User talk:Renamed user cdb78c3737e6b7f6ba7e28cedcc6608711202eee/Archive 2

Case sensitivity
Hi!

Yes please, thank you very much! This is my first article so I couldn't work out how to fix that up, but I definitely did intend for it to be Little Dreamers Australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opwal (talk • contribs) 05:15, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, done. —   IVORK  Discuss 05:17, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Joey the squirrel
Contested deletion:This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it has significant media coverage. See User:Barbara (WVS)/Jerry the crime-fighting squirrel. You saw the underconstruction template and should allow time to add the references. This is not a hoax and it is not a joke. Bfpage (talk) 10:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Please remove the template. Bfpage (talk) 10:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If it truly is a notable animal, it won't get deleted. You're fine to continue adding information in the meantime. —   IVORK  Discuss 10:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Then you doubt my good faith if I say that the article is notable because it has significant coverage. Bfpage (talk)
 * I don't doubt you're editing in good faith, but still doubt that media coverage is the only requirement for a claim to significance. If that were the case, why doesn't Danielle Bregoli (the Cash me outside, howbow dah) teenager have her own article? I could link multiple articles stretching over a period of months from Daily Mail / The Sun / Fox News / NewYork Post / Hollywood Life etc about the incident or how she is progressing with life and the fact she's heading to jail for 5 years and such. But significance means that it is an event that will still be significant in some way that users will want / need to access information on it a year / two from now. I don't see that being the case with either of these topics. At least that's my understanding of WP:A7. —   IVORK  Discuss 11:07, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Continue any further comments here please→‎Talk:Joey the squirrel

added a source
Hi, I got your message and added some sources to the article Amy York Rubin. Is that all that needs to be done to prevent deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lampface (talk • contribs) 23:08, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, yes that is all that's needed for you or anyone to remove the WP:PRODBLP notice. However also note that per WP:ELNO external links are generally not put in the body of the article (such as you have for Little Horribles). Generally in-article links are only for references or links to other Wikipedia articles.  —   IVORK  Discuss 23:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Episode title and redirects
 I just checked my own television's guide for the next Game of Thrones episode's title, and it lists it as "Death Is the Enemy." As such, I recreated the redirect which you moved previously to "Beyond the Wall." Obviously it doesn't actually matter until the episode airs, but just letting you know my reasoning for re-creating the redirect. Once the official title is confirmed, probably within the next day or two, I'd suggest deleting whichever redirect was not actually the episode's title. Not sure if it would be wise to remove the episode title from the season 7 article, also. Calibrador (talk) 09:59, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually I just looked at the source for the title on the season 7 article, and see it's an HBO account, an official one presumably. So I'm not sure anymore. Calibrador (talk) 10:05, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I know YouTube doesn't count for much, but their official account captioned the S07E06 trailer with your title. We'll just wait and see before I move mine to sandbox. I was just acting off that source which seemed believable. No dramas. —  IVORK  Discuss 10:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, well in that case it may be best to just leave it as TBA on the season 7 page then. If you disagree feel free to revert. Calibrador (talk) 10:20, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Fine by me, see above mate, it is likely that source is incorrect due to the amount of sources supporting the Death Is the Enemy title. Leaving it until there's a clearer source from HBO themselves was the plan. I'm gonna undo your changes since there's ambiguity at this stage.  —   IVORK  Discuss 21:13, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually now that I check it, the HBO website lists it as Beyond the Wall, unsure why your TV guide would get that wrong. Will leave as is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ —   IVORK  Discuss 21:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * ''Copy-paste merged to Talk:Game of Thrones (season 7). Continue any discussions there —   IVORK  Discuss 23:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

