User talk:Vanamonde93/Archive 17

if you are aware of [this discussion?] What about the discussion that actually represents what I proposed, not what my edit summary stated which appears to be what was acted upon. It is important to me for you to see the actual proposal - and the 3 choices I provided - it's the only way for you to fully understand what I meant by BLP violations, along with noncompliance per WP:LABEL and that fixing it required a simple in-line text attribution. My iVote is first which contradicts everything I've been portrayed to be and what everyone appears to be accepting at face value. Worse yet, I added sources with explanations that supported what I proposed but disruptive editors kept removing them from my comment section in an attempt to alter the outcome of the RfC, which is why I reported them. It was wrong of those editors to remove another editor's supporting comments during an RfC, and it deserved a reprimand.

I appreciate the kind words you shared at the other TP, but I am heartbroken over how I was treated, simply for trying to do the right thing at a highly contentious BLP. I am tired of being branded for things I did not do, and then threatened with a TB when I was actually doing the right thing. Consensus does not overrule policy. The solution I was offering would have stopped a lot of disruption in the future, and it didn't change the flavor of the article, and it did not whitewash it as I was accused of doing among which was very hurtful to me. If worse wasn't bad enough, some of those same editors pounced on an article I had just created (2 days ago) in retaliation for my proposal at Taylor. Next came the removal of large chunks of text, which altered the entire direction/context of the article, making it look like something it was not.

Please read the edit summary of the revert as it admits the connection to Taylor. The crux of the article I created was the DOJ turning over 400+ documents to the American Center for Law and Justice, including a highly publicized email exchange between the Dept. of Justice and Main Stream Media, neither of which are supposed to be political. It was on the fringe of the American politics ban I was threatened with unfairly on top of a BLP ban. That isn't how admins are supposed to respond to credible GF editors. The history I have with several of those same editors is not unlike what they're doing to me now but because I'm outnumbered, I got tagged as the one who gets thrown to the lions. Please, Van, I would be very appreciative if you would just review the links I've provided - look at the edit summaries, the activity, my responses vs those of others - I don't want or expect you to take any action against anyone - it is strictly for my own piece of mind and knowing that at least one editor understands what really happened. If after you've seen the evidence, and still believe I'm at fault, I won't bother you again. Atsme 📞📧 20:14, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No, I was not aware of that discussion, but I just glanced through it. I also read the RFC prior to my comment on Bishonen's talk yesterday. I don't particularly want to get bogged down in a discussion of a single source. Though I may disagree with your assessment of the SPLC, your assessment is a defensible position; but that's not the point. The point is that you have gotten involved so deeply in challenging one (or a few) sources, that in my judgement you are at the moment unable to step back and see the larger picture. That is the substance of the issue, and is why I asked you to step back a little. I have yet to view the history of the talk page, and once I have done so I may leave some advice elsewhere as well; but my advice to you still stands. Even if you are correct in totality on the content issues (I do not think you are, but even if you were) the best thing might be to take a brief break from the topic. I've endured harassment far worse on south Asian topics (remember my RFA?) but a lot of the folks who made it a point to pick fights with me are now blocked or tbanned or have left. As to the Clinton page, I think roughly the same comment applies there, too. I think any POV issues there are secondary to the problem of CRUFT. As in, we have WAY TOO MANY articles relating to minor aspects of the careers of Trump and Clinton; an example of RECENTISM, or to put it another way, another example of not being able to step back and see the larger picture (in this case a problem far from unique to you). Forgive the long reply. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:22, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your input. I'm looking forward to the next. There is still a very healthy discussion ongoing at RSN about this same topic. I just provided a legal scenario for MastCell to review and am looking forward to his response. I agree with you about getting bogged down on RS issues, but just want to be clear that my proposal was not about removing defamatory labels or that all of the sources were not RS, it was about inclusion of derogatory labels using quotes or paraphrased with inline text attribution cited to appropriate sources, rather than including them as statements of fact in Wiki voice. My whole case rests on getting a definitive answer, hopefully from legal, so we're not constantly finding ourselves in these highly disruptive battles. I'm inclined to believe legal will opt for the inline text attribution. I'll be keeping an eye on RSN for a while. I have already backed away from the other issues. There's a quote on my TP that fits these types of situations - "On Wikipedia, it's important to know when to stop arguing with people, and simply let them be wrong.SMirC-wink.svg Atsme 📞📧 05:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

