User talk:Miraclepine/Archive 2

Purpose of edit
What are you trying to say with this edit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/918514203

The picture of the book isn't showing. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 08:48, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The bot removed the image due to NFCC 9, but I thought the caption would be useful for reference. ミラP 15:05, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , ah. Then direct link to the picture with ":" File:Example.jpg File:Example.jpg --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 15:20, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Edward Grady Partin
Hi there,

I noticed that you removed almost all of the content from Edward Grady Partin due to copyright infringement. Thanks for catching it. However, I noticed that you removed the categories as well as the content. I am not sure why you would do that, given that categories are by definition not copyrighted.--TM 11:51, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Because nothing in the retained text matches all of the categories. I commented them out for now. ミラP 15:05, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Swift Retort
Can you please revisit and possibly revert your relist at Articles for deletion/Operation Swift Retort (film), and let an admin handle this. The basis of the weak keep is founded on poor sources and has already been rebutted. IMHO it is unnecessary to be extended. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  06:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. ミラP 11:23, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind consideration. regards. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  11:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Francis Xavier Ransdell
Just a heads-up, I'm actually pretty sure that your initial guess about the creator of Francis Xavier Ransdell, in your nomination statement at Articles for deletion/Francis Xavier Ransdell was actually correct — it would most likely be impossible to definitively prove it now, but there's a lot of circumstantial evidence that Gulfstream411 actually was a sockpuppet of exactly the user you first suspected. I've explained the evidence in my comment on the AFD discussion. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

October 2019
Dear Miraclepine! Can you make categories Category:Russian films about revenge, Category:Turkish films about revenge, Category:Swedish films about revenge, Category:Bangladeshi films about revenge and Category:Philippine films about revenge? Thank you! --178.66.99.51 (talk) 09:19, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe if my mind goes up to it. ミラP 13:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Erotica and Pornography
The subpage that you requested be deleted has been deleted. You made a comment about the future of the portal. Where has there been a discussion of the portal? I am in general a critic of portals, but this portal appears to be relatively popular and may be maintained adequately. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:05, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I found none in MFD, but the portal does average 150 a day. ミラP 20:08, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
 * So were you referring to discussion of portals in general? I see an average of 121 views in the third quarter of 2019, which is better than most portals.  I do not plan to nominate the portal for deletion, at least not at this time.  Also, I think that the subpage you were looking at is an orphaned subpage, because the portal appears to have been converted to single-page.  Robert McClenon (talk) 20:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Herald/Harbinger
Hello! I think your close at Herald/Harbinger is inappropriate. Why are you closing an AFD that received two keeps, two merges and a delete vote? There's not clear concensus, so you should not be doing a non-admin close. I'd ask that you revert your close and let an admin close it. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * . I thought it looked like the consensus had devolved away from a keep, but I've undid the close. Should the AFD be relisted? ミラP 23:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for fixing that. To me it is clearly no consensus, and in cases like this is is not appropriate to do a WP:NAC, per the guidelines there. Regarding relisting, I think it can be closed by an admin, so I would just leave it. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:32, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ミラP 23:33, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Obituaries for cricketers
Hi Miraclepine. Incase you didn't know already, all the Wisden obits. are online. For example, in your recent edit to Eustace Crawley, just Google "Wisden Obituaries 1915" for the full list of that year on Cricinfo's site. Apologies if you were already aware of this. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 20:45, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I know. I thought it looked simple. ミラP 20:46, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

WP:Autopatrolled
Hey Miraclepine, I've seen you around a lot and I've noticed great article creation from you. Would you be interested in applying for WP:Autopatrolled?HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd be very honored to take the job, thank you. ミラP 22:12, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&page=User:Miraclepine added] the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 22:21, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Military people of the Philippines


A tag has been placed on Category:Military people of the Philippines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Liz Read! Talk! 14:59, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Japanese sources
Hello, and thanks for nominating Kiuchi Kyō ‎for DYK. Just wondering: are you fluent in Japanese? I've been trying to look for places where I could find Japanese language journals and academic material, both for Wikipedia and real-life uses, but I haven't been able to have much luck so far finding an appropriate resource. Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not fluent with respect to speaking the language, but I've had enough experience with anime subtitles and Google Translate to be certain I'm getting the translation right. I also had to look up several Japanese words on WT. ミラP 00:03, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Universal fire victims
Hi! I'm a bit late to this perhaps, but I've been noticing you put the useful sentence "On June 25, 2019, The New York Times Magazine listed XXX among hundreds of artists whose material was reportedly destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire" in many articles. Might I suggest that it would be better if each of these was terser? It's mostly irrelevant that the Times reported this, and it's mostly irrelevant that it was reported on June 25. "Reportedly" makes me wonder if there's some uncertainty as to whether it was actually destroyed. Were it me, I'd have phrased it as "XXX was among hundreds of artists whose material was destroyed in the 2008 Universal fire." I'd guess you did this in a semi-automated fashion; I wonder if you'd consider making a bulk edit to tighten this. Thanks for your consideration. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 05:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not much time to do it, but I should point out I added "listed" and "reportedly" to clarify the fact that it was listed there at all, and added "New York Times Magazine listed" to make it look neutral. ミラP 14:01, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * How can it be non-neutral? It's a fact the stuff was destroyed; it doesn't matter in the least who reported it. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 17:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Judge Dredd articles
It's premature to delete or redirect articles before the 7 days are up, even if you think that will be the eventual outcome. People are entitled to the full time to object to the removal of prodded articles if they want to. Richard75 (talk) 23:29, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that these are valid redirect yet -- they may well be, but that isn't the point. Another user prodded then for deletion, and by redirecting them so soon you didn't respect the process. I appreciate that they can't be prodded again, but with the greatest respect, you should have thought of that. Your remedy now is to nominate them for AfD. Richard75 (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
 * This is why WP:BOLD exists. ミラP 16:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:BOLD doesn't override all other policies and procedures. Richard75 (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't be impatient. Richard75 (talk) 23:40, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not. I'm just being clear that articles will not exist some of at those pages. ミラP 00:01, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * They exist right now, so it's premature to delete links to them. Richard75 (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Not anymore. 7 deletions in 36 hours. ミラP 17:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think you'll find that 2 December was more than 36 hours ago. Richard75 (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I meant within a period of 36 hours. ミラP 20:46, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Television channels and stations established in 1939