A7 placement on Top Notch Infotronix India Pvt Ltd
Hi, i saw you recently placed a A& tag on the page top notch infotronix india pvt ltd. You stated that that the article is not meeting the wiki notability guidelines. However i feel the article has all required notability evidences, once you check the google it will display lot of independent sources for you about the company and also since its an indian company you may not able to recognize from your your location. YOu take your time to research around google,yahoo,bing or any other and you will get high quality and independent sources as an notability evidence. ThanK You ,Tamilan ( (talk)Tamilan ( 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, per the discussion on the articles talk page, a company merely existing isn't enough by itself for notability. Notability means that it stands out / is distinguished enough for people putside of the companies direct influence to be interested in the article etc.  —   IVORK  Discuss 11:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes i agree and the company satisfy that too as i mentioned it has a notability and the subjects core remains in the hands of google and other search engines which i will give an idea that how well the company is standing among the audience and how well its noted all over more important than these two how well it has build up an image to get added up in the wikipedia. Thank You Tamilan ( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamilan ( (talk • contribs) 12:18, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, ivory u can check the Articles notability here https://www.google.co.in/search?sclient=tablet-gws&tbm=nws&q=Zebronics+india+pvt+ltd&oq=Zebronics+india+pvt+ltd&gs_l=tablet-gws.3...2892.7677.0.8073.14.14.0.0.0.0.182.1980.0j14.14.0....0...1.1j4.64.tablet-gws..0.3.475...0j30i10k1.MB4Za1QtpRY https://www.google.co.in/search?q=top+notch+infotronix+india&client=tablet-android-samsung&prmd=mnvi&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjP-YmFwePVAhUGso8KHUAWBv4Q_AUIESgC&biw=800&bih=1280 as I said Google is a god of offering good sources. Thank you Tamilan ( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamilan ( (talk • contribs) 14:28, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Zaklopac pie chart
It is in continuity with other settlements. Thats the only reason. Also name of ethnos like Serbs in this case is writhing with capital letter S. So, if you change data for settlement of Zaklopac you should do it with other settlements also !--Rethymno (talk) 14:46, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My bad on the capitalisation, being from Australia I do not know Croatia / it's people very well. However the fact remains that a pie graph showing 100% of one variable serves absolutely no purpose. The other articles don't need to be changed if they can actually be helped by using a chart. Usefulness trumps uniformity. —   IVORK  Discuss 14:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

you could always add something like the below for the overall chart if you really want something.  or —  IVORK  Discuss 15:05, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

No, thanks. I like concrete numbers.--Rethymno (talk) 15:53, 20 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Those are the numbers from the table. No dramas —  IVORK  Discuss 15:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Enfants Riches Déprimés
Hello IVORK. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Enfants Riches Déprimés, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''multiple RS indicate significance. There is no rule that says you have to have your drafts reviewed.''' Thank you.  So Why  12:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) Article history lost
 Could you take a look at my contribution history real quick? Specifically the fact that the Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) article was moved from its page to an incorrect title and then recreated by someone else. Do you have any way to move the page back, so that the article history is preserved? Calibrador (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, yeah had swapped the origional page and Brothers Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) which moved the histories but not the actual content... I'm not too sure how it worked and can't seem to get the script they used working. There's a discussion on the talk page about it, will probably alert an admin soon if he's not back. Cheers  —   IVORK  Discuss 22:06, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I am waiting for a reply on the talkpage but I suspect it was a copy and past move and therefor no script was used by the other user. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I assume it is to do with the log on the Brothers page being