User page and deletion rules
Hi, I'm not familiar with the English deletion rules, maybe you can help me. I found this user page, and I think it is not compatible with the project goals, but I'm unsure which rule exactly it violates. User_pages? If yes, what is the right deletion proposal for that? --mfb (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that userpage is a problem. It is certainly covered by WP:G11, and probably by WP:G12 as well, because the bulk of the text looked like it was copied from someplace, and as such is likely to be a copyright violation. I would also drop them a warning about COI/promotional editing. Vanamonde (talk) 03:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. The userpage is now deleted and I put a COI notice on his talk page. --mfb (talk) 12:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Trump campaign–Russian meeting
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Trump campaign–Russian meeting. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Animech.79
Is there any way to get the attention of ? They do not seem to be responding to anything on their talk page and they're making a right mess of things with POV, unreliable sources etc. Might a short block get their attention? I'm pretty sure they'll end up being topic banned or indef'd because I recognise the "type" but just maybe they can be turned. - Sitush (talk) 07:20, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You're probably right that a block or a tban is what will be required eventually, but I'm not happy blocking when a user hasn't made edits following their final warning. One more poorly sourced edit and I will block them; I might be busy, though, so leave a message here if you see something and I don't immediately respond. Vanamonde (talk) 08:20, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Next steps
Vanamonde: How would you like to proceed with Cattle theft article? I welcome you to review the sources, the talk page comments so far, and revise. I can provide you with more RS on the talk page, as we make progress. Alternatively, if you are short of time I can review all sources cited in the article so far, revise the summary based on your recent comments, followed by your review of whatever changes I make when you find time. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Guatemala City
Hello, Vanamonde93 – I thought you might like to see  and the ones just before it to Guatemala City, and the accompanying edit summaries. Perhaps you could find or verify the correct population figures. – Corinne (talk) 15:14, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I will take a look when I have the time, but this is a bit outside my area of knowledge, I'm afraid; I do history, not geography or society topics. Vanamonde (talk) 16:11, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh. I'm sorry. I didn't know that. – Corinne (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Zapad-2017 exercise
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Zapad-2017 exercise. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks!
Hi Vanamonde. Just a message to say many thanks for being a co-nominator on the Steve Biko article. It is appreciated. Happy to start work on preparing Miriam Makeba for FAC, if you are? Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My pleasure, as always. I'd had my eye on the article for a long time; had plans of reviewing it at GAN, but was busy elsewhere; so I was glad of the opportunity to work on it, even if you did much of the heavy lifting. I'd be glad to start work on Miriam Makeba. I'm a bit busy in RL, but what time I do have for Wikipedia, I can promise to spend on that, along with the two things I currently have under review (one, of course, by you). Vanamonde (talk) 11:35, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Article The Yakshagana Puppets
Hi, The article The Yakshagana Puppets, now has enough references. Kindly restore the article. Thank you.

Wikieditorksd (talk) 07:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not certain why you are asking me, because I don't think I have had anything to do with this page, nor is the page protected. If you have enough references for the topic to meet WP:GNG, you can create the page yourself, though I would recommend going through the WP:AFC process. Vanamonde (talk) 08:17, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal

