This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 29 |
Hey dude, if you have some time, could you look at this AN discussion and tell me if I'm completely off my rocker? Further context is here. I had assumed it would be a simple request to ask the closer to re-open, but the level of push back I'm getting has me questioning my own sanity. If I'm off base, I'll drop it immediately.-- Cúchullain t/ c 15:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).
Hello, you deleted the Alex Merced article. Could you give me the source or export it so I could put it on the LP History wiki? My e-mail is andrewkolstee@gmail.com if you want to give an exported file. Thanks. 23:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMK152 ( talk • contribs)
Hi,
Please tell me the reason why you undo the changes I made yesterday.
Thanks, Sagar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagar.kottappuram777 ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
There's now no page at talk:Kremlin, and I can't find the most recent related RM discussion. It's been that way for a few hours now. Can I help? Andrewa ( talk) 17:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Wow, see also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Possible improper use of page move redirect suppression. Amakuru, what with this and the New York/State/City fiasco, Talk:Jacques, Hereditary Prince of Monaco#Requested move 1 March 2017, WT:AT#Article names in other Wikipedias... we seem to have an epidemic of verbal diarrhoea, do you think it's chronic or acute, and either way, what's your prognosis? Andrewa ( talk) 00:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't know why I get involved in these types of discussions. Always irritates and demoralises me, and I end up feeling apprehensive about logging onto Wikipedia rather than excited. My own fault though, hopefully one day I'll learn. Jenks24 ( talk) 17:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).
?fuzzy=1
to the URL, as with
Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.Two years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).
Hello,
Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.
The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.
To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.
We really appreciate your input!
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative ( talk) 19:52, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).
Are you the admin who deleted the Mandela Effect article back in 2015?
I think the article should be brought back. Two years have passed and there are plenty of reliable sources now that talk about the Mandela effect. For example, The Telegraph in the below article defines it as "a conspiracy theory that argues we are living in an alternate reality". But on Wikipedia, Mandela effect just redirects to an article on false memories. Very misleading and confusing especially when the telegraph asks it's readers in a poll whether they believe in the Mandela effect. If wikipedia is correct then they are asking if we believe in false memories, but that is obviously not what the telegraph is asking. So wiikipedia needs the article back explaining what the Mandela effect means. Here is a link to the telegraph article but there are many other reliable sources available now:
Arnold1 ( talk) 15:20, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You deleted Thirtysomething (disambiguation) as unnecessary. Then Thirty-something (disambiguation) is (re-?)created. Are the deleted revisions similar to that one? What can be done? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the articles three years ago but could you do the following for me please:
I would be grateful Mr Hall of England ( talk) 18:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello Jenks. Good to hear from you again and hope you are okay. If you need any help with Richmond, etc. just let me know.
As you are an admin, could you please take a look at the AfD discussions concerning I. Kudigame, S. Dhanayake and Dinesh de Zoysa, all Sri Lankan players who have played a first-class match. There are concerns that what amounts to a deletionist clique has formed and is targeting cricket articles. As it is difficult to obtain information about Sri Lankan players, these are an "easy target" given the ambiguity of WP:N re its GNG section in particular. I have, however, raised a fresh argument today that WP:NEXIST applies because we had a test case two years ago when a contact in Sri Lanka went to a Sinhalese newspaper and checked the report of a player's "only match". In English sources, the player was only known by initial and surname (S. Perera). The Sinhalese report mentioned him making his debut and confirmed his first name, his age and his occupation (student). I can't say that such information would definitely be found about these three guys but the potential is there and there is no doubt that there is expansive Sinhalese media coverage of cricket.
Anyway, I don't know what you can add but several of us at present feel that WP:CRIN is under attack, for whatever purpose. All the best. Jack | talk page 13:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I was thinking about commenting on one of the threads at WT:CRIC when I did have a chance to get some thoughts together. My general opinion is that, like the last time this happened which I recall observing and maybe giving one or two small opinions on, it irritates me to see Sri Lankan cricketers from the '80s and '90s end up being the target for these sorts of deletions. As you (Jack) have noted, only a small percentage of what has been written in reliable sources about these sorts of players is available in English and online. It only contributes to our systematic bias to target these articles.
I am more sympathetic to, for example, the minor counties player I saw was at AfD who played one List A match. That is something we can actually work with – if no significant coverage of that guy can be found then it most likely does not exist. And if we see that happen for several cases where a player has only played one minor counties List A match then we can actually do something at CRIN to rectify this situation, eg you could say that five matches are needed at that level to assume notability (random number picked just make an example). That way we could get everyone on the same page about what the notability standards are and we wouldn't have people creating articles on topics that the guidelines say are notable and then justifiably getting a bit upset when they get deleted. To take a more extreme example, if people really feel that one first-class match is not enough for assumed notability you could reasonably easily do a quick survey of Australian and English cricketers in the last decade who made only one first-class appearance and see what sort of coverage they got because it's all in English and mostly online. Then if there's a consensus that's not enough we could look at adjusting our guidelines. AfDing Sri Lankan players from the '80s seems to me to be a completely backwards way to be going about it.
The-Pope was always someone who I agreed with on this sort of issue, and he expressed his thoughts far more cogently than myself – I just tend to ramble. Hopefully I'm not accused of canvassing by pinging him here. Jenks24 ( talk) 18:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Do we really have to move an article for such a minor thing the day it is on the Main page? Could have been tomorrow, no? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | → | Archive 29 |
Hey dude, if you have some time, could you look at this AN discussion and tell me if I'm completely off my rocker? Further context is here. I had assumed it would be a simple request to ask the closer to re-open, but the level of push back I'm getting has me questioning my own sanity. If I'm off base, I'll drop it immediately.-- Cúchullain t/ c 15:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).