'' (cur | prev) 06:03, 22 August 2017‎ Emir of Wikipedia (talk | contribs)‎ m. . (2,536 bytes) (0)‎. . (Emir of Wikipedia moved page Talk:Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) to Draft talk:Move/Brothers Beyond the Wall (Game of Thrones) without leaving a redirect: Round-robin history swap step 1 using [[User:Andy M. Wang/pageswap|pages...) (undo | thank)
 * —  IVORK  Discuss 22:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It looks like it was copy and pasted as shown in this edit. -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * So best solution would be to do a swap without talk pages with that script and copy accross again? —   IVORK  Discuss 22:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Merged to Talk:Beyond_the_Wall_(Game_of_Thrones): please continue discussions there —   IVORK  Discuss 22:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Agilitas Ltd Article
Sorry for wasting your time, I should have read more of the guidelines before creating a page.
 * No dramas mate, unfortunately we aren't all notable. —   IVORK  Discuss 12:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Rashan Fernando
thanks for your help. I've salted both of his capitalizations and endorsed your final warning but haven't yet blocked. Alas it's about to be bedtime here so I won't be of much help until tomorrow evening (roughly 18 hours) so won't be able to closely watch for the next incarnation of his autobiography. StarM 02:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, I was in the process of responding to his deletion contest and will post it on his talk page so he can hopefully understand. Cheers! —   IVORK  Discuss 02:41, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Tried to drop him a couple of links, but he doesn't seem to understand exactly what / why copyright is an issue. Perhaps different in different jurisdictions. Have a great day StarM 02:51, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Looks like got the last version, guess I didn't catch all versions to salt. I don't know if that was before or after your guidance, IVORK, but thinking may be time to block. He's burned through enough final warnings. StarM 23:41, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, he had created it in one of the talk pages which I moved to draft to try assist. But after reading through his 20 or so "references" determined it wasn't worth it as nearly all "award nominations" listed appeared to be amateur competitions he could self-submit into. I'm not too sure where the COPYVIO stands since this is clearly an attempt at an article about himself against his own website. But the A7 is definitely valid. I'd be fine to leave it unless there is one more, but your call. —   IVORK  Discuss 23:58, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you or whoever the first tagger was (I lost track of the various iterations) went with G11/12 but it could easily have been an A7. It's not suitable content for Wikipedia. From a perusal of their talkpage, RHaworth seems more familiar with this content to know how to handle. I think the larger concern is the user didn't seem to understand either of our explanations even when we went simpler/non template. I didn't explore the content in depth that you did. StarM 02:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * StarM, you are being too hard on yourself to say [on my talk page] that you screwed up. Not noticing is perfectly excusable. You both need to provide links as a matter of course when you discuss stuff on a talk page. One reason is that they provide what-links-here information to let later investigators know that a page has been discussed before. I had to do a bit of searching to find what you are talking - note the mis-spalling in the discussion title. The links for this discussion are: Reshan Fernando, draft:Reshan Fernando, Reshan fernando and.
 * Dunno why you think I am more familiar - I cannot see it being discussed on my talk page. Certainly I have strong ideas about people who copy their own website - read this. OK, you could argue that people should be allowed to copy their own websites but deleting as copyvio is often a clear, uncontroversial deletion reason whilst deletion on grounds of notability always has a subjective element. I shall leave it to you two to watch this case. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links lesson. I am super wiki rusty, hence also screwing up the ping. You seemed to be a more knowledgeable in how to handle copyvio editing just based on some of the other threads, but I think we're happy to keep an eye on this. Thanks for insight. StarM 02:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

References added
Please Check Ujwal Nirgudkar page, References are added now so please remove the Tag. Please help me to remove 'biographies of living persons policy' for 'Ujwal Nirgudkar' page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manish005 (talk • contribs) 01:38, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, you had removed the WP:PRODBLP template in this edit back on the 19th. There shouldn't be any dramas from that, the references you have added establish his notability adequately. —   IVORK  Discuss 02:11, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
 * has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.
 * The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
 * Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
 * To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

Hi
We have continued disruptive editing on Kashmiris by the new user. I reverted him again a few minutes ago. Would you mind keeping an eye out? Otherwise please advise me where to lodge a complaint. Thank you.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 03:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, if a user is being continually disruptive you can WP:Warn them on their talk page using the suitable templates in that link or alternatively installing a tool such as Twinkle. Once you or any other users have warned them 4 times in the space of a month, you can report them here for vandalism or here for edit warring. I strongly suggest enabling Twinkle, it is an incredibly useful tool for those not too familiar with the processes.
 * I will keep an eye out however I am not well versed in the topic and was merely reverting clear vandalism from the pending changes list. From what I can tell so far, you could warn him with a level 4 next time and following that a report. If you believe the article is under constant attack from users that are already WP:autoconfirmed you can request page protection here and your best bet would be to ask for temporary WP:30/500 protection, meaning only extended-confirmed users which you well and truely are, can edit the article. —   IVORK  Discuss 04:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Err, just clicked: I'm not an admin. Just extended confirmed, rollbacker, new page & pending changes review and page mover, but thanks, I'll do what I can. —   IVORK  Discuss 04:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. This is the user who's behind the trouble. I gave him a warning earlier, but he ignored it. Most of his edits are unsourced POV. He doesn't have much of an editing history other than disrupting that article. I don't think he was enabled to edit that page and the review requests were approved, but not sure by whom. If you do end up reviewing his edits, let me know on the talk page what's further advisable. Thanks again for your response.--NadirAli نادر علی (talk) 20:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Aquaman's Strength
Aquaman not being physically on par with Superman and Wonder Woman isn't entirely true. He fought and bested the likes of Hercules, Lobo, the shaggy man and others physically superior to both of them more than once and come out on top too. I feel that sentencing isn't entirely accurate and honestly, a tad contradictory in and of itself.--75.168.154.111 (talk) 23:38, 25 August 2017 (UTC)