 * Why thank you,, I appreciate it. Not sure where you got 37 from, though, I'm at 60 last I checked... :) Vanamonde (talk) 13:44, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Your entry on List of Wikipedians by number of DYKs says 37. Update it and all dispense the 50 lol — Calvin999  14:02, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh I'd forgotten that even existed! I don't think Ive edited that page more than once...I'll get around to it. Vanamonde (talk) 16:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Steve Biko scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Steve Biko article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 12, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/September 12, 2017, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  09:55, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Dismissal of James Comey
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Dismissal of James Comey. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau, Allahabad
Dear Sir, you have deleted the page of Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir , Phaphamau , Allahabad even without giving any warning. Today on Sunday I was about to modify the page to remove the materials which are against the norms of Wikipedia. Kindly restore the page and give me opportunity to re modify it & draft it to meet the standard of Wikipedia. Powerfulindia9 (talk) 07:06, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I have moved it to your userspace at User:Powerfulindia9/Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau, Allahabad, despite my better judgement, because I originally intended to tag rather than delete. Your edits nonetheless seem to be remarkably promotional in nature. Please read WP:NOTPROMO. All promotional information must be removed from that article before it is moved back to mainspace; please remember that finding a source for something does not make it not promotional. Vanamonde (talk) 07:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, My apologies if it appears that I am trying to promote. I will definitely review and will only keep the facts & chronology in the article. I will do it today. I will request you to restore the article thereafter. Sincere regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerfulindia9 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 27 August 2017 (UTC) --Powerfulindia9 (talk) 08:51, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, I have deleted all the lines and words which may appear to be promotional. I have only left the facts on the page. I shall requset you to kindly review the article and guide me as how could I make it more compliant towards policies of wikipedia so that page could be restored by you, sincere regards--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 08:51, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * What are you trying to do here? You have recreated the original article (which does not, by the way, need me to "restore" it; it already exists, because you recreated it). You did so after you asked me to "restore" the page so you could work on it; but you didn't wait for my response. Now you are also editing the draft I created for you. Please choose one of those titles to work on, and I will delete the other. Also, though your current version is better, the references in it are completely unacceptable. Please read WP:RS. Vanamonde (talk) 08:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, Kindly delete the current page created by mistake. I will edit the draft created by you for me User:Powerfulindia9/Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau, Allahabad. Sir kindly delete the current page created by me. Kindly restore the edit draft provided by your good self to me User:Powerfulindia9/Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau, Allahabad and oblige.--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 09:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, the page has been deleted. Once you draft complies with WP:NOTPROMO and WP:RS, I will move it. Vanamonde (talk) 09:07, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, I have edited the draft given by you User:Powerfulindia9/Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau, Allahabad. I have tried my best to ensure compliance to WP:NOTPROMO & WP:NOTPROMO standard of wikipedia. I have left only facts in the edit, which has been duly covered and published by electronic & print media .Kindly restore the page and oblige. regards --Powerfulindia9 (talk) 09:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the page is not good enough yet. For starters, it cannot contain any references to a google search, youtube videos, blogs, or Sulekha. It should contain no honorifics, and only strictly relevant information; the fact that some ambassador happened to release a book in the school is not worthy of inclusion. It has far too many images, which once again suggests promotional intent. You clearly have not read the pages I asked you to, and are stretching my patience here. If the page is not speedily brought into line, I am inclined to delete it again, because it is promotional in its current form. Vanamonde (talk) 09:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, I convey my gratitude to you for guiding me. I am new at wikipedia. I will remove the materials cited by you. Kindly guide me I will do the needful & will make it compliant to standard of wikipedia. I will remove photographs & will also remove citation from google search, sulekha , youtube etc. Kindly give me some time, sincere regards --Powerfulindia9 (talk) 09:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Respected Sir, I have deleted all the pics which appears to be promotional. I have also deleted all google search, youtube & sulekha references. I have redrafted many sentences which appeared to be promotional. I have relied only on authentic sources. Kindly review my work & guide me further as how to make it improve it further so that it could be compliant to all the standards of wikipedia. looking forward for your valuable guidance and comments.--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 10:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You have not done all that I asked. There are still a very large number of pictures, a lot of extraneous information, and many honorifics ("Prof.", for instance) in the article. I also do not have much time to investigate this any more. Therefore, I suggest you use the WP:AFC process to create your article. You are not required to call anybody "sir" over here. Vanamonde (talk) 10:44, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I have deleted all honorofics and deleted many photos. Modified many contents to bring in tune with the standard of Wikipedia. Please guide me what I should do more to get this article to standard of wikipedia so that it could be restored by you.--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I told you: please use the WP:AFC process. Vanamonde (talk) 12:32, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I am trying to understand WP:AFC Process. It is about creating new article and not about restoration of this article. I want to modify this article to restore it. There is no guideline about how to restore my deleted article which has been edited and modified by me to make it fit. Please tell me how many pics or photo I can keep so that I will delete others. I want my article to be restored. I have edited it and i am still ready to edit it further. please help.--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 12:42, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The page you have created is not ready to be an article. I also do not have the time to help you fix it completely. Therefore, for one last time, please try the AFC process, where you can get more feedback on your draft. I cannot spend more time on it. Vanamonde (talk) 13:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I will make it article within two days using AFC Process. After that I will request you to restore the article. Powerfulindia9 (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I have further deleted pics & modified the article. now only relevant pics are in the article. I have deleted extraneous information also.Is it okay now ?--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

can you restore it now ?--Powerfulindia9 (talk) 17:05, 27 August 2017 (UTC) I have deleted all references, honorifics & extrenous. I have removed most of the pics & have kept only facts which are of utmost significance. Please restore the article & guide of any further changes are required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerfulindia9 (talk • contribs) 07:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC) --Powerfulindia9 (talk) 07:13, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

