User talk:Premeditated Chaos/Archive 17

Portal:English language
Just a note that after you closed the MfD for Portal:English language as no consensus, the nominator then immediately unilaterally redirected the portal, against the consensus of the discussion. I reverted that and left a warning notice on their user talk page regarding the matter. Cheers, North America1000 22:38, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Templating a regular for taking a reasonable editorial action to redirect one title to another of exactly the same scope is pretty uncivil. Also my action was in keeping with the close. Legacypac (talk) 22:54, 25 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Nb. The portal has been immediately nominated for deletion again by the same original nominator. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:English language (2nd nomination). North America1000 23:01, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , dropping a template like that on anyone who has more than a dozen edits is supremely passive-aggressive, and so was leaving these little notes here. There was nothing in my close that forbade anyone from redirecting or merging the portal., immediately taking it to MfD again was stupid - the discussion was open for almost a month and came to no consensus, so re-opening it immediately is hardly going to change the outcome. Both of you, have a civil discussion about merging or redirecting it somewhere that isn't my talk page. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks PMC - since no one is watching the portal page, MfD seems a reasonable place to discuss the need to have two identical scope pages. If you have a better suggestion that will attract reasonable editors to the discussion, I'm open to taking it elsewhere. Cheers. Legacypac (talk) 23:13, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Proposed mergers perhaps, and maybe leave pointers at relevant WikiProjects. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Prostitution in Canada
Hi. WP:DRV suggest talking with the closer of the discussion before starting a deletion review. The above should have, in my opinion, have been closed early as a speedy keep on the grounds that "The nomination is so erroneous that it indicates the nominator has not even read the article in question"

The original nomination was:

"Random portal recently created with the "automatic" portal system with few directly related articles and no project to back it up. It links bios like Raymond Gravel implying this Catholic priest is related to prostitution in Canada. It also does not pickup the real articles of this topic like Human trafficking in Canada and Office to Combat Trafficking in Persons or any related bill like Bill C-268 or Bill C-310 its just a portal with somewhat related junk."

Breaking that down:


 * few directly related articles - about 50
 * no project to back it up - backed-up by WikiProject Sexology and sexuality/Sex work task force
 * It links bios like Raymond Gravel implying this Catholic priest is related to prostitution in Canada. In the lede of this article: " he has been open about the fact that he was a sex-trade worker during that time"
 * does not pickup the real articles of this topic like Human trafficking in Canada and Office to Combat Trafficking in Persons or any related bill like Bill C-268 or Bill C-310 - This is a prohibitionist view of prostitution (i.e. prostitution = human trafficking ) and therefore WP:POV. This is further backed up by the fact the articles Office to Combat Trafficking in Persons, Bill C-268 and Bill C-310 make no mention of prostitution. Even putting aside the POV aspect, suggesting that the portal links to articles that don't include the subject matter of the portal shows the proposer hasn't read any of the articles.
 * with somewhat related junk - The "junk" includes GA articles such as She Has a Name

I did request that the discussion should be speedily kept but received no response. (Perhaps I should have made the request somewhere other than in the discussion?) The majority of the replies on the discussion seem to be based on moralistic grounds rather than any objectivity.

In my view this deletion needs to be reviewed as it is now being used as a precedent to nominate other prostitution portals for deletion.

Thanks --John B123 (talk) 18:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * However you feel about the nomination statement, there was a solid consensus to delete. I don't see a pressing reason to override that consensus by undeleting. By all means take the page to DRV. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * As a side note, I do find it ironic that you claim the nominator has a POV prohibitionist view of prostitution because they suggest including articles on human trafficking, but you point to a play about human trafficking in Thailand as an example of the good content related to the portal. Certainly the play originated in Canada, but does it have to do with prostitution in Canada? Hardly, since it's about human trafficking in Thailand. This is one reason why these narrow-scoped portals are problematic; one has to stretch so much to find "related" articles that inevitably a bunch of tangential stuff gets included and the portal becomes an unfocused mess. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. My point was that the original nomination was so erroneous that the discussion should have been speedily closed. Any consensus reached after a procedural anomaly is irrelevant.