 * G'day, by saying to take it to the talk page, I meant the the article's talk page. Simply because the article currently says that he isn't, and changing that needs to be discussed there and gain a consensus, not just convince me. —   IVORK  Discuss 12:15, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the "Pending Changes protection" section
Can you get back to me on our consecutive edits in the relevant section? I think my edit was accurate: I believe that the latter three bullet points supported it:


 * "If the editor is logged in and not a pending changes reviewer, then...
 * if there no unreviewed pending edits waiting, this editor's edits will be visible to everyone immediately; but
 * ''if there are unreviewed pending edits waiting, then this editors edits will be visible only to other logged-in users (including himself) immediately, but not to readers not logged in."

Specifically, it seemed clear to me that the portion of the text I edited, "When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an autoconfirmed user," (emphasis mine) the edit will be immediately visible to Wikipedia readers," was too broad. That is, the second component of the sentence in question would be more precise if one included the words "with reviewer rights" or perhaps another similar sequence of words along with "an autoconfirmed user," at least in some capacity.

I hope we can resolve this soon; it's quite a critical project page, after all. Encyclopedia Lu (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, you changed:
 * When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an autoconfirmed user, the edit will be immediately visible to Wikipedia readers.
 * to
 * When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an autoconfirmed user with pending changes protection, the edit will be immediately visible to Wikipedia readers.
 * This removes the link about the autoconfirmed access level, and you stated the page has PC-1 for a second time in the same sentence which is redundant. —  IVORK  Discuss 06:32, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. But let me try to address your concerns.
 * I do realize that I had removed the link regarding the autoconfirmed access level—and I appreciate that you quickly changed that back for me—but I don't think that diminishes the primary component of my edit. Additionally, I believe that you misinterpreted my second mention of PC-1: I was referring to the privilege of the editor, as opposed to the restriction assigned to the page. Finally—and you might have changed it back after checking the original source again, but I'd like to be certain—I only added the emphasis to the phrase in question on your userpage to draw attention to it; I didn't do this on the project page.
 * Finally, with regards to the aforementioned "primary component," I still believe that the essence of my edit was valid. That is, while my removal of the link (I didn't realize I had done so at the time) created an issue in the section, I think that my specification that the edits of only a certain subclass of autoconfirmed users are immediately available to all was a helpful addition.
 * (Before this is resolved, I'll make a less controversial edit to the section. I realize that, while writing this response, an "are" is missing between "if there [are] no unreviewed . . ." This time, I might be able to make my first | unreverted edit in two years, before we can solve this issue. ☺️) — Encyclopedia Lu (talk) 19:27, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Ah ok, however I think it is specifically trying to explain how new users don't get accepted, autoconfirmed do (assuming there are no previous outstanding pending edits). It seems fairly obvious that every pending changes reviewer will be autoconfirmed as well. —   IVORK  Discuss 19:47, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

humbly asking for review for Famemix Rwanda
hey Ivork,hope this message finds you well,i would like you to review my content that i have wrote about this platform called famemix,its platfom based in Rwanda country and its purpose is to promote and let other rwandan who want to know about to find it on here (wikipedia),please if you really don't mind you will consider this and help me to put it up again.

