User talk:Soman/Archives/2022/September

The Signpost: 31 August 2022
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:01, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

WikiCup 2022 September newsletter
The fourth round of the WikiCup has now finished. 383 points were required to reach the final, and the new round has got off to a flying start with all finalists already scoring. In round 4, Bloom6132 with 939 points was the highest points-scorer, with a combination of DYKs and In the news items, followed by BennyOnTheLoose, Sammi Brie and Lee Vilenski. The points of all contestants are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

At this stage, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For the remaining competitors, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them, and importantly, before the deadline on October 31st!

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. The judges are Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Ubaldo Buttafava for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ubaldo Buttafava 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/Ubaldo Buttafava 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 until the discussion has finished. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 22:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 7
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Communist Party of Lithuania and Belorussia, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Brest and Di royte fon.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Craftsman-Farmer Alliance for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Craftsman-Farmer Alliance 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/Craftsman-Farmer Alliance 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 until the discussion has finished. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:50, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Revert on Libyan Popular National Movement
Dear Soman, you deleted my edit on the page about the Libyan Popular National Movement, claming it would not be in line with WP:RS and WP:OR. I'd like to protest that and ask you to revert your edit.

I argue that it is in line with RS, because all criterias of the section "Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves" are met. 1. It's not an exceptional claim, as it describes (controversial) statements made by the party that were published on their official facebook page, which is their main platform of public relations. 2. It does not involve claims about third parties; While the statements do, this is clearly set into context that they're (again, controversial) statements by the party. If it helps, I can add reliable sources that native names for children were banned under Gaddafi and that he called Amazigh languages "dialects" if that helps, but that's really not the point of the section; the point is that these are statements from the party. 3. It does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject, as the subject are really just the statements. 4. There is no doubt to its authenticity, as it's the party's official facebook page; facebook is the main media for political expression in Libya, almost all parties don't even have own websites and even journalism mostly takes places there, much more so than in most European countries or the USA. And 5., the article is not primarily based on these sources.

As for OR, this doesn't apply either. It's neither analysis nor a synthesis of published materials and not original thought either. It only takes official statements by the party and marks them as such, to help clarifying their political stance.

I hope this convinces you to revert your edit. I invested quite some time in the research and would have used journalistic sources, if Libya had the journalistic infrastructure that such statements would be reported in the press. As you might know though, the country is stuck in a civil war, so the sources on political activities are rather thinly spread. Ermanarich (talk) 22:44, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Heyo, Just pinging you in case you missed this. Apart from that, it's never wrong to thank a fellow Wikipedian for all their voluntary work they've done in general for this great platform for accumulation of human knowledge of course; I guess we don't do that often enough here and I want to make clear that I highly respect anyone editing Wikipedia in good faith.--Ermanarich (talk) 14:53, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Communist Party of Lithuania and Belorussia
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Yungas Cocalera Revolution


The article Yungas Cocalera Revolution has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Article has remained two uncited paragraphs for over a decade. Could not personally find any sources referring to this organization's existence, and if it did exist, it's clearly not notable. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 02:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)"

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.

Category:Émigré organizations of political parties
Category:Émigré organizations of political parties has been nominated for renaming. Please see Categories for discussion/Log/2022 September 26. – Fayenatic  L ondon 06:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)