My article contains only fact & figure which are corroborated by authentic references. I have deleted many pics honorofics & extraneous information which were not in tune with standard of Wikipedia. Please restore my article to main page or kindly guide me what I need to do further for it's restoration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerfulindia9 (talk • contribs) 09:39, 28 August 2017 (UTC) --Powerfulindia9 (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * I told you. Use the AFC process. Here. Vanamonde (talk) 09:53, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I read entire conversation between you & poeerfulindia9. I checked Wikipedia page " List of educational institutions in Allahabad " sub heading " Schools, . None of the schools and their pages are as per Wikipedia norms but they have not been deleted. Even their references are not genuine. I perused the deleted draft edit on Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir, Phaphamau , Allahabad. Most of the references cited are better than what other schools on Wikipedia has cited. Most of the schools on Wikipedia are not able to cite Even genuine references still they are on Wikipedia. I fail to understand why only Shiv Ganga Vidya Mandir has been deleted when all other schools listed on Wikipedia are short of the standard. In my opinion deletion of such articles having so much genuine verifiable references is a loss. It should be modified & edited rather than deleted.--Director Henery Lucas (talk) 11:15, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, that's about enough of that. You ignore my instructions, repeatedly create promotional pages, badger me despite my instructions not to do so, and finally create multiple accounts to further your agenda, and pretend they are different people. I have deleted the page, blocked your sock account, and blocked you for 3 days. Unless you start making genuinely constructive contributions when you return, the next block is likely to be indefinite. Vanamonde (talk) 11:24, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

RE Savuka edits
Hello, I have read your post regarding your reversion of my edits to the Savuka page. As the sources I used for most of my edits are those that were already featured on the page (these are the sources currently featured in the members' section), is it your view that these references should be completely removed from the page then on account of dubious reliability? Regards, 86.130.88.245 (talk) 10:24, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No, that isn't what I mean; but this is a discussion best had on the talk page of that article. I will copy our posts there momentarily. Vanamonde (talk) 10:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the discourse. I have responded as such. Kind regards, 86.130.88.245 (talk) 20:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Right of return
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Right of return. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Imperial Napoleonic triple crown


P.S I know you clearly have a lot of DYK credits to choose from, but if you ever apply to upgrade to the next tier of Triple Crown please specify which ones you would like to officially count. I have taken the liberty of adding your first five to the official record. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 11:20, 30 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Many thanks, Vanamonde (talk) 11:59, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

CSD
Hey, sorry, I did see the history, and if you look at my CSD it says "If the PRODer was correct I apologize." I realize what you are saying but you shouldn't have to google something to have context provided to you. But since you say it is a notable play I'll remove CSD and add a little context. Thanks, and hopefully you realize where I was coming from. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ  13:24, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I do realize where you are coming from; a year ago I may have done the same; but over time I've come to be a little more strict about the CSD criteria. I'm not saying the play is notable, that's why I PRODed it. But "no context" is a very low threshold indeed; the play can clear that threshold without being notable. Vanamonde (talk) 13:26, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I added a 'lead' (if you can call it that). ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  13:27, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * (and I just noticed you are an admin! Which makes my action even more questionable, so I apologize again! Hopefully there are no hard feelings! Cheers!) ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  13:53, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It doesn't really matter that I am an admin: my actions should be as open to questioning as those of anybody else. In any case, while I believe you were wrong, I do not think you were unreasonable at any point: so no hard feelings whatsoever. Vanamonde (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

The Gibb brothers
Thank you for protecting the Gibb brothers pages, however the current versions are set to the wrong version, the dispution is the is removing their nationally (British) from the leade and infobox. These are the status quo versions before the no consensus versions were set, , besides of the current versions being incorrect BLP's I find it hard pressed to have a discussion with the user who wants to change from the status quo when the articles are set to their version. The little forgotten brother Gibb is Andy Gibb unchanged and is still listed (correctly) as British. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 15:50, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but no. I explicitly said that the protection was not an endorsement of either version. It was to stop you both edit-warring. Unless there are egregious policy violations in the current version; and there aren't; there is absolutely no need for me to take sides here. Sort the issue out on the talk page. If you cannot reach consensus there, try a third opinion, dispute resolution, or perhaps an RFC. Vanamonde (talk) 16:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 September newsletter
Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