 * On the side note, there is a difference between sex trafficking and human trafficking. I couldn't find any reliable figures for Canada, but from UK Government official statistics, numerically sex trafficking is a minor part of human trafficking. Agriculture/food production has the highest absolute numbers, and domestic servants the highest number as a percentage of those employed in that industry. (That said, even if it were only 1 person, that would be too many). Suggesting Human trafficking in Canada is the most important article in Prostitution in Canada is akin to suggesting List of United States presidential assassination attempts and plots would be the most important article for a portal about JFK: it is included in the article but so is a lot of other subject matter. With regard to She Has a Name, although not primarily about prostitution in Canada, the play was used as part of a campaign in Canada to raise awareness of sex trafficking in general, but also within prostitution in Canada. --John B123 (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The nomination by me was not erronious. It is an WP:X3 portal spam creation. Even if we make nomination errors in the clean up of pages created in seconds via an automated script, it is not that big a deal. Go improve the mainspace content which people are likely to actually read, instead of worrying about junk pages like this with no origional content. Legacypac (talk) 18:04, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:X3 puts a different complexion on matters, however, if this had been made clear on the deletion page it would have saved everybody a lot of trouble. In view of your patronising last sentence, which I find insulting (check out my edit history), I see no point in carry on this discussion. --John B123 (talk) 18:29, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No insult intended to your specific contribution history - I advise everyone to work on articles instead of portals that pull often less than 1% of the views as the article by the same name regardless of the topic. Legacypac (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * lol - you didn't nominate that one, did. In any case, I disagree that Moxy's nom was so egregious as to require a speedy keep. Moxy obviously has a more narrow view of what constitutes a related article than you do (as do I), but that doesn't hit the level of suggesting that they didn't read the portal, and definitely not to the level that I'm going to override the consensus that developed. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:32, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree, but life would be dull if we all agreed all of the time. This episode has shown me shortcomings in the deletion process. Firstly you can't just rely on just the obvious. Transhumanist's portals are being discussed on three different noticeboards (that I'm aware of). These discussions may not be in harmony. For example, Moxy nominated based on the Village pump discussion, but the WP:X3 discussion tends towards not using MfD but speedy delete. Secondly, there are a group of editors that dominate deletion discussions and generally agree with each other. This might well be perceived by some as a clique who "close ranks" to support, or not, the nominator. However, as everybody is free to join in the discussions, I don't see this as any wrongdoing by the editors involved, it's just how the situation has ended up. The situation perpetuates itself when other editors try to join in the deletion discussions, their opinion gets overwhelmed by the "regulars", so they don't bother getting involved in the discussions again. Not sure if there is any fix for this, but if deletions are controlled by a relative handful of the 36 million registered editors, it might be better to regularise it and have a committee who control deletions. --John B123 (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Was brought to deletion after Village pump (technical)/Archive 170.--Moxy (talk) 11:38, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * As per my reply to above, if the real reason for deletion had been made clear in the nomination then it would have saved everybody a lot of time & trouble.--John B123 (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean by "real reason", Moxy clearly outlined their reasons for deletion in the nom. There's no "real" reason except what they already wrote, and I'm not sure it's entirely fair to suggest they were being disingenuous in their nom. Again though, by all means if you think the MfD wasn't done correctly, take it to DRV. There's never anything wrong with getting more eyes on something. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

