User talk:Shalom Yechiel

Shalom also means "goodbye"
I am leaving English Wikipedia and all Wikimedia projects. After I relocate in August, I will create a new username.

Wikipedia is causing me more stress than it's worth. After discussing my options by email correspondence with three administrators this week, I have decided to leave.

I created a rant about 60 kilobytes long on my computer to complain about how unfairly the community treated me. I will not post it. That's not how I wish to be remembered.

I'd like you to read one article I've written or improved during the last two and a half years. Pick any article from my list or the toolserver's list. That's how I wish to be remembered.

Shalom also means "goodbye." I offer best wishes to everyone who made editing here such a pleasant and fulfilling experience. Yechiel (Shalom) 15:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #f2dfce;" | This series of discussions has been archived.
 * style="text-align:center; font-style:italic;" | The following is an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

Your ER
If you happen to see this, i have left more comments and added some questions. Cheers,  Dloh  cierekim  01:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Everyking
EK has a penchant for re-writing history in his favor. See this. Take what he says with a grain of salt. Raul654 (talk) 05:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Second Annual WikiNYC Picnic
Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come! You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan
WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT


 * Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
 * Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)

WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:


 * Wikis Take Manhattan page at The Open Planning Project


 * 349 W. 12th St. #3
 * Between Greenwich & Washington Streets
 * By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop

FOR UPDATES

Check out:


 * Wikis Take Manhattan main website

This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,
 * Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Meetup/NYC/Invite list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * }

Epilogue
I am writing to say goodbye to those of you who still watchlist my talk page, and to offer a chance for you to wish me well. One of the hardest things about moving on from a relationship is forgetting the painful memories and the lost hopes associated with that relationship. I accomplished many achievements here, but I never helped the project as an administrator (though I performed administrative tasks without the tool-set); I never submitted a featured article (though I did submit a good article at Talk:Endgame tablebase); and I never completed coverage of towns and villages in Israel (though I did create more than 100 articles about these places). I am proud of what I did, broadly speaking, and for my mistakes and failures, I am trying to retain whatever lessons I can apply to life outside the four walls of Wikipedia.

Last year I spent an extraordinary amount of time on Wikipedia. Without revealing too much personal information, I'll explain that I was working freelance part-time but I had most of my waking hours to spend at my discretion, and I donated that time to the project. Two months ago I relocated and began graduate school in the chemistry department of a major research university on the east coast of the United States. (You can read my admission essay at User:Shalom Yechiel/Drafts and archives/Wikipedia got me into graduate school.) My teaching and learning responsibilities do not permit anything more than a cursory interest in Wikipedia, and sometimes not even that. Last month I created an anonymous user account for editing and creating articles related to chemistry. Yechiel (Shalom) 19:06, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #f2dfce;" | My thoughts on various issues
 * style="text-align:center; font-style:italic;" | The following is an archived debate. Please do not modify it.
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

I wish to leave my thoughts on various issues that I expect will engage the community's attention during the next months and years.

Honesty is the best policy
Honesty is marked as an essay, not even a guideline. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Honesty where someone had the gumption to suggest Wikipedians should abide by such a basic ethical principle. "Honesty is the best policy," according to a popular saying, and honesty should be required of all users on Wikipedia. Making baseless accusations against another user is unacceptable. Misrepresenting your real-world credentials is unacceptable. Misrepresenting the content or intent of sources is unacceptable. Honesty should be at least a behavioral guideline on par with Civility.

RFA reform
I support the efforts of Gazimoff and others in the RFA review. I have spent many hours thinking about what might discourage users from engaging in the false statements, assumptions of bad faith, and borderline personal attacks that pushed my temper over the edge in July. I prefer not to discuss my particular case anymore, but I recognize it as a wider problem. I perceive that RFA has become a toxic environment, one where false statements, assumptions of bad faith, and borderline personal attacks are tolerated as the price of vetting candidates for the stressful situations that some administrators may face. Standards of conduct from RFA commenters need to improve: users who can maintain neutrality in a particular RFA discussion should watch for comments that cross the line and not be shy about challenging them, and if necessary, asking a bureaucrat to remove or disregard them.

Administrator accountability
I support the proposal for bureaucrats to remove adminship after suitable discussion. I don't understand all the details, but the delays in recent arbitrations cases have shown clearly that the community needs a functioning process for removing administrators by a vote of no confidence. In the C68-FM-SV arbitration case, 16 users (including me) supported a proposal to desysop one of the parties, while only four opposed and one was ambivalent: by RFA standards this counts as consensus, yet not a single arbitrator submitted the desysop proposal for consideration. (It's possible that the commenters at the ArbCom workshop were biased, but I don't think so: most of them were not significantly involved in the case except as observers.) The community logically holds the power to remove admins as it does to promote them; it should be able to exercise that power if needed. The benefits would be a streamlined process, lasting one to two weeks instead of four months, and a confidence that adminship will again be not such a big deal because anyone can be demoted almost as easily as they were promoted.