Regards Ivan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivan250igan (talk • contribs) 09:56, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, unfortunately Wikipedia has a criteria articles need to meet for inclusion as not every single topic in the world is notable enough for inclusion to an encyclopedia. Your article was deleted per WP:A7 which essentially details that the subject has not declared why it is notable. These guidelines are outlined at WP:NWEB and essentially explain that a website must:
 * The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations[4] except for media re-prints of press releases and advertising for the content or site or trivial coverage, such as: a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site, newspaper articles that simply report the times at which such content is updated or made available, and content descriptions in directories or online stores.
 * The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization.
 * Without meeting those criteria, then it is purely a form of advertising which unfortunately Wikipedia does not allow per WP:NOTADVERT. If the website does get covered by multiple independent sources (such as news etc.) then it may be notable enough and you could re-submit for an article at Draft:Famemix Rwanda per the WP:AfC proccess.  —   IVORK  Discuss 10:08, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Learning by Observing and Pitching In
Quick note to let you know I sent this to AfD. A prior ProD had been removed by a contributor to the article. Cheers, Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:56, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

ISU-152
I gave those information from WarThunder.

Regardless. A game cannot be taken as a factual representation much let alone a tanks statistics even if the game is meant to to be realistic. —  IVORK  Discuss 16:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Persistent sockpuppets
See MCC page edit history, as well as all those new page creations (username should be logged in my CSD log). Thinking of reporting all these to WP:SPI and request CU, but might also got to report to admin's noticeboard of incidents. -★- PlyrStar93. → Message me. 🖉← 04:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * No dramas, I had tried to db-vandalism all of them but you got them prior in the same minute. IMO I'd say it looks more like a group of people (assuming college students) due to the time between edits on seperate accounts. But couldn't hurt to do so. —   IVORK  Discuss 05:00, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

A goat for you!
Re: Aretha Franklin, As far as I can tell, the children's "names" also were vandalism. Thanks for taking care of it.

L3X1 (distænt write)  02:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC) 

Deletion of Rahul Haridas page
It was my first time writing an article from scratch. I was editing it and it has been deleted. The seven days time wasn't given to me. I spent hours of time searching for this actor's data including his movies, interviews and everything. cited everything when I clicked save the changes it wasn't saved. What sort of unfair system is this. Sure the articles need to be accurate and follow the rules but deleting it immediately without providing at least few days of time. I am deeply hurt by this action.

You people aren't following your own rules. 10:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, I merely put a WP:PRODBLP tag on it which is essentially stating that yes, an source has to be added within 7 days for all biographies of living people. However it was a different user (who I unfortunately can't see since the page has been deleted) placed a WP:CSD tag upon the article. This essentially details that any article that is created that doesn't immediately state why the subject of the article is notable, may be deleted without further delay. For an actor, they need to meet the criteria for notability set out in WP:NACTOR. If you still believe that Rahul is worthy of an article, I would recommend following the WP:AfC process and creating a draft first. —   IVORK  Discuss 10:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. He does meet the criteria under entertainers.


 * That'd need to be made clear by referencing independant reliable sources. If you believe this is still the case, do create that draft. You pretty much have to since the article title has been create protected. Once it has been reviewed and approved I'm sure the admins will have no dramas removing the create protection and moving it to the mainspace for you. Please also sign messages left on talk pages with ~ Cheers —   IVORK  Discuss 04:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

References ‎
I have update references as suggested - User:Vhugec 02:38, 5 September 2017
 * Are you refering to the Silvia Hugec artice? I am confused, I cannot see myself in it's edit history. (Although I do review a lot of articles so can't remember them all). The WP:PRODBLP template another user placed has since been removed, so it's fine in that regard. Please also sign your messages using ~ Thanks. —   IVORK  Discuss 04:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the Page Shaji Chen
Hi,

I have created the page using the guidelines provided by Wikipedia (Infact last week I was creating a temporary page and wanted to transition to this page). Can you please review and let me know any more changes are needed.