A tag has been placed on Category:Television channels and stations established in 1939 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Please read WP:SOFTDELETE
Not many people follow the guideline but as you are not an administrator please don't relist discussions like this. Thanks in advance,  J 947 &thinsp;(c) , at 04:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh, my mistake. But there was a keep vote after the relist. ミラP 16:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Funny I was bothered by the out of policy relist there too - given that there was a keep vote I felt compelled to relist again, though I would suggest the ends don't justify the means. I then found Articles for deletion/Jennifer Akiniymika. Your relisting statement is again incorrect (we don't need any !votes to decide what to do ) and that article to would have been eligible for soft delete. This one had two subsequent delete !votes so I went ahead and closed it, in keeping with policy, as a delete. If you are going to relist discussions (and know that I am on the record as disliking this long before I became a sysop myself) I would ask that you need to better familiarize yourself with appropriate policy. I would also ask that you give thought to relist bias and consider abstaining from relist until you decide to go for RfA (which based on your userbox seems unlikely and fair enough). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Well another solution would be to ask the closing admin to disregard the votes that are problematic. And yes, I'm considering adminship but I'm not in a convenient position to do that. ミラP 22:19, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Women “Manangement”
At some point I realized that was indeed an irrevocable typo. 🥶 Trillfendi (talk) 01:51, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, this is why a certain template exists. ミラP 01:52, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Teacher's Pet (video game)
Hi! An update comment is needed, since video game and OVA are split now in nomination (because the video game disambig implies that it's the primary topic, which it isn't). Regards, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 11:49, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Child (Star Wars character)
Hello! Your submission of The Child (Star Wars character) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Already addressed by another user. ミラP 05:38, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

edits to my talk page
Hello Miraclepine, I am confused by this edit that was made to my talk page to remove a notification by. I am wondering if your edit complies with policy, I dont see anything in DENY that permits you to delete content on other users talk pages. I dont think I have ever interacted with you, can you please explain what is going on? Is there some sort of dispute with Ladislav that I am not aware of and am tangentially involved in (why else would my talk page be edited...)? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Miraclepine, I noticed the same thing on other editors' talk pages on my watchlist and also came here to ask you about it. WP:DENY is about vandalism, not canvassing. Nothing in DENY suggests to me that it's acceptable to remove talk page posts that are or may be canvassing; canvassing isn't mentioned on the page. Also, DENY is an essay, not a policy. Nothing in the WP:CANVASS guideline suggests that it's OK to remove canvassing posts, either. The WP:TPO guideline says The basic rule—with exceptions outlined below—is to not edit or delete others' posts without their permission, and canvassing isn't mentioned as an exception. I'd ask you to consider self-reverting. – Levivich 05:40, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It seemed disruptive to me because some of the editors seemed random, and some of the editors with less edits seemed connected with the article. Besides already explained that they made only a minor edit and that it's not usual to notify everyone who's done something like fixing a ref title. ミラP 22:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Helene Walker
Thanks for the prompt for a reference for her MBE. I've found the award in the London Gazette; it appears to be from the 1946 Birthday Honours, but she isn't mentioned in our article on those awards. Warofdreams talk 14:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Just checked, and it appears to be a second supplement of the 1946 Birthday Honours that wasn't posted to that article. It's from pages 3119 to 3148 of The London Gazette issue 37617. ミラP 15:42, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've tagged 1946 Birthday Honours as missing that info. ミラP 13:41, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Top 25 Report
Nice that you're offering to help. If you can add at least short comments to each entry, instead of just those regarding positive political developments, you might even get a co-writing credit and an invite to help with the yearly list (Kayden Boche must be one of those boosted by bots views) igordebraga ≠ 18:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I've added some some involving Star Wars and a few movies. ミラP 03:28, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Forgot you already helped some this year, only with another name. Claim what you'd like to write about! igordebraga ≠ 06:03, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No thanks, I'll just stick to the usual. ミラP 14:08, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

WP:SOFTDELETE reminder
Please remember that discussions like Articles for deletion/Michael Berke are eligible for soft deletion; the nomination counts as a !vote.
 * Comment was at 00:51 UTC on Christmas Eve; sig: Happy Festivities! //  J 947  (c)
 * Apologies for being slow to respond. My opinion is that whether or not a relist is necessary depends on multiple factors, particularly whether or not it meets WP:N or if there's any indication of WP:BEFORE. I saw that both issues leaned towards a side that favored a relist (WP:IDL-ish AFD motive, the other vote being an WP:ATA fail, and no indication of BEFORE), so I proceeded with it. After that, I voted keep on the grounds that WP:GNG was satisfied. So that's that. ミラP 04:36, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It's best to leave it always because admins have an option. The best thing to do is !vote yourself in those circumstances. Happy Festivities! //  J 947  (c) 04:50, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, got it. I'll keep that in mind in the future. ミラP 23:55, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
PS: your greeting is awesome!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:31, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello Miraclepine: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers,  PA TH  SL OP U  03:33, 25 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Seasons Greetings
Happy Holidays text.png

Hello Miraclepine: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, the Winter or Summer solstice, Quviahugvik, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 08:34, 25 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Adapted from Season's Greetings

Merry Christmas
Hi Merry Christmas I hope you and your family have a great new year, next year.  scope_creep Talk  11:16, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Christmas from Australia!
Happy Holidays text.png Hello : Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:37, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

(Adapted from Template:Season's Greetings1)

Thanks
- thanks for your kind thoughts and good wishes - cheers - Epinoia (talk) 16:06, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!
Have a great rest of your holiday season! If you do not, then you should know that I have acquired a very particular set of skills on my time on Wikipedia. Skills that make me a nightmare for people who do not enjoy themselves. If you do not have a great time this year, I will find you... And I will block you.

