Wikipedia has way too many articles sourced only to IMDb. I prodded a bunch of these for deletion, since IMDB is explicitly not a reliable source, and had my prodds pretty much all deleted. With the limit of only one nomination every 24 hours, I have little hope of making any headway against this huge, gargantuan collection of articles on bit part actors and forgotten films. Edward Cansino Jr is just the tip of the iceberg. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
I am having a serious issue with the closing of the AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hattie B's Hot Chicken. I don't understand exactly the rationale of the closing, supposed sock puppets, and reversing the decision. This gives me a sour taste because the reasoning, "deletion cannot stand due to discussion being tainted by sockpuppetry. Overturning to keep", was so flimsy. I looked and some editors were blocked, leaving a mean count of as 8 for "delete" and three for "keep". My main issue is that there will always be those that wish to disrupt. In my opinion, like as with any close, 1)- the "junk", 2)- not giving substantive policy and guideline reasoning or rationale, or just "keep" or "delete !votes with nothing else, or some other !vote deemed to be in some way inappropriate, and these would be discounted. This would be the same if there were votes from COI, those too close to the subject to be objective, or even meat or sock puppets. The bottom line is that after the trash is weeded out, a look at what is left would give a consensus one way or the other or no consensus. My problem is that I looked at the !votes again, discounting only those blocked, and there was still the above !votes of 8 for delete and three for keep. That is an enormous spread even if three of the delete !votes were discounted. The problem to me is that an issue with sock puppets, or any other reason I can imagine, would not be a good enough reason to summarily trash an entire AFD. I have not run into this before, and not canvassing some ---something (I couldn't even think of a scenario) but just needed to ask someone else if this was normal or something not entirely appropriate. Thank you for your time, Otr500 ( talk) 19:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_December_28#Peter_Hood_Ballantine_Cumming. Rusf10 ( talk) 00:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I received a notification that I was mentioned in this discussion. However, I don't remember being involved in this or see anything relating to me here. Was this a mistake or am I missing something? – Noha307 ( talk) 21:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. The biography has encyclopedic relevance and numerous references (especially for his vocal technique and the incident that keeps him in a wheelchair). I see no reason for the article to be independent of the band's page. Adriel ricardo morales ( talk) 02:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mogilev Conference 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 Alex Shih -- Alex Shih ( talk) 14:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello K.e.coffman. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elyson de Dios, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "Article has far more sources than it did when it was deleted. Needs to go back to AfD." Thank you. Ged UK 15:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I thought you might want to stop this article from being approved, considering it is a copy of the article that you have AFD twice in the past month. Draft:Milan_Mathew_Kordestani Antditto ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Take a look at the draft /info/en/?search=Draft:Milan_Mathew_Kordestani . Actually read it. Compare it to /info/en/?search=Mary_Gaylord_McClean . I agree, the first two pages were like an advertisement, but this draft is not, it clearly has references and is written unbiasedly. Don't contest it just because the articles were poorly written in the past. This one passes all of wikipedia's rules 2603:3024:1827:6E00:8D54:B1DE:D8C:B6EB ( talk) 00:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Best wishes for 2018 ... and congrats on the first CfD nomination of 2018. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:54, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
GA Notice |
---|
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Hitler's Generals on Trial that you recently 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. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 16:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC) |
· · · |
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Въ 109.252.84.173 ( talk) 13:00, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, K.e.coffman. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ronald Smelser at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne ( talk) 01:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC) |
Hi K.e.coffman, thanks for all your input with the article so far. As we are going nowhere, I have put in a request for an outside mediator to look at it.If you would like to have your say in the mediation, go to the bottom and select agree to the mediation (I don't know if the system notified you automatically of this, so letting people know) The request for mediation is here: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Panzer_Ace#Issues_to_be_mediated. Cheers Deathlibrarian ( talk) 02:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Panzer Ace". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 19 January 2018.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee. 16:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
You had spoke about removing one image and setting up a link to the image gallery. I was hoping you might have a bit of time to do it so I can see how it is done as I don't want to mess of the article. Thanks for everything you done and if you can't, then I will give it a shot (in the dark). C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 19:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, K.e.coffman. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Helmut Krausnick at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne ( talk) 23:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC) |
Hello, K.e.coffman – I need to mention a few things:
1) First, unusually, I could not figure out where on the article's talk page to place the Guild of Copy Editors template indicating that a copy-edit was completed, so I have left a question for an editor with technical expertise. So that will be added soon.
2) In the second paragraph in Helmut Krausnick#Education and career, I changed "multiple", in "multiple languages", to "many". "Multiple" is really not the best writing. If you think it should not be "many", you could change it to "several". It all depends upon the actual number of languages.
3) In the first paragraph in the Die Truppe des Weltanschauungskrieges section, I changed "bourgeois offsprings" to "sons of upper-middle class Germans". That was really just a guess on my part. I preferred not to leave a phrase that was both ungrammatical (the word "offspring" does not have a plural form) and non-colloquial ("bourgeois", though it is a word in English, is not used very often and may have little meaning to an average Wikipedia reader). Of course, it all depends upon what the sources say. If you think the phrase I used is not accurate, perhaps you could give this some thought and find a better phrase. You could just use "young, upper-middle class Germans".
