User talk:Sandstein/Archives/2022/October

Ian Liston
Hello,

I was wondering if there might be a possibility of restoring this page. Just a year after the page was deleted, the actor died. As a result, various obituaries were published. Some of these could be used as references. Liston was known for appearing in popular franchises such as Star Wars and Doctor Who, as well as being involved in theatre (Theatricalia may help), appeared in panto, playing Mr Chairman in over 3000 Music Hall / Variety shows and first brought the Mr Men to stage. Was also a supporter and advocate of prostate cancer research due to his tragic illness.

Some sources I have come across that could be helpful.


 * Archived obituary from The Stage


 * Ian Liston - Hiss & Boo


 * Ian Liston - Biography of a Water Rat


 * Prostate cancer and me: Clinical trials | Prostate Cancer UK - Ian's story, being involved in clinical trials


 * Article in The Daily Mail published a few months before his death


 * RIP - Ian Liston (from Rebelscum forums - includes funeral programme cover and truth behind his passing)

Would it be possible to undelete this page so necessary changes can be applied using the above. It would help motability. Many thanks.Silurian25 (talk) 08:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I'm not undeleting articles. But you can ask at WP:REFUND.  Sandstein   08:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Yom Kippur ANI thread
You closed the Yom Kippur ANI thread citing forum shopping. Reading that page, it seems to sort of float a hypothetical argument in a passive aggressive way that seems to boil down to an argument that it's not always helpful or constructive pursue the same issue in multiple forums, and, particularly, the main thrust of the sort of quasi argument seems to be that you shouldn't, for instance, bring an issue to a hundred different admins to find one admin out of 100 that agrees with you, but that is obviously in the minority. So basically once a consensus has been established, it's not constructive to ignore the majority opinion and try to find one admin, or one forum that shares a minority opinion. Can you see where I'm going? No consensus has been made. How is it counterproductive to try to bring more attention to an issue that nobody has commented on? How is that "anti-constructive"? Has a consensus been established that the front page Yom Kippur text meets wiki policy? What majority opinion am I trying to "game" by searching for some dissenting minority opinion? And, to state the obvious, this is quite a time sensitive issue. This will be irrelevant in a few hours. So, to me the argument that bringing more attention to this so that a consensus can be established is a more persuasive argument than the argument presented in the forum shopping link. As I've hopefully made clear, I don't think that that argument fits quite as well to the circumstances of this particular issue than one might assume at first glance. Could you please tell me why you think that consensus is better served by closing the ANI thread when there has been no discussion on the WP:errors thread? How could that possibly damage the consensus building process when no consensus building process is happening in WP:Errors? And, again, this isn't a case of trying to ignore the consensus of the majority to find a minority forum that agrees with my position. So could you please clarify your argument. Could you tell me how you think forum shopping applies specifically in this case?

Thanks. Tttmaker (talk) 14:33, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Please link to the "Yom Kippur ANI thread" you refer to.  Sandstein   15:41, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Is_front_page_neutral_and_abiding_wiki_policies_in_presenting_the_start_of_the_Yom_Kippur_War?
 * the thread in ani about yom kippur on the front page that you closed citing forum shopping... Tttmaker (talk) 23:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. Well, my advice is that WP:FORUMSHOP also applies to my talk page.  Sandstein   05:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Could you explain how exactly? The page says "essentially the same issue".  How is closing an ani thread essentially the same issue as neutrality of the front page? Tttmaker (talk) 11:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If you want to complain about a perceived error, you should do so only in one appropriate forum, which is WP:ERRORS, not WP:ANI and not my talk page. Accordingly, I will not respond further.  Sandstein   12:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Fatah Ahamada
I was writing this as you made your closure. Let me know if this comment would have given you a different view. I do think the delete contributions misapplied ROUTINE, but if you feel this would still not have swayed your analysis, I leave it. "*Keep Those deploying WP:ROUTINE here are conflating notability with sourcing and thus misapplying the guideline's intent. A match report which included details of a player scoring their first hat-trick would be a perfectly reasonable source for material for that player's article. ROUNTINE is specifically indicating that a match report does not justify an article about the *match* itself, it is not suggesting that match reports in toto cannot be reliable sources.  The piece from La Region gives repeated mentions of Ahamada and provides description of his playing style ("Les accélérations foudroyantes", "avion de chasse"; this is information which can be used in an encyclopedic sense. There's complete consensus that the piece from 24hueres is satisfactory.  We have a pass, albeit bare minimum, but a pass nonetheless, of the GNG." Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 06:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Goldsztajn, thanks for your input. This nuanced appraisal might well have impacted the closure, but given that it was not provided prior to the closure of the AfD, I'm not going to speculate on how it might have done so.  Sandstein   06:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Goldsztajn, did you read the discussion about ROUTINE in the AfD? NSPORT is the governing guideline here, and there is community consensus for its invocation of ROUTINE in assessing what type of coverage is acceptable for establishing notability. If you disagree with that you will have to start an RfC to remove all policy/guideline uses of ROUTINE that don't apply exclusively to determining notability of events -- which would include pages like NBIO.
 * I'll also note that whether or not "routine" is wikilinked to NEVENT is ultimately irrelevant, since the word is also used in WP:NOT to describe what type of coverage (and it explicitly mentions sports) cannot be used as the basis of an article: Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion and Wikipedia is not written in news style. For example, routine news coverage of announcements, events, sports, or celebrities, while sometimes useful, is not by itself a sufficient basis for inclusion of the subject of that coverage. JoelleJay (talk) 17:17, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi @JoelleJay, my proposed input was based on the GNG, nothing in NSPORTS implies the inapplicability of the GNG. The other elements of your contribution simply repeat the problem identified in my comment, the conflation of notability with sourcing. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Goldsztajn, yes, NSPORT requires GNG to be met but that doesn't mean its guidance on what the sourcing standards are for sportsperson notability is irrelevant. And regardless, GNG is also subject to NOT, which is very explicit in stating routine news coverage of sports/celebrities cannot be used for establishing notability. No one was ever arguing match reports couldn't be used as RS, just that they don't count toward GNG, so I don't know where this "conflation" is. JoelleJay (talk) 20:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