edit summary
Don't attribute to malice what can be easily explained by error. This is the only edit I intended to make, a simple typo removal. Turns out you had edited it just minutes before, more recently than I had refreshed the page. -- Netoholic @ 20:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , you're right. I apologize. That was a bitchy edit summary and I should've asked you about it first before being a dick. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:29, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Bright Scholar Education Group
Hey, is it possible for you to view and add to my talk page the entire content of a page you deleted a while ago? not sure if this is against the rules, i would just like to see what they wrote so i can recreate the page better so hopefully it can be properly submitted this time. The page is called " Bright Scholar Education Group ". Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leedade (talk • contribs) 08:56, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Normally I'm happy to do that sort of thing, but that page was the subject of undisclosed paid editing accompanied by sock puppetry (see Sockpuppet investigations/BrightScholarJonathan/Archive) so I would have to see a great deal of independent in-depth references that meet our sourcing guidelines for companies before I would consider that. I have to ask - why the interest in Bright Scholar Education Group? Your only contributions are to a draft about an English teaching company (Draft:Meten English), and here you are interested in re-creating the deleted page of another similar company. Are you an employee, or otherwise being paid to create these articles? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:49, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah you are right i am new to Wiki editing, i used to work for a very small company a little similar to Meten english but i have never actually been an employee of either of these companies. Honestly i haven't done much other editing here because i find the entire process incredibly complicated and confusing. I saw that the bright scholar page was accused of sockpuppetry, but at least some of the content should be salvageable and im willing to try hard to reference it fully, and if im unable then i won't continue trying to remake the page. Both Meten and Bright Scholar are HUGE companies here in China and i honestly just find it strange that there isnt already at least a short page about their companies. Hope you can understand my motivations, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leedade (talk • contribs) 02:19, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The references included in your version of the article do not meet our sourcing guidelines for companies. We require independent, in-depth, reliable sources to prove corporate notability. I have done a search for sources but did not find much that I consider to be reliable (much of what came up was blogs or based on press releases, which are not acceptable sources for companies). I am going to re-list the article at articles for deletion for community discussion, because I do not believe the sourcing is sufficient to maintain an article. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:51, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Le Guin portal
Hello PMC -- wondering why you deleted this after no discussion? Espresso Addict (talk) 03:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * So fun story, . I had this response about WP:SOFTDELETE all typed up, and then looked at the date on the MfD again and realized it wasn't a weird leftover from the beginning of March, it was a brand-new MfD that had somehow gotten stuck under the Old Business heading, which I failed to notice. I've reverted myself, undeleted it, and stuck it under March 30 where it belongs. Thank you for catching that. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:55, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I hadn't realised it was transcluded in the incorrect date section. Espresso Addict (talk) 06:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hahaha, no problem. I didn't either, to my shame. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

deletion of entry Mahnaz Badihian
Hello, this entry was deleted due to notability. I feel this is in error. This individual is notable in the Iranian literary diaspora. One example is the us government website highlighting notable Iranian-Americans https://ir.usembassy.gov/mahnaz-badihian/. Please advise how to edit the entry to help restore it in English, it continues as an entry in Persian Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mishkoti (talk • contribs) 00:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
 * One source is typically not enough to support a claim of notability. However, since the article doesn't appear to have been overly promotional, I'll restore it and take it to articles for deletion for a community discussion. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for re-considering the entry. Here are additional links this is from an Iranian-American nonprofit supporting artist https://www.aftabcomm.org/mahnaz-badihian. Here is an interview with Italian TV:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1H55oo2X8U Here is a podcast at City Lights bookstore in san Francisco: https://www.citylightspodcast.com/tag/mahnaz-badihian/. Mishkoti (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Are you sure?
SmokeyJoe wanted it archived which is pretty close to delete. That makes it 3/4 Legacypac (talk) 03:40, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Joe's historically been very clear on his desire for old things in projectspace to be archived rather than deleted. Nothing wrong with tagging it historical after a no consensus vote if you want to be bold though. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:46, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

*URGENT* Hide IP address ASAP
Hi please hide my Ip address: [REDACTED - Oshwah] from this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khaled_Juffali without removing content added if possible. Expunge — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantom122 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks like took care of this - thanks Osh :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem; always happy to lend a hand ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Mitsubishi F-3
Dear Administrator,