But seriously, happy holidays.  Dark Knight  2149  21:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll see if that ANI report you were planning to file a while ago will finally get through. ミラP 21:57, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

A Shaker greeting
Apologies - I'm a bit late with my cards this year. :-)

Happy editing into 2020, and beyond! -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:06, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
Many thanks, and same to you! GiantSnowman 10:31, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you
Hey there! Thank you for your wishes :D Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! -- LoЯd  ۞pεth  14:45, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year Miraclepine!
Happy New Year! Hello Miraclepine: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, ★Trekker (talk) 19:50, 30 December 2019 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks (static)}} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

Happy Holidays text.png


Miraclepine, Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year   – news article. – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year '' Send New Year cheer by adding     to user talk pages.

–  North America1000 21:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Miraclepine!


Happy New Year! Miraclepine, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:35, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year, Miraclepine!


Happy New Year! Miraclepine, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

– Davey 2010 Talk 00:25, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year!


Miraclepine, Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year   – news article. – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year Send New Year cheer by adding     to user talk pages.

– Utopes (talk) 09:02, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Wishing you a happy 2020


Miraclepine, Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year   – news article. – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year Send New Year cheer by adding     to user talk pages.

–  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 12:16, 1 January 2020 (UTC)



LovelyLillith (talk) has given you a bubble tea! Bubble teas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a bubble tea, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy drinking!

''Thank you for your warm greetings! Here is a toast to you for 2020, and a wish for a prosperous and joyful year ahead.''

Spread the awesomeness of bubble teas by adding Bubble tea to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Happy New Year, Miraclepine!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em; height:auto; min-height:173px; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! Miraclepine, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 12:49, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Major props
For entering the 2020 WikiCup under the genderqueer flag. If only I had thought of that first!` &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 07:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Didn't know it was possible, but I did it anyway and it worked! ミラP 20:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion
Hi, I see that you took part in a discussion of the proposed deletion for an article on Frederick Goold in August 2018, and the result at the time was "no consensus". I am just letting you know that I have renominated this article for deletion here.. I am contacting all contributors to that discussion to see if you wish to comment again. In my view, the additional sources provided at the time did nothing to establish notability as definied by WP. I have also proposed two others for deletion for the same reason here and here. Thanks -- Sirfurboy (talk) 11:33, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikihounding
Stop WP:HOUNDing me. It's offputting. Bondegezou (talk) 18:59, 30 December 2019 (UTC) On 30 December 2019, Miraclepine edited a multitude of articles that had never edited before. All your interactions can be simply explained by the fact you both have a keen interest in British politicians. If you have a single example outside that topic field where you found yourself interacting with Miraclepine, then your accusation would carry a lot more weight. Case in point, these were Miraclepine's last three edits before editing Dominic Shellard: 1, 2, and 3. &#8211; MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 17:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * this is not what hounding looks like. &#8211;  MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 01:35, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I do, Miraclepine does having never previously edited the article before. I do , Miraclepine does  having never previously edited the article before. I start Articles for deletion/Paul Tilsley, Miraclepine does  having never previously edited the article before. I do , Miraclepine does  having never previously edited the article before. Et cetera. Bondegezou (talk) 13:33, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Regarding the WP:DEFCAT issue, I don't think you have a consensus for this. I think those categories are catch-all. How about back to WT:COP? ミラP 14:50, 1 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to tell you straight up; I have no clue who Miraclepine is and am only following page because we both entered the WikiCup. I'm telling you this not because I like Miraclepine personally or anything like that.  no clue who I am, and I don't really even know

Articles for deletion/List of Squidbillies characters
Why did you close this AfD as Keep? I don't have a personal stake in this article, but it does not seem like a clear Keep to me. I believe this should be reopened and relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 00:06, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Editorial merge can be done in the article’s talk section. I've tagged it for detail and a possible merge to sort things out. ミラP 00:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I see your rationale, but from the discussion, there were 2 delete !votes and !keep votes, so I don't think this should have been closed as Keep in the first place. Additionally, none of the delete !votes seemed interested in a merge. Natg 19 (talk) 00:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Fine, I'll relist it at your suggestion. ミラP 00:21, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Mortiska 5.jpg
If you're going to de-PROD a useless, low-quality file that was never actually included on the user's self-promotional (and now-deleted) walled garden in userspace from 2007, then at least update the old prod template. Indignant Flamingo (talk) 23:55, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for John Percy (politician)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of John Percy (politician). 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.

Checkuser edits
Whilst I am sure these edits were well intentioned, please don't add Checkuser tags to a userpage when you are not privy to checkuser information. This user is not confirmed by checkuser to be socking, but the abuse of multiple accounts has been proven by other methods. A CU tag on their userpage is therefore inappropriate. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 22:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Any suitable sockmaster tag for that person? ミラP 00:06, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Not at this time. There are a number of ongoing investigations regarding the person responsible for the account, and at present it doesn't seem to be appropriate to add a tag. Regardless, it's generally a bad idea to add templates that are specifically labelled for use by admins, SPI clerks or checkusers unless you belong to one of those groups. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 08:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

BADNAC for Sushree Dibyarshini
With 3 delete arguments, 1 weak keep, and 1 keep, how did closing Articles for deletion/Sushree Dibyadarshini as keep make any sense? — MarkH21talk 16:27, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The first delete came before the keep (, which produced a wealth of sources (two short profiles and an article), and the other delete  did nothing to explicitly address whether or not the sources were bad. ミラP 16:39, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, a wealth of passing mentions. This close sounds like an NAC supervote rather than an assessment of consensus. I’ll open a DRV. — MarkH21talk 16:41, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Since you edited your comment after I posted while tagging me, I’ll point out that you seem to suggest that this close was based on your personal interpretation on whether WP:GNG was passed. The role of the closer is generally to assess consensus, not supervote. Don’t close if it’s close per WP:BADNAC#2. Also consider relisting as an alternative to a close call. — MarkH21talk 17:19, 15 January 2020 (UTC)