ECP Russia-Ukraine
Could you please place the protection agreed on Oblasts of Russia and Template:Subdivisions of Russia. Cambial — foliar❧ 01:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, the place for such request is WP:RPP.  Sandstein   06:42, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Adriana Chechik
Greetings! I am contemplating restoring Adriana Chechik (previously deleted pursuant to Articles for deletion/Adriana Chechik (2nd nomination)) to draft in light of news from within the past few days of the subject "breaking her back" in an overly shallow foam block pit at TwitchCon (see, e.g., CT Jones, Adriana Chechik Calls Out Tech Company Lenovo After Back-Breaking TwitchCon Injury, Rolling Stone (October 10, 2022)). Any thoughts? BD2412 T 06:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Isn‘t that a WP:BIO1E sitution without other coverage?  Sandstein   06:30, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It would be, if there were not other sources noted in the previous discussion—generally relatively low level, but the combination of those with this recent coverage (some of which references her previous occupation) might cross the threshold. BD2412  T 06:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * It might, I guess? I don't really have an opinion about that. If you think coverage is now sufficient, feel free to restore the article insofar as I am concerned.  Sandstein   07:51, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have restored it to Draft:Adriana Chechik, at any rate. BD2412  T 23:38, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Category:Video games by game engine
Hello! Last year you made a successful deletion nomination of Category:Unity (game engine) games. You said, if successful, to follow with nominating its parent category and subcategories, but you probably forgot about it. The closing statement of that nomination also called for nominating other categories, and I think it’s proper to follow with that. I thought about nominating them myself, but wanted to ask for your opinion first.

As I mentioned here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games, it’s very confusing that only Unity doesn’t have a subcategory. You may also want to join this discussion. Respiciens (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @Respiciens, I agree that the other similar categories should also be deleted, and I'd appreciate you doing so; I haven't gotten around to it yet.  Sandstein   08:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I started the nomination, see notice below. --Respiciens (talk) 10:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Category:Video games by game engine has been nominated for discussion
Category:Video games by game engine has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Respiciens (talk) 10:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of game lists by engine for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether these articles are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether they should be deleted.
 * List of CryEngine games
 * List of GameMaker games
 * List of RenderWare games
 * List of Ren'Py games
 * List of Sierra's Creative Interpreter games
 * List of Unity games
 * List of Unreal Engine games

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

Users may edit the articles during the discussion, including to improve the articles to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the articles until the discussion has finished. Respiciens (talk) 13:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Sanctions log header
Template:Sanctions log header has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Raphael Hazrat Ishaan
Dear Sandstein, 2 days ago I have created an article about the current head of the Qadiri Naqshbandi Sufi order. An Afghan Prince and Lawyer with Millions of spiritual followers in South Asia. However this article seems to have had a bad history of deletions, because of which Mccapra has requested speedy deletion. It seems that the prince has many fans somewhere around teh world who tried to make Wikipedia articles, but with low experience and bad quality because of which it was deleted many times. Alone that actually shows notability. I have to agree that the quality of the article about Sayyid Raphael Dakik indeed lacked quality in year 2020, but that was long ago and I have improved it very well so that it has become a professional Wikipedia Article. The request for speedy deletion was with pure bad-faith and I would be grateful to receive your assistance in creating the article on Raphael Hazrat Ishaan again. Once you confirm, I will recreate the article and would be grateful for your assistance in defending it. --TwelverShii (talk) 12:27, 25 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Raphael Hazrat Ishaan was deleted as a recreation of Articles for deletion/Sayyid Raphael Dakik. I have no knowledge about the topic and therefore will not express an opinion, but any recreation that does not establish notability through high-quality sources will likely be speedily deleted.  Sandstein   12:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of the shortest rivers
Hi! Courtesy heads up as you don't appear to have been notified. This close is at Deletion review/Log/2022 October 29 almost certainly a(nother) sock but I can't play whack a mole at this hour. Star  Mississippi  02:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)