I would like to request the deleted article, Mitsubishi F-3, to be restored into my userspace. The F-3 is a future Japanese stealth fighter currently in development. A while back I created the article but it was nominated for deletion, Articles for deletion/Mitsubishi F-3, because there was a lack of information regarding its current development (namely the manufacturer, Mitsubishi is only speculated). The other editors declared the article WP:TOOSOON (which I also agree). However, I believe there is still potential for this topic in future when more information is available or if I could find more info from the Japanese Ministry of Defense website. I wish to make improvements and changes based on the other editors' feedback. In addition, some of the editors have stated that the information within the deleted article can be used for the existing Mitsubishi X-2 (a tech demonstrator designed to study and develop technologies for the F-3). Thus, I would also like to use the information from the Mitsubishi F-3 to expand upon the Mitsubishi X-2. Thank you for taking the time to read my request. I edit things that come to mind (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi! Meant to respond to the ping on Beeblebrox's talk page yesterday and forgot. It's now at User:I edit things that come to mind/Mitsubishi F-3. Cheers! &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:50, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. I'll strive to do better. :) I edit things that come to mind (talk) 02:30, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Subpages
Hey PMC, I saw you were the deleting admin. on the MfD's of Portal:Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean, Portal:Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Portal:Women's history and Portal:Ulcinj. All of those portals have bunch of subpages as well; can you take care of them or do I have to tag each subpage with CSD G8 myself instead? Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:08, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * All done, thanks for the reminder. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:56, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Subpages II
Portal:X-ray astronomy also has subpages. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:12, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Subpages III
Portal:Arijit Singh and Portal:Babism also have subpages. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:44, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:00, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, keep finding more: Portal:Brandy Norwood. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:33, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Lol, don't apologize, it's all good. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:57, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * And Portal:Taito UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Another one bites the dust. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * And Portal:Laurentides and Portal:Robert E. Howard. UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:06, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Done and done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Shubunkin
Hello. I need some advice. I preliminarily discussed a wrong information at Talk:Shubunkin. After that, I edited the article but that was reverted twice. First time, I thought it's because I forgot to mention the discussion at Edit summary. But second time, I felt something weird is going on. I contacted first editor before I recover the reverted article but no response. Also, I contacted second editor but no response as well. I'm worry about what to do and what not to do. Mechamocha (talk) 03:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's probably best to continue to discuss it on the article's talk page. I'm not particularly interested in fish so I'm not a good choice for a neutral third opinion, and there's nothing being done that's actionable from an administrative point of view (no edit warring or personal attacks, I mean). Sorry to not be of much help. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Is it rude to recover my reverted edit again writing "Please check Talk:Shubunkin before you edit" on Edit Summary? Or should I leave a comment on the talk page first? Mechamocha (talk) 07:09, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe try to speak to the editor again on their talk page? Your original comment to them was not very clear, so maybe provide a little more detail about the situation. It might also help to re-start the discussion on the article talk page again. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll try it. Thank you. Mechamocha (talk) 07:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Best luck :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:37, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Please help
My name is Akash jainism, as per following policy ,my user name acceptable or have to change Akash jainism (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Username
 * diff
 * Should be ok, I think that other one got bot-flagged because it's just the word Jainism. But yours looks like it's a surname or a last name so that would be ok in my opinion. I wouldn't worry about it unless someone says something about it to you though. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:16, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanq .I wl continue with this my user name. Below link clearly says religious user names will not be acceptable.


 * "Do not use the name of a political, military or religious figure or event (including real people).


 * Do not choose something that might be offensive. Your user name should not suggest that you hold any particular political, religious or other belief." Akash jainism (talk) 17:24, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That's a policy from Simple Wikipedia, which doesn't apply here - this is English Wikipedia. Our Username policy doesn't prohibit mentioning religion in your username, as long as it isn't done to mock or offend that religion or its followers, which your username doesn't seem to. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:33, 24 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Sorry for continue discussion...just now i verified some religious user names. All most all religious related user names were blocked for user name violence.


 * Some examples: Jesus 100, Jesus 100, Jesus   12, Jesus christ  010, Jesus christ  69, Jainism  20. Akash jainism (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Listen, I don't know what else to tell you. I don't think your user name puts you at risk of being blocked. It doesn't defame Jainism. It doesn't insult Jains. There's nothing disruptive about it, unless there's some secret insult in the word Akash that I don't understand. If I were you, I wouldn't worry about it unless someone came to you and actually said they found your username was a problem. Relax and go edit something. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much
Thank you very much for your quick unblocking of my university. As I clarified in my e-mail to arbcom-en@wikimedia.org, the problem was blocking of User:さとみよ, one of my students, and my university's IP. As for the other accounts listed in Sockpuppet investigations/39age2/Archive, I know nothing about them. My students are listed here. They could not edit Japanese Wikipedia at all because of IP blocking, but now we can edit Wikipedia. I am very grateful. --saebou (talk) 07:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