 * What do you mean I did not address sourcing. I guess I should have explicitly said that interviews do not count towards notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sushree Dibyadarshini
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sushree Dibyadarshini. 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. — MarkH21talk 17:35, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Categories
Please note a few things re your recent edits. First, it is not necessary to categorise people as both English and British. English will do. Second, it isn't necessary to use a broader category if you have a narrower category. For example, a Lord Mayor of London does not also need to be categorised as a politician. In fact, Lord Mayors of London aren't really politicians anyway. Third, the "People from" categories only relate to place where people were born or grew up, not where they lived in later life. Thanks. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. We have a lot of Category:20th-century British politicians to put in the English/Scottish/Welsh subcategories, and perhaps is interested. ミラP 19:15, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I think if the British category has subcategories for England, Wales etc articles should only be in British if they wont fit in a narrower one - usually because they were born out of the UK or moved about a lot. I dont think you can really become English or Welsh by any legal process. And I am planning to break them down into counties. Rathfelder (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * However, as I've already said on my own talkpage, this should only be the county the person was born or brought up in, not ones in which they merely lived or worked. People can live or work in many places in their lifetime, but this does not define them at all. For instance, I was born in Surrey and brought up in Cornwall. I've lived in several other counties in England and Wales during my life, and I've lived in the Midlands for the last twenty years, but I'm only actually from Surrey and Cornwall. The others are completely non-defining. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I dont think it's that straightforward. If you moved to Lancaster and worked there for 40 years people might well say you were from there.  More practical problem is that many articles dont say where the person was born.  I entirely agree that for people who move about we shouldnt put that they are "from" half a dozen places. Rathfelder (talk) 13:08, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * But that is exactly what you did with George Anderson (educator)! He probably taught in Eastbourne for no more than a couple of years and we have no evidence that Sussex was his home county (or even that he was English), but you've still put him in Category:Schoolteachers from Sussex. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020
Your recent edit to the page Template:GPC contains an edit summary that appears to have triggered the edit filter. The summary may have contained inappropriate text such as a highly repetitive character sequence, profanity, gibberish, or all-caps. Please use appropriate edit summaries to tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. If your summary did not contain such text, please report it to the false positives page and remove this message. ''Also - We don't usually have redlinks in a template so they were removed. If you want an article created, do it yourself.'' Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In your recent edit to 2020 Green Party of Canada leadership election, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. Me-123567-Me (talk) 03:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Apparently you used the wrong template by mistake. But my point is, this article is written by a journalism speaking of him in the third person, so it's a point that counts for notability in comparison to the version deleted at AFD, so GNG should be met. ミラP 03:15, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you
I wrote up a paragraph on Wintertree for the Signpost's community view column, PRODing it at the same time for its lack of notability. You dePRODed, correctly noting it would be listed in the Signpost in the latest issue. I remedied this by making a userspace copy and reinstated the PROD.

However, an admin has now removed the PROD, citing the usual PROD policy — single-use only. I pointed out that the circumstances were exceptional — there was no objection to the actual PROD rationale, and the reason for removing the PROD had been remedied — but bureaucracy has triumphed over common sense and they are now insisting you need restore the PROD if it is to stay. Would you mind doing that? – Teratix ₵ 15:13, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Moff Gideon
Hey Miraclepine. Thanks very much for nominating Moff Gideon for DYK! If you're interested in that topic, I've nominated that article for GA, as well as a couple other Mandalorian character articles (Cara Dune and Greef Karga for now, but I'll likely be nominating IG-11 and Kuiil pretty soon as well), in case you'd be interested in reviewing any of those. Totally up to you of course, just figured I'd pass it along. :) — <b style="color:#C0C0C0">Hunter</b> <b style="color:#595454">Kahn</b> 17:31, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I've never done GA reviews before, let alone sent an article to GA, but I'll see what I can do. ミラP 17:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Ahh, gotcha gotcha. No problem either way. Thanks again! — <b style="color:#C0C0C0">Hunter</b> <b style="color:#595454">Kahn</b> 17:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