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 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:26, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Nakon • Scott
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news
 * ACTRIAL, a research experiment that restricts article creation to autoconfirmed users, will begin on September 7. It will run for six months. You can learn more about the research specifics at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial, while Wikipedia talk:Autoconfirmed article creation trial is probably the best venue for general discussion.
 * Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.

Technical news
 * You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
 * Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
 * In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration
 * Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Far-right politics
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Far-right politics. Legobot (talk) 04:27, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Biko (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Biko (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 10:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Biko (song)
The article Biko (song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Biko (song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 16:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Biko (song)
The article Biko (song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Biko (song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 17:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Barry Voight FAC
Hi Vanamonde, did you want to provide additional comments at the FAC for Barry Voight? I replied to your comment, but I'm not sure if you wanted to provide more comments or had any other questions about the article. Thanks again for your feedback.  ceran  thor 21:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I actually didn't even read the whole thing, just the lead, because I saw it at FAC and though the name rang a bell I couldn't remember who he was. I'm a bit busy at the moment (and with three supports, an image review, and a source review, you're not doing badly) but if it's still open when I have the time, I'll leave some comments. Vanamonde (talk) 03:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sounds fair to me. I appreciate your honesty and your comments. Thanks!  ceran  thor 03:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Slaty-backed forktail
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Slaty-backed forktail you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 11:40, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Slaty-backed forktail
The article Slaty-backed forktail you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Slaty-backed forktail for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 12:03, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 September 2017
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Concerns re: child safety and metadata
Hello Vanamonde! I was NPPing the userspace and ran across who's UP states that he was born in 2004 and contains a picture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alejandro_Fuenzalida.jpg which has the metadata still attached. I ran the coordinates and found they reveal the exact location of a house in LA. Because he is just 13, and the coordinates are a possible danger to himself, should the picture be deleted/revdelled? Because of the proximity of the page creation to his own birthday I don't know if his parents were like "Your a teenager, you can be on the Internet." Personally, I consider 13 to be a bit of a young age to advertise to everyone on the internet, but am interested in your opinion on the matter. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write)  13:25, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I haven't much expertise in this area, but here's my gut feeling, for what it's worth. The picture seems quite clearly to be a teenager going "look, internet, here I am". It's coordinates do not have much value, and could be doing harm, so yes, they should be removed. But, so far as I can tell, the image is solely on commons at the moment; so it's probably an issue to raise there. Again, I'm not an expert here. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 13:43, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks. L3X1 (distænt write)  13:51, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union. Legobot (talk) 04:32, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Josh Sugarmann
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Josh Sugarmann. Legobot (talk) 04:31, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Voices (Le Guin novel)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Voices (Le Guin novel) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Voices (Le Guin novel)
The article Voices (Le Guin novel) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Voices (Le Guin novel) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:21, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Biko (song)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * That's especially great today, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Gerda! Vanamonde (talk) 10:55, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

2020
Hey there,

I just wanted to make a suggestion of a couple things to add to the "2020 Presidential election" page. Two potential Democratic candidates may be:

Jim Webb, former U.S. Senator from Virginia ...Chris Coons, U.S. Senator from Delaware since 2010.

Thanks!

Mike Woods University of Delaware Alumnus 2011


 * Greetings. What you need to do is to find reliable sources that support the information you wish to add, and to bring them to the talk page of the article: I'm not really involved there. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 03:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Please autoblock IP 116.106.220.36
Please autoblock IP 116.106.220.36

Reason: This IP was traced to an organization known for hiring professional vandalists (getting paid to do vandalism on en.wikipedia articles of Vietnamese history). Those hired might not be educated enough to gain any benefits from reading en.wikipedia articles but be hired to defame Vietnamese historical figures.

Example incidence: User contributions of 116.106.220.36.

Expiration period: Longest possible.