Jimbo's role
I would like User:Jimbo Wales to resign or limit his special powers to ban or unban, promote or desysop, appoint or remove from ArbCom, etc. I never granted him these powers, and I do not think he has used them wisely enough to justify retaining them. I support Sarcasticidealist's effort to clarify the role of Jimmy Wales on Wikipedia. Just recently Jimbo wrote on the page for preparing the 2008 ArbCom elections that he would retain the power to appoint any candidate who receives 50% or more of the vote, even to promote a candidate at 51% and reject another candidate at 80%. There is no justification for one man to veto the wishes of hundreds of voters. Wikipedia is not a democracy, but when it pretends to be one, the pretense should be legitimately founded. I won't resign in protest if Jimbo appoints the wrong candidates to ArbCom, but I can voice my displeasure in advance, and I am doing that now.

I should note in passing that Hebrew Wikipedia, where I participated in community affairs for a short time, functions just fine without an absentee figurehead deciding critical issues once or a few times every year. Other large Wikipedias and sister projects also function as well or better without Jimbo or even an Arbitration Committee. English Wikipedia really does need the Arbitration Committee, but it does not need Jimbo's role.

Candidates for the 2008 ArbCom elections
I have learned that Rlevse, WJBscribe and Sam Korn are considering to run for ArbCom in the 2008 elections, and I would support all of them. I am looking for candidates who will resolve disputes, not simply to say that everyone needs to act kindly and give "hugs all around." I initially wrote a more detailed explanation, but this will suffice.

Correcting mistakes by administrators
If I were an administrator for a day, I would undertake the following actions to correct mistakes other administrators have made.
 * should be unblocked. I have reviewed the allegation that he is a sockpuppet of User:Coldmachine, who was indef-blocked for the same reason last year before Jimbo himself unblocked, and I find it unconvincing.  Arthana was an innocent new user caught up in a false allegation of sockpuppetry - sadly, neither the first nor the last.
 * (formerly Mitrebox and a few other names) should be unblocked if he agrees to limit himself to one user account and only bot accounts as approved at WP:BRFA. Initially Mitrebox was indef-blocked in February for setting a bot to revert any edits to a certain page.  The underlying issue of that edit-war has long since lost its real-world relevance, but Mitrebox never succeeded in getting unblocked, and when he tried to evade the block from his IP address and a series of new accounts, all those accounts got blocked for evasion even though his bot-assisted edits were largely beneficial.  This case is an embarrassing example of administrator authority being taken too far.  An administrator blocked Mitrebox and an adversary's account when the adversary engaged in an edit war spanning about 100 reversions (!) in three hours.  Every time the adversary edited, Mitrebox's unauthorized bot automatically reverted with no explanation.  Normally in a revert war both parties get blocked for the same amount of time.  Upon discovering that Mitrebox used a malicious bot, admins indef-blocked Mitrebox "until assurances are given" that he won't use malicious bots anymore, and immediately unblocked the other guy who stubbornly edit-warred for three hours!  Mitrebox, not understanding what "assurances" were asked of him, made up some silly unblock request accusing the administrator of "unclean hands," and was told that any further appeals of his block must go to ArbCom.  Instead of pursuing that route, he started editing under his IP address, then under a series of new names.  Aside from two short-term blocks for civility problems, these accounts were largely unobtrusive, and a normal user engaging in such behavior would face no danger of being banned.  The initial decision to indef-block Mitrebox "until assurances are given" was a mistake - surely the admin did not expect Mitrebox to call his bluff, but once it happened, you would think that six months later, people might be willing to give the guy a fair chance instead of saying he should be banned forever, or requiring him to prove that he's not socking.
 * Move User:Runcorn back to User talk:Runcorn. A pagemove messed up the page history, so that it appears people were carrying out discussions on Runcorn's userpage.
 * Block a bunch of sockpuppet accounts that aren't active anyway, but I have a list in mind. In particular, Jimbo's unblock of User:Sweet Blue Water was inappropriate and should be undone.

Banning
Users should not be banned trivially. Keep in mind that many of these people are young and may grow up someday. They should not be banned for the rest of their lives without first trying a one-year ban.

Vandalism
Vandalism is a continuing problem. I support any and all efforts that might be undertaken to curtail its insidious effects. Under my new account I stumbled across "[Name redacted] from miami fl is a g!" at the top line of a major article. It had been there for 20 minutes. I can cite numerous examples where I removed vandalism that had lasted much longer. Wikipedia's openness to vandals is unprofessional. Any variant of stable versions that can curtail this scourge should be encouraged. I would even recommend requiring all users to login in order to edit. This would deter some vandals, and the overall cost-benefit analysis for anonymous editing is overwhelmingly negative. Even if login is required, Wikipedia is still the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Especially with single-user login enabled, I see no reason why Wikipedia can't take this very reasonable step. Imagine if a named user would vandalize Wikipedia one edit out of every ten or twenty or whatever the rate is - how long would he last? So why do we tolerate that vandalism rate from anonymous users as a whole? The amount of time wasted of good-faith contributors is unconscionable. If people simply stopped fighting vandalism and let it slide, maybe the foundation would recognize the problem. I am not optimistic.