FYI
Just so you know, per WP:NOTBROKEN, there's nothing wrong with having redirects leading to articles. The only case where it's necessary is if the target link was disambiguated, but in this case the redirect works fine. Opencooper (talk) 23:34, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Which one are you talking about? ミラP 23:35, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have specified. I meant Hiroyuki Yoshino (voice actor). Opencooper (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There was a move discussion that decided that Hiroyuki Yoshino was actually the primary topic and did not need disambig. ミラP 23:38, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I have no issue with the move itself. Was just reaching out in case you didn't know that the link didn't need to be updated. If you prefer it that way for some reason, sure, but maybe in the future it will be less work for you. Opencooper (talk) 23:40, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Closing AfDs
Even though I was a keep !voter and there's nothing technically wrong with the close, I was disappointed to see you closed Articles for deletion/Black Falls Crossing, Arizona as a non-admin, and without any discussion of your rationale. The discussion was a difficult one, it should have been closed by an administrator, and I'm surprised you continue to close AfDs given your recent record at DRV with badnacs. I also looked to see if you had closed any other AfDs recently just in case and while your Mollie Hughes close was probably fine (if potentially premature), and correct for the Woodlands Centre of Excellence, I really don't agree with your close at Articles for deletion/Fawcett City at all, which should have been a delete given the discussion. Please stop closing AfDs, as there's really no reason for non-admins to be closing contentious discussions, or at least please only close AfDs where the outcome is a crystal clear keep or redirect. SportingFlyer  T · C  04:26, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll just add my rationale discussion there. ミラP 04:29, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't feel as though you've heard what I've asked. I'm not writing you because you didn't originally add a rationale, I'm writing you because you should not have closed that discussion in the first place. Will you please abstain from closing contentious discussions going forward? SportingFlyer  T · C  08:16, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll. ミラP 15:51, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It's appreciated. SportingFlyer  T · C  11:08, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Please don’t make up new shortcuts and advertise them without good reason
Please don’t make up new shortcuts willy nilly, and worse, don’t add them to WP:LINKBOXES unless there actually is a good reason to start getting others to use them. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see what's wrong with the shortcuts I made. Besides recommended it. Consider taking WP:LTA/DRV to WP:RFD. ミラP 22:19, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You are new, and doing weird things. Please read WP:LINKBOX. Not every shortcut goes in a linkbox. Your just made up shortcuts do not belong in LINKBOXES.  Neither do they belong in hatnotes. It’s unlike S Marshall to encourage silly things. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:18, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:50, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see any there. ミラP 00:52, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There's a request for you to respond to the concerns about the hook wording on the nomination page. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!
Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition has begun and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are, , and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Re: Zombie Land Saga "mentions"
Just to clarify, I reverted the four edits related to series that were mentioned in a review of Zombie Land Saga that you did because merely a passing mention in a review for another series does not mean that's a notable example of reception for those series. Series get compared to other series all the time, but that's really only relevant on the article for the series the review is actually reviewing. In this case, if Zombie Land Saga in the review is compared to Aikatsu!, PriPara, Love Live! and Uma Musume Pretty Derby, then the mention of that should go on Zombie Land Saga, but of course further context for the comparison should also be included if available to understand why Zombie Land Saga would be compared to those series.-- <b style="color: black;">十</b><b style="color: red;">八</b> 22:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * i got the magazine copy from a B&N that's actually farther from where I live than the one closest to me, and I had already left at the time, so I'm gonna be able to get a copy on short notice and check back. But If anyone has the Anime USA Fall 2019 issue, they can find the mentions at page 63. ミラP 23:47, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm back and I found it. The first of sixteen paragraphs - I've only added half of that paragraph though: These days, idol anime is a genre of its own. Whether it's the aspiring school idols of Love Live!, the young career idols of PriPara and Aikatsu, the racehorse hybrid idols of Umamusume: [sic] Pretty Derby, the concept has gone in nearly every conceivable direction. ミラP 19:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * The most you can say about that is that the reviewer is citing the variety of idol anime over the years, and that Zombie Land Saga is doing something similar for being a zombie idol anime. But the only thing that they have in common, as far as that sentence goes, is that they're all idol anime, which isn't very much of a comparison at all in terms of a review. It would be best to summarize that review and put it onto Zombie Land Saga if you were going to do anything with it.-- <b style="color: black;">十</b><b style="color: red;">八</b> 21:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I found the second half of the paragraph, that should cover it up: Fans flock to the story no matter the setting: hopeful girls of different personality types join forces, train up their singing and dancing skills, and face happiness and hardship together on their way to the top. If you connect the two quotes together turns out a paragraph of the review is making common comparisons between four anime shows and a better-known one. ミラP 19:50, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Lai Pin-yu
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Dedham Covenant
Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Keiko Sonoi
I think I'm finished translating Draft:Keiko Sonoi. I didn't translate some of the lower sections (bcz I don't feel they need to be), but a portion of the material have been incorporated, e.g., the actress's family depending on her, and some of the opinions as to her acting.

Any corrections and additions you may want to make, and publish it as an article whenever. thx. --Kiyoweap (talk) 06:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Publish away. ミラP 16:12, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thx. Have done already. --Kiyoweap (talk) 17:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. You have to move the draft to mainspace, not cut-and-paste it to a separate article. I've merged the draft to the article. ミラP 17:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh right. It didn't occur to me to use MOVE. Hadn't used Draft before. Thanks. --Kiyoweap (talk) 00:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Henry Stuart Russell
Categories on this article including ones you recently added seem unrelated to any information in the article itself. Are there two guys out there with similar names? Or article content that needs to be added? Kerry (talk) 23:02, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably the latter. List of English cricketers (1826–1840) has him in the list. I can't access the CA source but it looks like a match. ミラP 23:04, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Category:Members of the Hokkaido Legislative Assembly has been nominated for discussion
Category:Members of the Hokkaido Legislative Assembly, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Category:Aichi Prefectural Assembly has been nominated for discussion
Category:Aichi Prefectural Assembly, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Danzen! Futari wa Pretty Cure
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:03, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Jean Delumeau
Gatoclass (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Precious
You are recipient no. 2342 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for History of anarchism
--valereee (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Yoga body DYK
Hi, I think this has got stuck: maybe you could take a look at it? , not quite sure what happened here. Many thanks, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * says Full review needed. It should be done by an uninvolved user. ミラP 15:22, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, we just sit and wait then. Can't get my head around that process. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Rodhullandemu talk page
Regarding your suggestion, I permanently protected User talk:Rodhullandemu as the user had been permanently banned. So just this morning he left me this message on Commons:
 * Probably not a good idea to impose full protection on this page. For one thing, how do bots without the admin bit send me messages? For another, some people have occasionally sent me messages there without realising that I am also an Administrator here. Finally you say "permanently banned"- that I find a bit presumptive because any ban, or block, can be reversed- it's a wiki, remember? Please be careful how you answer because having been treated so appallingly I am very sensitive to harassment.

I'm not sure why a user who has been banned would even need to get messages. I can't block him or protect his talk page on Commons because I'm not an admin there. What do you think should be done here? J I P &#124; Talk 08:26, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Rodhullandemu's still active on Commons and has been acting in good faith, so you shouldn't worry. There is precedent for full-protecting UTPs if the associated user's TPA is revoked. ミラP 13:41, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Yoga Body
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Soldier Blade
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Clarice Phelps
No idea what I did to antagonise you, but edits like this are really terrible. Using a (rather high profile) article to attack another editor by including negative unrelated things is a rather blatant form of disruptive editing and a WP:POINT violation. That you only see fit to name me, with an action no one had any issue with (not brought up as a problem in the Rama case, nor in my case) may have seemed "fun" to you (" To be fair, my favorite part was bringing up Fram."), while leaving out the much more relevant username of the admin who actually got desysopped over this, is quite telling. And no, I wouldn't argue to include their username either, or most of what happened around the deletions, it's navel gazing. But if we do navel gaze, it should be neutral and to the point, not a means to settle some scores or make a point. Fram (talk) 08:02, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I thought it was "fun" at the time, but after that block and the almost three months after that, I'm now different: I now realize that it's not at all funny because it makes people feel hurt, which makes us very sad. ミラP 22:50, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Fram (talk) 06:18, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suresh Bhatt
Thanks for nominating Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suresh Bhatt. There is a shocking amount of Political spam on Indian politics and these users appear to be primarily the reason for it. I am just curious how this person was found ? -- D Big X ray ᗙ  19:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Perhaps this trend is worth an article on Signpost. ミラP 19:41, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed, a good one. User:DiplomatTesterMan here is a suggestion for your next SP article. -- D Big X ray ᗙ  19:48, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Noted... thnks DTM (talk) 12:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Ai Kidosaki
— Wug·a·po·des​ 03:01, 22 February 2020 (UTC) 00:02, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

