "DeWitt" have stepped forward. I suspect the prevalence of DeWitt on the web can be blamed largely on Wikipedia having the incorrect spelling for so many years. But I don't mind opening a Requested Move if you think that's the best course. Cheers, Eleuther (talk) 03:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, Jack. Reviewing the situation a bit more, I think it's better if I do it through a formal Requested Move after all. Thanks for the offer to cut the paperwork, but you were right to develop some qualms. I'll request the move formally in a day or two, after marshaling the evidence more systematically. Thanks! Eleuther (talk) 13:01, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No problems; good luck! Jack Frost (talk) 23:59, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've finally created the move request. I would be interested in your opinion. Thanks! Eleuther (talk) 15:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi,, I see you've been on a kind of vacation. When you return, I would appreciate your advice on how to proceed with this move request, which has not aroused any controversy, but has not aroused any particular interest, either. Thanks in advance for your advice, Eleuther (talk) 18:20, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , my sincere apologies for the delay. I have been away from Wikipedia due to COVID (work rather than illness, thankfully!). It appears that the move request has already been closed with a consensus not to move the article. Sorry I wasn't able to assist further. Thanks, Jack Frost (talk) 07:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm very glad to hear from you, and to hear that you are healthy. In this age, when such a prolific editor goes offline, it's natural to worry.
 * The outcome of the move request was discouraging of course. I didn't see any sign that any of the commenters had bothered to read my arguments in favor. One would think that Wikipedia would be particularly concerned about correcting a widespread error that has largely been brought about by the publication of bad information by Wikipedia itself! But I guess that's just me. Welcome back, Eleuther (talk) 08:12, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi,, sorry to impinge on you again. I would be interested to hear your opinion about this move request, and why it failed, if you have the time and the interest to review it. Thanks for your attention, Eleuther (talk) 19:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Disclosure on user page
Hello Jack Frost. We are authorized by the client to edit their wiki page and already made the disclosure on the user page. Therefore, we would like to amend the page as soon as possible. Thank you. MemePR HK (talk) 03:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

== Hello Jack, my name is Rayane, I just saw your message regarding Rafic Hariri page, this was done by mistake as I don't even recall clicking on this page. Thank you for restoring back the removed info! ==

Rafic_Hariri — Preceding unsigned comment added by RayonR (talk • contribs) 11:14, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

I want to see imfo or watcth the video Scuff Joe (talk) 13:21, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

The ruby
I'd suggest moving the page back yourself to its previous title. I think you can do this, as the only author, fingers crossed. Even though that might seem pointless, it will maintain the history and hence the attribution within the article before (and while) it was a redirect. An admin might be reluctant to delete an article with substantive history just because you moved it to a title that you don't like. Then you'll be left with a fresh redirect with no history at the unwanted title, blank it and ask for it to be speedily-deleted. If you're lucky, an admin might spot what has happened and do it all for you. Lithopsian (talk) 20:52, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , well spotted. I thought I had shifted everything back already. Now fixed. Jack Frost (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Midnight Starring
Hello, Jack Frost,

What were all of these moves about? The redirect page ended up where it was originally before you started moving it around. Liz Read! Talk! 21:33, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, to be frank, it comes down to a cock-up. I moved "Midnight Star" to "Midnight Star (Band)" then was going to redirect the original title, as I accepted a draft disambiguation page at "Midnight star". I accidently clicked "move subpages" when I did the move of the original, single page, which kicked off the subsequent three-ring circus of new page titles for everything... I think that I have now moved everything back to where it should be, listed the stupid titles for deletion, and fixed the redirects. My apologies to you and anyone else affected by this unholy mess. Jack Frost (talk) 21:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)


 * FYI, I moved the band's article back to Midnight Star. The band is very likely the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the capitalized version of this name (see WP:DIFFCAPS), and your move broke over 100 incoming links to the article. Also, if it was moved, it should have been to Midnight Star (band), not Midnight Star (Band). Please feel free to open a WP:RM discussion if you disagree. - Eureka Lott 22:44, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , I had been waiting for the rest of this shenanigan to be fixed before doing an AWB run to fix the links. Given you have contested the move, and the support of policy, I have absolutely no intention of runnning it to argument. What a palaver. Jack Frost (talk) 23:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's okay, you're allowed one mistake. ;-) Seriously though, please remember with all moves to check redirects and links. I just took care of about a dozen broken redirects that happened when an admin deleted an old article that had numerous redirects. They didn't check "What links here", hence, the clean-up.
 * It's a strange thing, there's a couple of bots that will switch redirects when a page is moved if a redirect is left and when there is a really bad page move (not well-intentioned like yours), they will switch redirects to the new bad title. But when some editor or admin switches the page back, they often don't leave a redirect from the bad title to the original title. Without a redirect linking the two pages, the bots are lost and the previous redirects which had been changed to point to the bad title are now broken and are deleted unless someone is checking the bot list which I try to do daily. You can see why someone wouldn't leave a redirect from the bad title to the good one but it can really mess up the bots handling redirect changes. Liz Read! Talk! 00:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)