Thank you. Vuara (talk) 13:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * In principle, such a situation would warrant a block, but it is rare; and I am especially reluctant; to block on the basis of a single edit. I do not understand Vietnamese: can you explain to me how this edit was defamatory? Also, IP addresses vary substantially in their properties: sometimes an address can be changed simply by resetting a modem, in which case a block is quite pointless. I do not have the technical knowledge to make such a judgement. Under the circumstances, you may be better off requesting assistance at WP:ANI, much as I hate sending people there. If what you say about hired vandals is true, this will require wider attention in any case. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 14:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You're right. Blocking should be a last resort. I'm looking for a less restrictive way to solve the problem. Maybe, one such solution is to make that article editable to only registered users. Now, why that edit was defamatory? If you knew Vietnamese language, you would agree with me that the level of education of that vandalist is very low. Very likely, those vandalists don't know English enough to read any en.wikipedia articles, so their sole purpose to be here (instead of vi.wikipedia) is to vandalize targeted Vietnamese names. The language of that vandalist's edit is shockly profane_it belongs to the lowest class in Vietnamese society with education not higher than fifth graders'. Thank you for your reply,Vuara (talk) 07:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
FYI in case you have any interest, I am trying to do something similar with the upcoming centennial of the Balfour Declaration. I am also inspired by your managing to get two articles in one day to see if I can get the McMahon–Hussein Correspondence up to GA and DYK ready for the same date... Onceinawhile (talk) 11:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, . That's a worthy undertaking. I did see the Balfour declaration page at FAC, and was hoping to review it: let's see if I get the time to do so. Vanamonde (talk) 11:06, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Just a quick update – just a day after I posted this here, I was informed that the FAC had been archived and so the article wasn't promoted. I have however opened another peer review, so if you do have the time and inclination to review the article, you can do so there. Many thanks, Onceinawhile (talk) 23:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:2017 Berkeley protests
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:2017 Berkeley protests. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Carlos Castillo Armas
The article Carlos Castillo Armas you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Carlos Castillo Armas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Request to administrators to look at this account
It is my request to administrators to look at the edits happening from this account and take appropriate actions. I am compelled to do so specially after seeing this edit where an organization has received a BLP tag. This person is not ready to read that the article itself says that it is an organization. Thanks in advance. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am sharing the above message on your talk page as I see that you are a administrator sir / madam. Thank you. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I will look into the account, but the fact is that many of your creations are thin on sources. They need to demonstrate notability, and the main way to do this is to provide multiple reliable sources that discuss your subject. That way, you avoid tags, and AfD and CSD nominations. Vanamonde (talk) 11:18, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes sir, I am definitely aware of it. I have also no issues if an article gets deleted if someone who knows the guidelines well does it because I learn in the process at least. Here I am feeling a lot uncomfortable with this person because he is trying to provoke by showing similarity in the name between a food item and the great scientist about whom I am talking about. I am not exaggerating here sir, but that person can also get Nobel prize if his idea of reverse pharmacology will become hit and if some new research regarding a new drug molecule is successful based on it. Saying something like - this seems to be a self written source is really a big insult to that person. I never felt so distressed on Wikipedia before than this. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:35, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have also shared about this account at administrators noticeboard. I was not going to do it, but after seeing the massive problems this person is creating, I had no options left. I want to thank all the admins on Wikipedia because of whom Wikipedia is in good shape. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you are referring to: I can only see them tagging articles. Can you give me some diffs? Also, you do not need to call me "sir" (or "madam"): Vanamonde is fine. Vanamonde (talk) 11:59, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * V, this is at AN right now and a few people have commented on it (including yours truly). cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  12:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am feeling a lot relived that few admins have started looking at the edits from that account. Thanks a ton. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 12:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