As the only Wikipedian to maintain a zero in Japanese proficiency...
...I find your strangely soothing signature somehow meaningful and interesting, thank you for the breath of fresh air and temporary disruption of regular "Anglicised" programming. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:09, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Protecting talk pages of banned users
You recently asked me to protect the talk pages of several permanently banned users. As I was doing it, both User:Bbb23 and User:Gerda Arendt questioned this and asked me to stop it. I am now confused about what I should do. J I P &#124; Talk 16:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ... and users Tony Ballioni, Black Kite, SandyGeorgia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:17, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ... and help my failing memory, please: when was Eric banned by ArbCom? There was a September 2019 motion to block him, - that's all I know. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ... instead of helping my failing memory, you pinged me to WP:Great Dismal Swamp? Please don't do that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge
Hi, would love to see your articles up on this!♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Category:Ipswich MPs
I'm not very clear what I'm supposed to do. I dont remember having anything to do with this category.Rathfelder (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Ipswich MPS CFD
Hi Miraclepine

Many thanks for withdrawing WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2020 February 26. I like editors who can review the arguments and change their minds, regardless of which way the evidence leads them.

After posting my !vote there, I took another look at Category:Members of Parliament by constituency, and I don't much like what I see: too much excessively fine categorisation, too many barely-populated categories. Category:Members of Parliament by constituency contains 63 subcats, of which the 5 oldest are correctly subcatted. That leaves 58 newer cats without subcats, and I see for example that in the last 2 months, you have created 15 such categories: :
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Dartmouth — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Exeter — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Totnes — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Plympton Erle — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Maidstone — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for New Romney — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Berkshire — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Taunton — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Truro — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Cornwall — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Launceston — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Helston — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Liskeard — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Dorchester — population:
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Carlisle — population:

These sparsely-populated categories are no use for navigation. Regardless of anything else, they should be deleted unless they are full populated, or a serious effort is being made to populate them.