Hello, you deleted the Alex Merced article. Could you give me the source or export it so I could put it on the LP History wiki? My e-mail is andrewkolstee@gmail.com if you want to give an exported file. Thanks. 23:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMK152 ( talk • contribs)
Hi,
Please tell me the reason why you undo the changes I made yesterday.
Thanks, Sagar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sagar.kottappuram777 ( talk • contribs) 07:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
There's now no page at talk:Kremlin, and I can't find the most recent related RM discussion. It's been that way for a few hours now. Can I help? Andrewa ( talk) 17:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Wow, see also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Possible improper use of page move redirect suppression. Amakuru, what with this and the New York/State/City fiasco, Talk:Jacques, Hereditary Prince of Monaco#Requested move 1 March 2017, WT:AT#Article names in other Wikipedias... we seem to have an epidemic of verbal diarrhoea, do you think it's chronic or acute, and either way, what's your prognosis? Andrewa ( talk) 00:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I don't know why I get involved in these types of discussions. Always irritates and demoralises me, and I end up feeling apprehensive about logging onto Wikipedia rather than excited. My own fault though, hopefully one day I'll learn. Jenks24 ( talk) 17:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).
?fuzzy=1
to the URL, as with
Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.Two years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).
Hello,
Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.
The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.
To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.
We really appreciate your input!
Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.
For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative ( talk) 19:52, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).
Are you the admin who deleted the Mandela Effect article back in 2015?
I think the article should be brought back. Two years have passed and there are plenty of reliable sources now that talk about the Mandela effect. For example, The Telegraph in the below article defines it as "a conspiracy theory that argues we are living in an alternate reality". But on Wikipedia, Mandela effect just redirects to an article on false memories. Very misleading and confusing especially when the telegraph asks it's readers in a poll whether they believe in the Mandela effect. If wikipedia is correct then they are asking if we believe in false memories, but that is obviously not what the telegraph is asking. So wiikipedia needs the article back explaining what the Mandela effect means. Here is a link to the telegraph article but there are many other reliable sources available now:
Arnold1 ( talk) 15:20, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. You deleted Thirtysomething (disambiguation) as unnecessary. Then Thirty-something (disambiguation) is (re-?)created. Are the deleted revisions similar to that one? What can be done? -- George Ho ( talk) 04:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the articles three years ago but could you do the following for me please:
I would be grateful Mr Hall of England ( talk) 18:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello Jenks. Good to hear from you again and hope you are okay. If you need any help with Richmond, etc. just let me know.
As you are an admin, could you please take a look at the AfD discussions concerning I. Kudigame, S. Dhanayake and Dinesh de Zoysa, all Sri Lankan players who have played a first-class match. There are concerns that what amounts to a deletionist clique has formed and is targeting cricket articles. As it is difficult to obtain information about Sri Lankan players, these are an "easy target" given the ambiguity of WP:N re its GNG section in particular. I have, however, raised a fresh argument today that WP:NEXIST applies because we had a test case two years ago when a contact in Sri Lanka went to a Sinhalese newspaper and checked the report of a player's "only match". In English sources, the player was only known by initial and surname (S. Perera). The Sinhalese report mentioned him making his debut and confirmed his first name, his age and his occupation (student). I can't say that such information would definitely be found about these three guys but the potential is there and there is no doubt that there is expansive Sinhalese media coverage of cricket.
Anyway, I don't know what you can add but several of us at present feel that WP:CRIN is under attack, for whatever purpose. All the best. Jack | talk page 13:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I was thinking about commenting on one of the threads at WT:CRIC when I did have a chance to get some thoughts together. My general opinion is that, like the last time this happened which I recall observing and maybe giving one or two small opinions on, it irritates me to see Sri Lankan cricketers from the '80s and '90s end up being the target for these sorts of deletions. As you (Jack) have noted, only a small percentage of what has been written in reliable sources about these sorts of players is available in English and online. It only contributes to our systematic bias to target these articles.
I am more sympathetic to, for example, the minor counties player I saw was at AfD who played one List A match. That is something we can actually work with – if no significant coverage of that guy can be found then it most likely does not exist. And if we see that happen for several cases where a player has only played one minor counties List A match then we can actually do something at CRIN to rectify this situation, eg you could say that five matches are needed at that level to assume notability (random number picked just make an example). That way we could get everyone on the same page about what the notability standards are and we wouldn't have people creating articles on topics that the guidelines say are notable and then justifiably getting a bit upset when they get deleted. To take a more extreme example, if people really feel that one first-class match is not enough for assumed notability you could reasonably easily do a quick survey of Australian and English cricketers in the last decade who made only one first-class appearance and see what sort of coverage they got because it's all in English and mostly online. Then if there's a consensus that's not enough we could look at adjusting our guidelines. AfDing Sri Lankan players from the '80s seems to me to be a completely backwards way to be going about it.
The-Pope was always someone who I agreed with on this sort of issue, and he expressed his thoughts far more cogently than myself – I just tend to ramble. Hopefully I'm not accused of canvassing by pinging him here. Jenks24 ( talk) 18:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Do we really have to move an article for such a minor thing the day it is on the Main page? Could have been tomorrow, no? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:15, 29 October 2017 (UTC)