Thanks,

AnumodAnumod.thomas (talk) 17:18, 5 September 2017 (UTC)


 * G'day, I have made a bunch of changes to the overall style of the article such as header formatting (MOS:HEADER), removal of external links within the text (WP:ELNO), removal of facebook as a reference (WP:SELFSOURCE) as weel as addition of a infobox. From here I'd recommend cutting down on the amount of raw references you have listed at the bottom of the article, try include them with tags within the article next to the relevant sentences.
 * Be aware that references are purely for validating the claims made by the article, not for linking works done. Additionally that external links are generally kept limited to just the subject's personal website / website of his company, again, not to works done considering how many he has reportedly done.
 * I would also look to add references to the advertising writing paragraph (which I merged with writing) to support that he indeed worked with those companies.
 * As mentioned I added an infobox and feel you could complete some of the sections within that from information that you can source. But there is no need to fill out all of them.
 * Hope it helps! —   IVORK  Discuss 23:49, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Park Jimin (musician) article
Hi! So you sent me a message talking about "Being involved in an edit war" and all that stuff, and I'm sorry, that wasn't my intention at all. In reality, my article, "Park Jimin (musician)" was created (approved) yesterday, however, it was created as a redirect article to the page BTS (band). How can I change that? I tried editing the source and putting the html all over again but after a few hours it went back on being a redirect page. I tried everything, but it still doesn't work... I'm sorry to bother, I'm just new in Wikipedia and this is my first article and I there's a lot of things I still don't know, so I was wondering if maybe you could help me? I really don't know what to do to get my article actually published. User:Cristinaclcardoso 01:17, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, I have responded on the article's talk page here. —   IVORK  Discuss 01:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of LAWSON D. GRATZ

 * --Snipped CSD template--  ɯ ɐ ɔ  💬 03:44, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Did you mean to tag the redirect? I wasn't too sure if it'd survive notability but incase you missed it, I moved the page to Lawson Gratz to comply with MOS:TITLECASE. I'll tag the redirect with a WP:R3 and you're free to tag the actual page with an WP:A7 if you wish. —   IVORK  Discuss 03:49, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Template:2018 FIFA World Cup qualification – UEFA Runners-up table
To help you reply to requests that ask to update the table so it shows all results from UEFA qualification, always look carefully at the template itself before replying. The text above the table clearly says "For this tournament qualification matches against the sixth placed team do not count." UEFA also confirms this in their qualification format page as listed here (note that they mention specific positions rather than saying "all results excluding the sixth-placed team.") Hope this helps if you stumble across this template with a request like this again. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:36, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
 * Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!
 * The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: 
 * On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
 * Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
 * To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: Technology update: General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
 * We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.
 * Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.
 * The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
 * To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

Draft:Morty Smith
Mind taking a go at it? HarrisonSteam (talk) 21:27, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: Outreach and Invitations:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
 * Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!
 * If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: . Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive
 * A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
 * Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. —  TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC) 
 * ACTRIAL has resulted in a significant increase in the quality of new submissions, with noticeably fewer CSD, PROD, and BLPPROD candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
 * The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
 * To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

New Years new page backlog drive
Hello, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1st and run until January 29th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:


 * The total number of reviews completed for the month.
 * The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Approve is badly Needed
Sir,please help me.I create my article about a bangladeshi actress who's name is Sharlin Farzana.There I shows dependable reference but you deleted the article.Bangladeshi people want to jnow about her.So this article is badly needed.please approve the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asif Mahmud Antor (talk • contribs) 14:58, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
 * G'day, one thing I would suggest before approval is to link some of her works to articles in order to satisfy the notability criteria per WP:NACTOR. —   IVORK  Discuss 21:37, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Give me Suggestion
Sir,I want to add a notable work reference of her.How can I add this?I didn't find the article.Please give me the link or tell me What should I do?I am the novice in this work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asif Mahmud Antor (talk • contribs) 03:48, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Changes to Article Deepak Shinde
Hi,

I received your message on the review of my Wikipedia article "Deepak Shinde". As per your concerns, I have added extra References to the article and Published it. Do let me know if this is sufficient.

Rohaanalex (talk) 11:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)Rohaan


 * No dramas mate, the references check out. —   IVORK  Discuss 11:36, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who like Black Mirror
Hey! I saw that you edited the article Black Mirror and thought maybe you would be interested in this new user category I created?- 🐦Do☭torWho42 ( ⭐ ) 11:08, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church edits
The edits I made are creative. Lot of vandalism happened in Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church yesterday. Pls go through that first before reverting my edits. - 106.208.21.30 (talk) 04:54, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter
Hello, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update: New Year Backlog Drive results:
 * The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
 * We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!
 * We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ACTRIAL will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
 * Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the guideline on appropriate redirects for advice on reviewing redirects. Inappropriate redirects can be re-targeted or nominated for deletion at RfD.