However, there are a number of other reasons why I think that such fine categorisation of MPs by constituency is a bad idea: Take a few examples: Does that mean: Does that mean: This one doesn't exist yet, but would be an odd one, because the pre-1983 and post-1983 boundaries had no overlapping area at all. So a category would be odd, because the pre-1983 and post-1983 MPs for Newcastle upon Tyne North had no shared characteristic apart from a label.
 * Not WP:DEFINING. Until the expansion of franchise in 1918, MPs frequently changed constituency. e.g. Churchill sat for 5 difft constituencies, as did William Ewart Gladstone.  In the era of the rotten boroughs (and even later, in the pocket boroughs which existed until the secret ballot killed them in 1872), many MPs simply bought their seats from borough mongers, and some changed seat at nearly every election.  Many of them never even visited those pocket boroughs.  So the constituency was not a defining characteristic.  How often is Gladstone referred to as the MP for Portarlington?
 * Category clutter. When MPs changed seats a lot, categorising them by each individual constituency adds a bunch of extra categories to articles which are already well-categorised.
 * Number of categories. Westminster constituencies were stable for hundreds of year until the Reform Act 1832, which began a process of changes that gathered pace in the 20th century, now happening about every fifteen years (major changes in 1918, 1945, 1950, 1955, 1974, 1983, 1997, 2005/2010, and an even bigger set in the pipeline). There are 650 current constituencies, but 1273 former constituencies, giving a total of 1,923 constituencies. If we ever got near that number, it would be a massive set to maintain, and I don't see any group of editors willing to take on that task.
 * Vagueness.
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Truro.
 * MPs for the pre-1885 parliamentary borough of Truro?
 * MPs for the massively bigger 1950–1997 Truro county constituency?
 * MPs for the renamed 1997–2010 Truro & St Austell county constituency?
 * MPs for the post-2010 Truro and Falmouth county constituency
 * Whichever it means, the current title lacks precision
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Leicestershire:
 * MPs for the the pre-1832 Leicestershire county constituency
 * All MPs for constituencies in the the geographical county Leicestershire
 * Whichever it means, the current title lacks precision
 * Category:Members of Parliament for Newcastle upon Tyne North:
 * It's a bit better to group constituencies by county. The problem with that is that none of the 3 countries in Britain has a stable set of counties. That creates a real mess for many constituencies, such as Abingdon, which was:
 * A parliamentary borough in Berkshire 1558–1885
 * A parliamentary borough in Berkshire 1558–1885
 * A county division of Berkshire, 1918–1973
 * A county division of Oxfordshire, 1973–1983
 * So I am minded to propose deletion of most of these categories. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 10:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't really mind. Although I saw some issue with this, I didn't realize how big it was until now. Possibly the placename in the titles of many of the HoPO bios is more defining than the constituencies, even if the latter is defining. You should take further discussion to WT:OCAT and WP:CFD. ミラP 20:12, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * My response, apologies for not doing so.
 * These sparsely-populated categories are no use for navigation. They are small yes, but they have potential to expand if you look at the categories.
 * Not WP:DEFINING: Yes WP:DEFINING. WP:NPOL grants notability to members of legislative bodies and the three Parliaments are them, so there is no question to their defining nature, even if the MPs are associated with a rotten borough they never even visited.
 * Number of categories: Categories can be categorized by county and reform date.
 * Vagueness: "MPs in Countyshire" if they were in all three Parliaments can be made into container categories.
 * Abingdon: All of these constituencies are united by name by the article.
 * Best, ミラP 18:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * If I sound tetchy here, that's because you are rapidly eroding my ability to AGF.
 * I took an half-an-hour of my time to write here a detailed explanation or the problems I saw, but you simply refused to discuss my concerns above. Now you have posted  a slightly more verbose dismissal only after I noted[ your earlier dismissal at Categories for discussion/Log/2020 March 4.
 * In substance: WP:DEFINING and WP:NOTABILITY are different concepts, and nothing good comes from conflating them. Please read WP:DEFINING, and then try answering the question: How often is Gladstone referred to as the MP for Portarlington?
 * Yes, the categories could be populated. But you just created the cat pages without any meaningful attempt to populate. That makes the categs as they stand pretty useless.
 * And the rest of our response seems like a box-ticking exercise of namechecking some of my points without actually engaging with them.
 * Thank you for withdrawing the CFD. But I remain disappointed by this whole saga.  I am seeing a lot more enthusiasm for doing things than for getting them right. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 22:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't have all the time to do all the MPs, and WP:DEFINING includes the reason(s) for the person's notability: the MPs are notable by NPOL, so the constituencies they hold make them notable. And as for category clutter, the categories prevent people from adding "MPs for constituencies in Countyshire". Also careful with what you say because... ミラP 22:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * again, I remind you of the simple distinction between WP:Notability, which is the question of why we have an article, and WP:DEFININGness, which is how we categorise them. MPs are notable because they are MPs, not because they bought a seat in rotten borough rather than  rotten borough  B.
 * You quote from WP:DEFINING the reason(s) for the person's notability. However, that is a cherrypicked incomplete quote, because the full bullet point is the reason(s) for the person's notability; i.e., the characteristics the person is best known for. You omitted the second part of that, because it undermines your stance, and instead supports the first section of WP:DEFINING: A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having.  That's why I asked above: How often is Gladstone referred to as the MP for Portarlington?  It's a very long way from being one of the main things anyone would not about him.  Most coverage will note that he was PM several times, founder of the Liberal Party, MP for many years, that he switched from Tory to Liberal etc; but which constituency is a minor detail.
 * Anyway, cherrypicking policy and guideline like that is specifically listed in WP:Gaming the system in point 3 of the section Gaming the use of policies and guidelines: Selectively "cherry-picking" wording from a policy (or cherry-picking one policy to apply but wilfully ignoring others) to support a view which does not in fact match policy. That's the final straw: I am unable to sustain the assumption that you are a competent editor acting in good faith. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 23:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * "i.e." means "in other words", so "reasons for notability" and "characteristics the person is best known for" are pretty much the same thing so it cancels out your cherry-picking claim. And as for the categories being populated, is on it, and I'm trying to help. ミラP 23:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Miraclepine, you now appear to blatantly playing games, ignoring half of what I write and replying only to what allows word games. If you want to engage seriously with the issue, please re-read what I wrote above, which I will repeat: A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having.  That's why I asked above: How often is Gladstone referred to as the MP for Portarlington?.
 * This is not at all complicated. An MP is notable for being a Member of Parliament — which is the test set out in WP:NPOL –  not for the constituency in which they bought a seat. And the precise seat fails the WP:DEFINING test in an era where MPs hopped from seat to seat.
 * Sadly, you demonstrate neither knowledge of the topic nor willingness to learn about it. Unless you change your approach, this discussion is futile.-- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 23:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * How often is Gladstone referred to as the MP for Portarlington? 474 times, like his National Portrait Gallery database entry, this Google Book preview of British Historical Facts, 1830-1900, his brother's biography written by a contemporary writer, his father's DNB entry. ミラP 23:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Miraclepine, you ae stretching my patience even further. Discussion with you might be of some use if you actually read what you are replying to, but you still give little impression of doing do.
 * Note again that WP:DEFINING says A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having. Note that I have underlined the words "reliable sources": see WP:Reliable sources for why that matters.  And note the phase "commonly and consistently".
 * You did a general google web search, which includes all sorts of unreliable sources, including Wikipedia itself. If you wanted to check reliable sources, check Gbooks or JSTOR, not a trawl which includes blogs and social media.
 * Next, you didn't check a comparator for the numbers: a google web search for "Gladstone" gives an initial count of 43,400,000 hits, while google web search for "William Ewart Gladstone" gives an initial count of 434,000 hits.
 * Based on you methodology, Gladstone isn't defined as MP for Portartlington "commonly and consistently" in the mentions of him; instead that is defined that way in between ~0.01% and ~1% of the 414 hits in a non-personalised search for your term: gladstone "MP for Portarlington".
 * So, having moved on from cherrypicking words, you are now cherrypicking data. A mention in 1% or less of cases is a million miles from "commonly and consistently".
 * Yes, some sources do mention it, and some of those are reliable sources of William Ewart Gladstone ... but "some mentions" is not the test set out in WP:DEFINING. Which part of "commonly and consistently" was not clear?
 * This is not a productive discussion. --  Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 00:24, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The DNB entry (national biography, my emphasis), which is a Wikisource transcription, mentioned three of the four constituencies he sat in. The NPG entry mentions all four. And most of the "British Historical Facts, 1830-1900" entries of MPs list all the constituencies they sat in. As you see here, they are sources commonly used by people, and the C&C test takes that into account. ミラP 00:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * For goodness sake, that's yet more word games. The test is A defining characteristic is one that reliable sources commonly and consistently define the subject as having. It does NOT say "the reliable sources which some en.wp editor claims without evidence are 'sources commonly used by people'".
 * Note that WP:DEFINING also says ''if the characteristic would not be appropriate to mention in the lead portion of an article, it is probably not defining;

''. The lead of William Ewart Gladstone doesn't mention any of his constituencies.
 * Cherry-picking guidelines, then cherry-picking data, then misrepresenting guidelines to mean something other than what they actually say. Please stop this: we are here to build an encyclopedia, not to argue with the judge in a pub quiz.
 * Nothing in what you write gives an impression that you have any experience of applying WP:DEFINING to a range of topics, or any knowledge of the topic of parliamentary history other than what you found on a quick trip to Google when you eventually decided to stop evading issues. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

"John Chetwynd-Talbot (Oxford Union president)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect John Chetwynd-Talbot (Oxford Union president). Since you had some involvement with the John Chetwynd-Talbot (Oxford Union president) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Fram (talk) 14:51, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Warning
Your conduct in the locking talk page debacle was disruptive. You were fortunate to escape with no sanctions. I just noticed that you altered sock tags on at least two userpages: Margicy and Solth49. In both instances your edits were reverted by. You also removed a retired banner from the Talk page of sock Plth41 here, which I just reverted.