, I've closed that discussion: didn't seem to be anything very productive coming from it. Abhijeet, please take the advice you have been given seriously. Vanamonde (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * , Sorry I only noticed this now and could not comment on the Admin noticeboard. First some clarifications: I need not mean any disrespect (not sure how it was one since both a doctor and a vendor earn their wages honestly) when I mentioned the vada pav vendor. It was point to the editors commenting on the XFD to not confuse the two. The mis-tag on the article was a Twinkle mistake on my part and I will be careful in the future. Second, I wanted to raise some points (not sure if this is the right venue for it) regarding.
 * One - The editor has created quite a bit of articles but some of do not meet WP:N in my opinion. I might be wrong here so would appreciate another opinion from experienced editors. List of Articles : Anjali Pawar, Nata_Menabde, Sheetal Amte. On a similar vein, some redirects also don't make the cut. Examples: Dr. Sheetal Amte, Dr. Mandakini Amte, Yajnik CS, Purna Malavath, Dr. Prakash Baba Amte: The Real Hero, Dr. Vikas Amte. For the record, I do not mean the actual articles which these redirects point to necessarily have insufficient information. My only point is, in my opinion, they are excessive and do not meet Wikipedia guidelines.
 * Second - The user has shown some questionable behavior (unsure if this because the editor is unaware of the rules or disregards them). The editor removed speedy deletion tags on two articles which he has created. He received a note from for that . On a similar note article Ravindra Ghooi was deleted once during a XFD but the editor in question once again created the article without any adding new content. This article was deleted again recently by another admin when it was nominated by me.
 * Three - He seems to have adopted a hostile behavior towards me. I get this sense from 3 edits (,Message on my talk page,). I am not sure if I can do anything about it but I just want to mention that I hold no personal grudge against or his work which motivated this (he for whatever reason seems to think so).
 * Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 14:02, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks a lot for your message. I will take your suggestions seriously as I have been guided in past and I have been benefited by taking these important suggestions seriously. I will go through this as suggested by you. I am removing your message from my talk page as I have taken a note of it. Thank you. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blyth's kingfisher
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blyth's kingfisher you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 02:41, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: Puffery on Sardar Sarovar Dam
That stuff has been added - and repeatedly reverted to - by. The situation hasn't provided adequate grounds to file AIV or 3RR report if I understand the policy, but I'll keep an eye on it. --The Fifth Horseman (talk) 18:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Blyth's kingfisher
The article Blyth's kingfisher you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Blyth's kingfisher for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 07:21, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Lago Martiánez
Good morning,

Can you explain me what´s promotional about the Lago Martiánez article? I believe it's perfectly neutral content, without any promotional intentions or whatsoever.

I really like to know which parts are considered 'promotional' or whatsoever.

I don't see the difference with the Siam Park article or with the Spanish Lago Martiánez] content: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lago_Marti%C3%A1nez

Kind regards, Pascal 18-09-2017 RoqueSanta (talk) 07:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi there. Both the articles that you pointed to also have problems, so they are not good guides. In general, folks are likely to consider something promotional when it uses non-neutral language: the description of something as a "paradise", for instance, is a problem. Also, when a page has no sources, or relies on self-published sources, there could be questions raised over promotional material; because a claim in an article that shows the subject in a positive way, but is not supported by reliable sources, is a problem. Please read WP:N, WP:NPOV, and WP:RS before you create any more pages. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 08:05, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Many thanks, . Thanks for your thorough reviews, and a pleasure working with you, as always. Vanamonde (talk) 14:08, 15 September 2017 (UTC)


 * I know that you have real life stuff coming up in October, and thus might not be very active on Wikipedia in the next few weeks, but if you like, I would be happy to start the review of the Noriega article? Up to you; I don't mind if you'd rather wait for someone else to come along. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually that would be just fine, because I assume that if this takes longer than a couple of weeks we can just proceed at a slower pace: I won't be absent altogether, just around less. As compared to FAC, where the volume of comments is often greater and the time constraints larger. Also, I wonder if I may trouble you for a source review here, since you've reviewed closely related stuff for me before: it's been hanging fire for a few weeks. It's only a dozen or so refs. By the way, I've noticed you had Referendum party at FAC, and was hoping to review it soonish: let me get a couple of other things out of the way first. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 16:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. I haven't ever done a source review before but will figure out what I have to do and get that done in the next few days (unless someone beats me to it). Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually Brianboulton just took care of it: thanks anyhow! If you have the time to review Manuel Noriega, that would be great. I'll get around to the Referendum party FAC soon. Vanamonde (talk) 04:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Alternative for Germany
The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Alternative for Germany. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Manuel Noriega
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Manuel Noriega you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:20, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

About blocking
You blocked a user named hanan khalid please please unblock it
 * That user was repeatedly disruptive despite multiple warnings, and showed no intentions of wanting to build an encyclopedia. Why should I unblock them? If you are the same individual, you should not be creating a new account, but requesting an unblock from the old account. Vanamonde (talk) 05:00, 20 September 2017 (UTC)