Apologies
This is probably what I get for typing the edit summary too fast... graaaa theinstantmatrix (talk) 05:17, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Shuri (Comic) Aliases
Greetings! Just noticed that my recent edits on Shuri's aliases have been reversed. The new aliases I've added are from the most recent Black Panther comic book run. Should I cite the source of the new aliases in order for them to remain on the page? Or is another step required?

Thank you for your assistance!

Bproofx (talk) 08:40, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Draft:Salt2
Draft:Salt2, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Salt2 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Salt2 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Legacypac (talk) 10:03, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Chrissymad
The editor is female. --Neil N  talk to me</i> 21:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ —  IVORK  Discuss 21:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

thanks from PNG
I know that Australia has done things to PNG too, but you guys seem to have seen the error of your ways. For that I thank you. I only wish Americans would understand that PNG is not their personal toilet or trash dump. yes, we have a beautiful home, and we make an amazing vacation place. However, because of how Americans not only treat our land but also our people, including myself, I canot respect any American wikipedians, though I will do my best to be civil. Whenever I edit any articles about Americans, I have my Australian girlfriend look at them to make sure I am not saying something insane. I hope you get it, when people form a certain country treat your land and people like crap, yuo are going to hate them. Even if the person talking to you had nothing to do with it other than being of the same nationality as those who did it. Think of it why the Russians were banned from the Olympics. Only a few idiots doped, but every Russian was treated like crap by the IOC because of it. So if the IOC can treat a nation like this, why can't I ask that Americans not give me orders?

Anyway, thank you for being honest with me, and thanks Australia for understanding and for giving us independence.

Andy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.101.62.36 (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of The Ouchies
Hi, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ouchies was deleted by you. My apologies for not including more information about the band. I am new to Wikipedia. I do have some links to public information about the band such as interviews and discography sites. Will including this help get it approved? Thanks!

Bobfrombham (talk) 23:05, 19 March 2018 (UTC)


 * G'day mate, I nominated it for deletion because it did not cite any references to prove the band's notability. The list of requirements for creation of an article for a band are outlined in WP:MUSICBIO. I would recommend creating the article as a draft or in your sandbox first, and once it is completed you can move it to the mainspace. —   IVORK  Discuss 23:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I will get it updated with proper references in sandbox first. Thanks! Bobfrombham (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm Natureium. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Nemy Rose, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Natureium (talk) 02:36, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Internet meme page
Hello, I am contacting you because you seem to have answered a section in the discussion of the page "Internet meme". I would like to add some content to this page but my account isn't confirmed yet. I wanted to add a section about racism in memes, and more precisely about the debate on whether memes portraying racial minorities reinforce negative racial stereotypes that exist in real life? I think this would be quite interesting since several articles were published on the subject. You can find something interesting through this link for example: https://www.theawl.com/2014/08/memes-and-misogynoir/ I feel that for the sake of neutrality, it would be interesting to add this subject. | Courstech (talk • contribs) 02:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)


 * G'day, you are only four edits away from getting auto-confirmed. Additionally you can submit an edit request onto the page Talk:Internet meme using the template below. Then any autoconfirmed user can add them in for you.