This is a formal and only warning. If I see you doing anything that should be done only by users with advanced permissions, e.g., administrators or CheckUsers, I will block you.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I promise I won't do it again. What should I do instead? ミラP 15:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Why do you want to do anything?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I just wanna help, but you did warn me. ミラP 16:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * As you should already know, the best way you can "help" is to do things that editors without advanced permissions do.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. ミラP 16:08, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

I came here for similar reasons as as a result of you starting this DRV. You need to stay away from anything to do with socking, tagging and SPI in general. You don't have the experience or the ability to interpret nuance that is required to work effectively in this area of Wikipedia. I'm sure there are many other corners of the encyclopedia that could use your assistance. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:42, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I submitted these which led to CU blocks, didn't I? In any event, I'll withdraw the WDHB DRV. ミラP 16:46, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You can file an SPI if you come across current socking during regular editing, just like any other editor, you just need to step away from actively involving yourself in SPI-related activities. That's where the current issues lie.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I feel this is skirting ’s warning if not in letter in spirit. You didn’t contact and it appears to be posting to a administrative board for the sake of posting to an administrative board. I can’t really think of another justification for you requesting a DRV of an article you have zero apparent previous connection to. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I forgot I had to contact the closing admin, and the concerns are not related to sockpuppetry but rather some non-sockpuppetry-related concerns, a non-admin, raised about a user. I take a look at WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sportspeople every day, and Smartyllama's concerns got my attention there. As a courtesy, I'll also ping both and  to the DRV there ミラP 23:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The warning, reworded more bluntly, was “don’t create more unnecessary work for things that you have no connection to.” It was not just about SPI. You could have just asked ST47 to relist if you really felt the need to be involved, which I’m still not sure how you came to be aware of a 4 month old AfD about a person virtually no one has ever heard of. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * How did I stumble upon this particular person, you ask? Well, one of my many interests is people who won awards in entertainment around the world, and while looking at the 7th Canadian Screen Awards, I noticed that there were minor anomalies in redlinks and nonlinks, so I decided to look at the edit history and found an AFD on one of the nominees which was closed as delete even though even nominees for such nationalized awards are notable. It was coincidentally one where JPL was the only vote - a delete, so I decided to bring it to DRV because the issue matched up with another issue brought up in Articles for deletion/Gérald Bertheloot. ミラP 00:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Callaghan MacCarty, 3rd Earl of Clancarty
Miraclepine, there has been a response to your DYK review here, and it would help if you would come back to the review to reply. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Miraclepine Amour II error
Hi, I assume this was an error. KylieTastic (talk) 17:12, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll see what Phabricator can do. In the meantime I'll temporarily disable genfixes. ミラP 17:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok, and in case you didn't realise that welcome was aimed at Miraclepine Amour II (before I realised it was a bot) and it got redirected, and you removed it before I noticed :/ KylieTastic (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I've logged the issue at . ミラP 17:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Mohammad Ali Ramazani Dastak for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mohammad Ali Ramazani Dastak is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Mohammad Ali Ramazani Dastak until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Keivan.f Talk 20:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Moff Gideon
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Cecil Middleton
Hi Miraclepine. I've created an article on Cecil Middleton if you want to find any links to the Middleton family! StickyWicket (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I found some sources, but better ones may exist. ミラP 19:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah interesting, I missed that on the project page! I wonder if second cousin twice removed is too much of a disconnect to be worth mentioning in the article? StickyWicket (talk) 19:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * @ Second cousin is a little close, so why not? ミラP 19:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Might add it as an unreferenced sentence, as that peerage page about 2 unknown sons falls short of a good source! StickyWicket (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of Big Brother (British series 19) housemates
At Articles for deletion/List of Big Brother (British series 19) housemates, you asked the deleting admin not to delete the redirects. Assuming you're meaning the redirects of the candidate names to the lists, are you planning to retarget them? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * @ I'll see if there's time. I'm a little busy now. ミラP 00:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying you have to do it right this second, but they are liable to be noticed and G8'd by someone else if you don't get around to it in a reasonable timeframe. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * @: I'll do it and tag each afterwards as G6. ミラP 00:46, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm lost. Why would you go through and G6 them after asking for them to be kept? I assumed you'd intended to retarget them. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm retargeting them to the series' articles. ミラP 00:48, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes but then why are you talking about G6ing them? That makes zero sense. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I meant G6ing the Lists of housemates per the AFD. ミラP 00:53, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * But I've already deleted those per the AfD. I was talking about the redirects you mentioned at the AfD. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:55, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm retargeting the redirects, not G6ing them. G6 was for the articles but I guess you got to them. ミラP 00:56, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I did, because your comment at the AfD didn't say anything about the lists, only about the redirects to them. You just pivoted randomly to talking about G6ing the lists without saying you were meaning the lists, which is what was confusing. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:00, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks. All done except for a few "List of housemates" spellings and some obscure terms that might not belong in the articles. ミラP 01:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Midori Katō
Hello! Your submission of Midori Katō at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:46, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm blocked, so I can't do anything. ミラP 21:39, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I just saw that. I proposed an alt hook and am waiting for a re-review. Good luck, Yoninah (talk) 21:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Midori Katō
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Shugo Nakamura
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)