I also confirmed your unblocking. Thanks! Yassie (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'm happy to help. It's possible that the other accounts were other students at the university, unconnected to the edit-a-thon, but that's just a guess - I can't say for sure. In any case it didn't look like any of them were being disruptive. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Asking for Help
Hello - I was hoping you might be able to help me out. I added a logo and some additional data to a Wiki and it got nominated for deletion. Ultimately it was deleted by yourself. I would like to see if I could fix this [] - I added a logo and some additional data and I guess attracted the attention of editors to review it and they deemed that the previous content wasn't notable enough. So it looks like it's my fault the page was deleted. I'm really hoping you could help me to figure out what I can do to fix their page. Can you help me? I'm afraid I hurt the company. thank you for your consideration. Rickwriteson (talk) 12:34, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not your fault the page was deleted. The page was deleted because no one produced enough independent, reliable sources to indicate that the company was notable enough to have a Wikipedia page, so the discussion was closed as delete. Generally speaking, the possibility that a company or subject might be "hurt" by their lack of a Wikipedia page is usually strong evidence that they aren't notable enough to have one in the first place.
 * All that being said, I have to ask what your relationship is to Fit Body Boot Camp - you haven't made any edits since 2015, but now suddenly you're really, really interested in adding data about this company (and only this company) to Wikipedia. It is, to put it delicately, suspicious. Are you being paid to edit this page, either as part of your employment duties or a contract job? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I sent you a message back. You mentioned you got a bounce back, but I did get your message. Thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rickwriteson (talk • contribs) 03:49, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Apologies from Fit Body Boot Camp
Dear Premeditated Chaos,

This is Sean Mabry, the Editorial Manager and Copywriter from Fit Body Boot Camp. I noticed you recently deleted our company page and I wanted to reach out to you personally and apologize for the situation.

Recently, our CEO hired an "SEO Expert" by the name Rick Porter to help us boost our search rankings for our company websites. You might recognize him by the username Rickwriteson.

He is the one who made the offending edits -- without any permission from the company and with no prior warning. Now I understand he is still harassing Wikipedia editors about the deletion.

As soon as we heard about the situation, we instructed Rick to cease his edits and make no further contact with anyone at Wikipedia. He has ignored this instruction.

So, to clarify...

Rick Porter DOES NOT represent the interests of Fit Body Boot Camp and he will face consequences for his actions.

Nonetheless, we apologize for any damage he has caused. If there is anything we can do to make amends, please let me know.

I will admit I am not familiar with the backend of Wikipedia, so the easiest way to contact me would be to email seanm@fitbodybootcamp.com. Thank you for your time, and for all the hard work you do to make Wikipedia useful and reliable.

Sean Mabry Editorial Manager/Copywriter Fit Body Boot Camp seanm@fitbodybootcamp.com
 * Sean, I will send you the same email explanation I sent to Rick. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Subpages IV
Portal:Daddy Yankee, Portal:David Guetta, Portal:Sacred Christian music, Portal:Serials and Wikipedia essays showcase also have subpages. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:15, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * All done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:55, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:27, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Hemphill Pontiac
Can you undelete [] please? Related to the more recent proposed for deletion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Zamaro_camaro_zamboni.jpg

This is NOT a promotional submission, it is historical. The business has been defunct for over 3 years. Please help, i have no idea what i'm doing but would like to set this up as a historical reference. Thank you Jeff


 * Not unless I see some reliable independent sources that indicate that Hemphill Chevrolet Buick GMC is somehow uniquely notable in a way that makes that one specific car dealership notable per our guidelines for companies. (That is hugely unlikely, but I'm not ruling it out by default). &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 03:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. "...reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published": https://www.journalpioneer.com/opinion/columnists/looking-back-on-caps-run-to-1997-canadian-championship-64784/ https://www.peisportshalloffame.ca/search/hemphill https://www.hockeycanada.ca/en-ca/news/take-a-walk-down-memory-lane **(note jersey) https://www.journalpioneer.com/sports/hockey/perfect-team-61595/ http://www.theguardian.pe.ca/sports/hockey/2017/2/15/_perfect-team.html

Related to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerside_Western_Capitals#History