Closing
A user requested by email that I apologize to another user for saying bad things about her. I apologized privately but will not do so publicly. Apologies on Wikipedia are meaningless except as evidence to use against the fellow who apologized in later proceedings. However, I have removed from public view statements I made about that user that she found objectionable, so that will have to suffice.

I rambled much more than I had intended - this was intended for me to let go, not to keep posting loads of useless crap. Anyway, I'll stuff this in an archive box, and that will be the end.
 * }
 * Best of luck on your new account. – xeno  ( talk ) 19:27, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hate to see you go, but I'm glad we can still count on your contributions, albeit under a new name. Good luck out there. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 19:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
If you returned merely to move junk from your userspace into the mainspace and personally attack other editors...  Enigma msg  05:32, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I did. I have been waiting for the opportunity to finally be done with this place, and it came at the right time. On that note... Yechiel (Shalom) 20:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Right to vanish request
helpme

Would an administrator please do the following:

{will post in a moment}


 * Hovering nearby for when your list is ready. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 20:34, 28 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Hersfold.


 * Delete redirect pages from my old user subpages and  and the user talk subpages  and.
 * Delete my user talk archive subpages and all other user talk subpages . Note that my talk page is structured so that archives are copy/paste.  Therefore if you left me a comment last year you will still have it in your contribution log (something which I think is generally important to maintain as long as the user who left the comment is active, barring truly exceptional reasons to delete user talk history).
 * Delete my user subpages, listed here. Be careful that if the subpage is a redirect to a different namespace page, such as a Signpost article, you delete the redirect but keep the actual page it points to.
 * Blank my userpage and delete the page history, which is several hundred revisions. I'm not sure how you want to do this, but when you're done there should be a single revision with an edit summary of "blanked the page" or similar, and nothing from beforehand. Leave the full protection in place.
 * Blank and full-protect this talk page. Leave the revision history alone because, as above, I believe it benefits other people for it to stay, even though it does me no good.
 * On a non-technical note, thank you for doing this. It is unfortunate - and despite what others might think, not entirely my own doing though certainly that was part of it - that my extensive contributions to the encyclopedia have been overshadowed by other issues which should have been forgotten long ago.  I hope that as a result of my action, those issues actually will be forgotten.
 * Unblock User:Arthana. I'm trolling now, but seriously, he is innocent, and I like to point it out whenever I can get people's attention. He is not the only innocent user who has been blocked, but to my knowledge he is one of the few who didn't manage to get unblocked.  If my attempt to become an administrator had succeeded, I would have unblocked him.
 * In the interest of disclosure, I will also ask for deletions of userpages belonging to other accounts I've operated. I will do this confidentailly through the proper channels, but I note here that it is being done.
 * Goodbye, and I hope the work I did here will benefit people in the world out there. Yechiel (Shalom) 20:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Shalom Yechiel! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is an  Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Anneliese Seubert -

Revision to Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri articles
I noticed that you have revised either Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri or Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire.

I intend to revise those articles following the WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. There are more details on the discussion pages of those articles. I'd be interested in any comments you have. It would be best if your comments were on the discussion pages of the two articles.

Thank you.

Vyeh (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Camp Moshava (Bnei Akiva)


A tag has been placed on Camp Moshava (Bnei Akiva) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Abductive (reasoning) 23:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia Review post
"...Fys/Dbiv/Sam Blacketer is sneaky and evasive but would not lie directly..." 

Not true. In response to a personal request, Mr. Boothroyd directly lied to me about his sockpuppetry, followed by a story which may or may not be true, but certainly did not explain the fact that the e-mail address attributed to him had no trace elsewhere that could be found. -JR 64.250.228.220 (talk) 00:53, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Chess notation
Template:Chess notation has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 21:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Fenix, North Carolina


The article Fenix, North Carolina has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This article is about a formerly unincorporated community; it's notability is nonexistant and anything notable that happens from this point forward should be placed within the Fayetteville article. There is no chance that this article can grow beyond this. Ncboy2010 (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ncboy2010 (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

coming back
Coming back — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faraone Lk (talk • contribs) 16:23, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Chinese-American Chemical Society


A tag has been placed on Chinese-American Chemical Society requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Laun chba  ller  11:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of CEDARLANE


A tag has been placed on CEDARLANE, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Compassionate727 (talk) 16:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Terror attack listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Terror attack. Since you had some involvement with the Terror attack redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kleuske (talk) 17:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Chief rabbis of Ireland


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

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hillel Yaffe Medical Center logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Hillel Yaffe Medical Center logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Lynndonald (talk) 11:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

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

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

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 05:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Hyper Poland


Hello, Shalom Yechiel. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Hyper Poland".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 17:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of HaAyin HaShevi'it


The article HaAyin HaShevi'it has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "WP:TNT - not much more than a list of unsourced red links (also created by a sockpuppet)."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Endgame tablebase
Endgame tablebase has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)