User talk:Naypta/2017/July

July 2017
Hello Naypta. 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 Eva soldatou. 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), blatant nonsense (G1), copyright violations (G12) and pure vandalism/blatant hoaxes (G3) should of course still be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Hayman30 (talk) 08:34, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting in touch. I did not, however, tag the article with A3 or A1: I tagged with A7, which is acceptable in this context, given that I looked online for references before tagging, and was unable to find any pertaining to the article. However, given your disagreement, I shall now go back and tag the article with a BLP PROD instead, if you feel that that would be more appropriate. &#124; Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 08:40, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The same logic applies here. You may not be able to find sources on the topic but you don't know what the creator has in store. It's best to give them at least ten minutes for a chance to cite their sources. And sure go ahead with PROD, that's more appropriate. Hayman30 (talk) 08:44, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I disagree - is there a policy on this? I think that the article creator should patently demonstrate the value of the article at the point of creation - else, it just clogs up the recent changes queue for approval. That's what the new article wizard says in the first place - although check my userboxes, I'm quite pernickety. &#124; Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 08:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * You may be pernickety but with only just over 300 mainspace edits you don't really have sufficient experience to be patrolling new pages at all. Please review all the notability guidelines and WP:DELETION. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:06, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I am very familiar with notability and deletion policy. The reason that I have only ~300 mainspace edits is twofold: as noted on my user page, I have an older account which I have stopped using for various reasons, but also, the vast majority of my edits end up getting removed. The reason for this is that I spend most of my time doing - surprisingly enough - new page patrolling! Before the changes, I had patrol rights - but my application for them was rejected, so I'm using RTRC to CSD new pages where appropriate without patrol rights at the moment. Insofar as I am aware, everything which I have done fits into WP policy - if you can find any instances where that has not been the case, I would absolutely appreciate them being brought to me. However, as it stands, I see no reason why I should not be able to continue doing what I do - as it helps Wikipedia. &#124; Naypta✉ opened his mouth at 13:36, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Unblocking My Account
Hello Naypta,

My account "St.Ramos" was recently blocked. The reason given is that I used multiple account illegitimately to cause distortion or so. I don't recall creating a multiple account. My account was created two days to ago, and I edited a page on 24/7/2017 and another page on 25/7/2017 and I was told my account has been blocked. All I did was to edit, and create an article for Bolaji S. Ramos as a Nigerian writer/poet, and to edit the list of poets in Nigeria.

The most challenging thing is that the procedure for unblocking is too tedious, as there as so many links without directing leading to a particular link where the appeal for unblocking is.

Please can you refer me to the exact link where I am to appeal for blocking of my account.

Thanks St.Ramos (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2017 (UTC)