Thx again Jeff
 * All of those sources are about the hockey team sponsored by the dealership, not about the dealership. Notability is not inherited, so we can't assume the notability of the dealership based on the notability of the hockey team. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 17:21, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Tower Island
Hi, some ref errors caused by this edit. Not 100% sure which ref name belongs where (as it were). Please can you fix. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 13:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Misnamed a ref, thanks for catching that. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for mending that! Eagleash (talk) 09:44, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Subpages V
Portal:Estrie has subpages. Thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:26, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Oui, c'est complet. Merci. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Merci beaucoup. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

Subpages VI
Portal:Theosophy has subpages. Thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
 * And done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:43, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)
Hey there PMC, thanks again for reviewing this article last year and promoting it to good article status. I've been looking at it again, and wonder if there's anything you can think of that it would help to add, before potentially nominating it as a featured article? It's quite short (it would be the 6th-shortest FA), but I've looked deeply for every source possible (including emailing its creator, Rick Kirby, and its owner, the National Trust—no response from either), and found little more than what is in the article. Is there anything else you can think of to do with this article before putting it up for nomination? Cheers, --Usernameunique (talk) 02:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm not really familiar with the FA process (never participated, never put one up for FA myself) so I'm not sure what else they would be looking for. It sounds like you've gotten as comprehensive as humanly possible. The article's well-written IMO so I think all there is is to see what the people at FA think. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Subpages VII
Portal:Montérégie has subpages. Thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Si, it is done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:25, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Another Damned Seattle Compilation
Hi PMC, in 2017 you deleted the article Another Damned Seattle Compilation. I am currently working on an article on the Dutch Wikipedia that is related to the subject of the deleted article. Could you tell me if the article had any sources? If yes, could you provide a list? I don't see sources in this off wiki snapshot but perhaps the snapshot is missing them for one reason or another. Could you also tell me who wrote the article? I would like to contact them. Thank you in advance for your time. Maartenschrijft (talk) 21:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, it had zero sources at the time of deletion. wrote the article in 2010, but hasn't edited since then. I can just email you a copy of it if you want. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I would like that. It might help me with what I'm working on. Maartenschrijft (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Done! :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 10:50, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Deleted entry for Rex Features
Hi, PMC,

I see that you are the editor who deleted the Wikipedia page for Rex Features, the British photographic agency.

Rex was founded by my parents Frank and Elizabeth Selby in 1953/4, and was owned and run by them, me and my brother John and sister Sue until 2011, when we sold the business to the managers and staff. Subsequently they sold the business on to Shutterstock inc., which has today finally absorbed the Rex Features business entirely and removed the name from trading.

We (the Selbys) would like to reinstate a Wikipedia page about Rex, reworded to give it a historical viewpoint, so that the name of this significant firm, which was highly respected in the media in the UK and worldwide for more than 55 years, is not forgotten.

Is there any way to retrieve the text of the deleted page? Ideally, we would like an older version, as the content was rather poorly edited by Shutterstock in recent years.

I hope you may be able to assist.

Mike Selby London UK Lordheber (talk) 21:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Mike, sorry for the delayed response. Do you have any examples of in-depth sources that would help confirm that Rex is as historically significant as you suggest? Newspaper articles (especially at the national or international level), magazine/journal features, and books that give details about the firm are the best kind of sources. Business listings, press releases, and blogs aren't of use. I'm not asking for an exhaustive list, but at least 3-4 of the best (most in-depth, widest audience, not written by anyone associated with the firm) examples would help give an indication of the firm's significance and notability. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Osaka University and Portal:Osaka
It appears that you deleted both of these portals after closing the MFD for Portal:Osaka. It doesn't appear to me that the deletion discussion of the city applied to the university. The university is a subject of another MFD that looks like a trainwreck to me. However, although I argued in favor of deletion of the university portal, I don't think that consensus has yet been assessed to that effect. Please check, and see whether the university portal should be restored as deleted by accident. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , sorry for the delayed response; I haven't been editing this week at all. You're right, it was a D-batch error; I'll undelete it. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:56, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

CSD G13
Declined G13 - Hii, as per WP:G13 bot edits doesn't count. -- CptViraj (📧) 09:42, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Last human edit was 16 August! -- CptViraj (📧) 09:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah that's what I get for editing without sufficient coffee. Sorry, you were right. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:47, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Page: "Desh Amila"
Hi Premeditated Chaos,

I am contacting you regarding the recently deleted page, "Desh Amila": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desh_Amila

I recently created this page for Desh Amila as based on the provided references he is a "notable person", as defined by the Wikipedia guidelines.