~
 * Good luck! —   IVORK  Discuss 00:45, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion contested: Eastern Cobras
Hello IVORK. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Eastern Cobras, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: See WP:CCSI.Look at other deletion alternatives. Thank you. ~ Winged Blades Godric 05:06, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * G'day I concede the point for the university club, and the A11 probably also wasn't needed ontop of the A7, but as for this Rugby team, is it really notable being that it is competing at sub-state level? It's only source after I've removed the Wikipedia link is the in-house roster. —   IVORK  Discuss 09:27, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I have not got much/any idea about notability of rugby teams.But, in general, the ambit of CCSI is a lot lesser than that of GNG/NSPORTS.And, being a state-level rugby team, passes that.Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 11:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * my point is that it's sub-state level, not state level. As for WP:CCSI, the club as stated above is not in a notable league, nor has it won any notable trophies, delving into the actual WP:CLUB, it doesn't operate on a national / international level and for the last point, again it's only source it's own roster. Not several independant reliable sources.
 * I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if you don't have much/any of an idea about the notability requirements for Rugby teams, I'm unsure as to why you are contesting CSDs for Notability on Rugby articles. —   IVORK  Discuss 12:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Additionally I'm unsure what you mean by saying the scope of WP:CCSI is lesser than WP:GNG. GNG is an actual guideline, where as CCSI is just an essay. So yes, but I'm not sure the relevance of this. —   IVORK  Discuss 12:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, interpretation of A7 is solely based upon CCSI, not upon GNG/SNG pass/failure.And, you may choose to seek deletion at AFD.Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 12:49, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Kimberly R. Cline speedy A7
Hi IVORK, I've declined the above A7 speedy as president of a university is a clear claim of notability. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10
Hello, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages! ACTRIAL:
 * ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing
 * Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines
 * The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
 * Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies. A further discussion is currently taking  place at: Can a subject specific guideline invalidate the General Notability Guideline?

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled
 * While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

Edit requests
Thanks for completing this task. I never noticed it, yet ultimately it should have been I that sorted that part except I never paid any attention to the feature. All the best. --Coldtrack (talk) 21:41, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

AFD of Elaine Herzberg

 * You nominated Elaine Herzberg with the comments to "redirect" to Uber because it is a one-event. This is true and I feel (and have stated) that any article concerning an "event" should not be given a biographical article title resulting in a "pseudo-biographical obituary". I do feel that there is ample sources to argue inclusion (somewhere) that at the least will result in a "no consensus determination on closing" that was already prematurely attempted. The "issues" that may have resulted in the accident, evidenced by sources, that there are possible software concerns (I have included ones I have so far found in comments), on more than "just Uber", and national attention to these, may have resulted in this tragedy being avoided. This, to me, is significant to have a stand-alone article on this subject and can include other centrally located and sourced content with issues and concerns.
 * I am sure you are following the AFD but kindly request that you look at recent suggestions to see if you deem there to be a compromise or not and offer an opinion. Thank you, Otr500 (talk) 13:19, 31 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Howdy, yeah I have been following. And to be honest the article has changed and gotten enough media attention to convince me it does deserve to stay in some form as my initial nomination was just days after the event. However it's not like me withdrawing / changing my vote will nullify the AfD. I tend not to respond in AfDs as it can appear to be WP:BLUDGEONing —   IVORK  Discuss 13:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I understand that but you stated that you believe "it does deserve to stay in some form". This is indicative of "not at the present title" it would seem that a self-concern of bludgeoning, that to me is a form of Wikilawyering, would be an attempt at "pounding home a POV" rather than agreeing that an article has merit for reconsideration. This would deem to me to offer another side of the coin of not just "fly-by" !voting while presenting an opinion aimed at collaboration for Wikipedia improvement. I am not just selectively sending messages but intend to send to the participants (except three apparent vandals) of the AFD. I have never done this before, nor asked an admin to reverse a decision, so new at this aspect and really really slow. My goal is to not let the continued "no consensus" closings result in articles being in the wrong namespace when this is against policies and guidelines that may also, by consensus, result in not having the 2, 3, and 4 AFD's. Another concern is that editors have it within the Wikipedia structure to make decisions that have been so long burdened to an admin. Wikipedia advances collaboration but it does not just have to involve only content editing. Consensus on a particular area can be decided and an admin just make the formalities. I have come to understand that "any" confusion such as multiple suggestions, or a somewhat close consensus, and a closer is advised to close as "keep". I have seen (and likely you) that it seems a head count is sometimes used even if against policies and guidelines. At any rate, thanks for your reply, and have a nice day. - Otr500 (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Question
I noticed you have an infobox on you User Page. How does one make a personal infobox? 71.206.3.92 (talk) 21:20, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Howdy, I suggest you check out the code for one I made here or here by clicking edit. Further info can be discovered by going to the Template:Userbox page. Let me know here if you have any more questions / want one. —   IVORK  Discuss 04:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)