I'd appreciate your help in having the page republished publicly, or letting me know what more is needed to achieve this outcome.

Thank you in advance!

Kind Regards,

Roxy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisis42 (talk • contribs) 06:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello Roxy, before we get started, what is your relationship to Desh Amila? Are you being paid or otherwise compensated to write/publish this article? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:05, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

WMF stand down
In your comment section re: sanctioning the admins who improperly acted against a T&S action, are you sure about the reason they stood down? If ArbCom does nothing about the disruption caused by the anarchy, wouldn't that be further reinforcing the need for T&S intervention? Perhaps it would be best to ask the T&S Team publicly why they chose to not take action. I think the community is split over whether or not WMF overstepped their boundaries and I'm thinking it would prove helpful if ArbCom didn't further the divide by showing the kind of favoritism that got us here in the first place, especially the kind they would not show editors without the tools. Atsme Talk 📧 16:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * T&S could have pressed the matter by blocking and de-tooling Floq, Bish, and WJBScribe, but they chose not to, effectively de-escalating that portion of the situation. I don't know what their motives were for making that decision (and am not interested in speculating), but regardless, the end result was to let that part of the matter rest. I don't see any value in ArbCom reigniting the situation by laying sanctions where T&S explicitly opted not to. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 04:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Deleted Page: "Transparent Media Portal"
Hi , Regarding the article Transparent Media Portal (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transparent_Media_Portal) which has been deleted and you were the deleting admin, ''I have gone through the various Wikipedia policies and saw that my article did not violate any Wikipedia policies. I or the sources mentioned in the article have not authored the proposed law which is the topic of the article nor are members of any organisation who has authored the proposed law. And we can see that only authors of the article get any political gain or any other kind of gain if law is implemented or even otherwise. You can see the same in the case of Frank-Dodd Act and many other laws passed. So, the sources given are independent, secondary and verifiable.'' I have also presented the article from a neutral point of view without any bias of my own as I have presented all the PUBLISHED views. I really want to follow Wikipedia policies to the letter. Therefore, I had requested the editors who nominated for deletion and who supported deletion to quote from the links of Wikipedia policies and establish how the editor came to the conclusion h/she came to. But this was not done. Instead I found that the reasons given for supporting deletion of the article are nowhere to be found in any Wikipedia policy. I do not know the reason why this was done but this is indeed unfortunate when Wikipedia is such a useful site. I would request to quote me from the exact Wikipedia policies which I have violated and explain how my article violates them. Thanks. ParthaSarathiMishra (talk) 17:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * PMC, can you kindly block this spammer? Part of a long-running campaign to use WP for political agenda pushing. &#x222F; WBG converse 09:10, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * , I'm not interested in prolonging the extensive discussions that were already had at the article's talk page and the AfD. The policies requiring reliable and independent sources were explained to you at length during both discussions. As no reliable and independent sources were produced at AfD, there was a consensus to delete the article. I'm not going to undermine the consensus by undeleting the article and I'm not going to have an argument with you about it. Please drop the argument and go edit something else unrelated. As Winged Blades of Godric has pointed out, your refusal to listen to what other editors are saying is making your edits come across as political activism, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. If you persist in retreading the same arguments or attempt to recreate the article, I am going to block you for being not here to contribute to the encyclopedia.
 * , if he persists in the same vein and/or recreates the article or something similar, please drop me a note and I'll block. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 06:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

You need to look at the evidence I presented
You need need to look at the evidence I've presented. It was there when you typed your comment rejecting the case. I think you might be relying too heavily on your peers. Jehochman Talk 14:40, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It wasn't - I opened the section for an edit before your new information was there, got pulled away from my desk at work, and returned to hit publish. Didn't see it in the mean time, but have now updated my comment. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:33, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I figured as much. Thank you for your service, your time, and your thoughts. Jehochman Talk 15:38, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Cowrywise
I have a number of concerns with your deletion decision at Articles for deletion/Cowrywise
 * The argument was sniped prior to closure by an editor who applied comments throughout including two above Please add new comments below this notice..
 * I am concerned possibly about an anti African/Nigerian bias in deletion of this article.
 * There was no explanation of the decision in the closure summary.
 * Many editors expressed possibilities of WP:TOOSOON. If the result was not a relist or a no-consensus due to the last minute snipe comments then a soft delete would have been more appropriate surely?  Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 06:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Hang on a sec. What on earth is a snipe comment - that's a new one on me. I can only assume you are referring to my comment. It was a stalled AfD and I looked at the article and provided my opinion. I added my comment *after* the Please add new comments below this notice. line, so again that's not a valid concern. I responded to other people's comments after their comments because otherwise how would someone know somebody replied to them?  HighKing++ 17:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @ Snipe ... Adding comments just before the end of a discussion before the end of the time limit for the review, In this case you dominated the discussion with no chance of a reply.Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @, WP:SOFTDELETE applies to situations where there was minimal participation; this AfD does not meet that criteria. There is no requirement for the closer to provide an extended rationale, I opted not to do so because the consensus was clear to me. There was nothing inappropriate about the placement of 's comments. Finally, I don't see any indication of anti-Nigerian or anti-African bias in anyone's comment. Please be careful when making those kinds of allegations and be prepared to back them up with concrete evidence, or you may come across as casting aspersions, which is generally frowned upon. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * @: Feel free to frown upon me and drag me to WP:ANI as others do. I may consider a WP:DRV but it would likely be pointless. 18:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You don't need to ping me, it's my talk page, I get a notification regardless. I've never taken anyone to ANI and I don't care to start now, but I'm telling you that making accusations of bias without evidence is a form of a personal attack, so back it up or knock it off. As always, I welcome a DRV of any of my closures; I am confident that this one was reasonable. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Subpages VIII
Portal:Kazi Nazrul Islam has subpages. Thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:46, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 05:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: File:Djmaskellblocktoberfest2007.JPG
Hello Premeditated Chaos. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of File:Djmaskellblocktoberfest2007.JPG, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''The page is needed for the image. The promotional content may be removed, but the image needs to follow the deletion process for images.''' Thank you. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 07:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Arguably an image uploaded strictly for promotional purposes meets G11, but ok, I'll PROD. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 07:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Obama Approval.jpg
As the creator of the relevant image, I agree with the deletion. The file is obsolete; let's trash it. J♯m (talk &#124; contribs) 06:59, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll G7 it on that basis, thanks for responding :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:55, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:CAI map-3.jpg
Yeah, definitely delete this. Sorry for wasting your time with it - I posted that stuff on here when I was literally 11 years old. Jokullmusic 23:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * LOL! No problem :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:25, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

editProtectedHelper
Hi! I was looking into making editProtectedHelper a gadget and found User talk:Jackmcbarn/editProtectedHelper, which links to two suppressed diffs. Would it be possible, if it's not against any oversight policies, to summarize what editProtectedHelper was doing in those diffs (via email if you want)? Thanks! Enterprisey (talk!) 07:02, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Replied by email. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 09:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

typo in deletion request
Hi. I corrected a typo in the deletion request for File:Pahawh yu.png. I don't know if you'll need to correct it anywhere else. — kwami (talk) 19:49, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Trans-wiki notif
Pinged you from de-wiki, but I'm not sure if a trans-wiki user link causes a notification alert or not. So, just a heads-up that I summarized at de:User talk:OfficeBoy the result of a recent block you were involved in.

A handy tip in case you're not too used to trans-wiki stuff: note the working Talk link wikicode above using the English namespace name, even though the local NAMESPACE is actually "Benutzer Diskussion". Saves you having to look up User, Talk, etc. for every foreign Wikipedia. Mathglot (talk) 03:48, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Request
Since you're going through my image uploads, isn't needed and can be deleted. I put a tag on it, but it's probably the wrong tag. Thanks. Victoria (tk) 19:15, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I was going through orphaned images, actually, but I'll take care of that one since you asked. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 19:16, 29 July 2019 (UTC)