4) The first sentence in the same section is:
According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Translations, the translation of the German title should be written with no special formatting, and in sentence case, unless the work is well known with an English title. So, I took away the quotation marks and put the English translation in sentence case. (I'm going to double-check this formatting issue.) But besides that, the phrase is missing a word to make it sound colloquial. It should be either "Troops of an ideological crusade" or "Troops of the ideological crusade". It would also sound good with "in" instead of "of": "Troops in an ideological crusade" or "Troops in the ideological crusade". Well, that's all. – Corinne ( talk) 00:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC) I think it would sound even more colloquial (i.e., more like English), if it read "The troops in/of an/the ideological crusade". – Corinne ( talk) 00:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb 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 Sigurd Hring -- Sigurd Hring ( talk) 21:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hitler's Generals on Trial 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 Spintendo -- Spintendo ( talk) 16:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I you could take a look at the article as it now currently stands and let me know if you're ok with how I worded the conclusion section, then that should be it. Thank you! Spintendo ᔦᔭ 22:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
...on this? Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:57, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Beyond My Ken: It was about this situation: "Meanwhile, over at Commons...". I find it a little shocking, frankly, that this type of contribution is considered "within scope", especially with the neo-Nazi dog whistle right in the name. From the response to an unsuccessful deletion request:
I have found the recolorings of User:Ruffneck88 to be very accurate, even in details. He colors in even minor parts of uniforms and vehicles, down to individual leaves on background trees.
SHM. I'm going to start decorating my user page with these images in protest :-). K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello K.e.coffman. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of List of Bellator Kickboxing events, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Neither the creator nor its sock account was blocked at the time of this article's creation, and this subject type (list of events) doesn't qualify for A7. Thank you. Mz7 ( talk) 03:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Hitler's Generals on Trial you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hitler's Generals on Trial 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 Spintendo -- Spintendo ( talk) 11:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Police Regiment Centre 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 Chetsford -- Chetsford ( talk) 07:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb 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 Sigurd Hring -- Sigurd Hring ( talk) 07:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Ernst-Wilhelm_Modrow has been restored. It is unnecessary to redirect all articles to the list. This article was fine on its own. auntieruth (talk) 17:06, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Panzer Ace, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
TransporterMan (
TALK) 16:40, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Hello! An old dispute that you were involved in has been brought up again. Your opinion is greatly valued. Thank you! KevinNinja ( talk) 00:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
nationalist fanaticismwasn't quite nice. Best to keep it focused on content, not on the perceived motivations of editors. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:11, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
I met with Keith Nellesen once last year for about 1/2 hour. I'm not an employee. Youngnoah ( talk) 23:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Youngnoah.
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thank you for your efforts in countering attempts to promote fringe historical revisionism and other problematic content on Wikipedia. Undomelin ( talk) 22:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC) |
The article Mogilev Conference you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mogilev Conference 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 Alex Shih -- Alex Shih ( talk) 17:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for this one by the way, appreciated it. I didn't get to respond at the time but.. better late than never? Hope your year started off well. Prinsgezinde ( talk) 01:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm aware that I shouldn't have to tell an experienced user like yourself this but unfortunately, taggings such as this one are needlessly incorrect and create unnecessary work for admins patrolling CAT:CSD. Please do remember that WP:G11 requires the text of the article has to be exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten and that promotional intent by the page creator is not sufficient to warrant speedy deletion. Also, be advised that receiving coverage in reliable sources is usually sufficient to pass A7, even if notability is not established. Last but not least, when another experienced editor decided to AFD an article instead of tagging it for speedy deletion, it usually means they have considered speedy deletion and decided against it. Tagging articles that are already at AFD thus might cause others to assume that you doubt their skills to correctly assess whether something meets G11/A7. Regards So Why 10:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Police Regiment Centre 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:Police Regiment Centre for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chetsford -- Chetsford ( talk) 16:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert C. Seacord 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert_C._Seacord until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Rogerthat94 ( talk) 23:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Precious six years |
---|
... for improving article quality in January 2018! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, just a courtesy message letting you know that I removed your refimprove tag on the Otto von Knobelsdorff article due to deleting the huge amount of guff that had been added by an IP back in December and which I figured prompted your addition of the tag in the first place. Googling a few phrases of guff, I found that all that material was entirely, or at least largely, a cut and paste from a webpage. I assume you are OK with the sources otherwise? Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 07:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia has way too many articles sourced only to IMDb. I prodded a bunch of these for deletion, since IMDB is explicitly not a reliable source, and had my prodds pretty much all deleted. With the limit of only one nomination every 24 hours, I have little hope of making any headway against this huge, gargantuan collection of articles on bit part actors and forgotten films. Edward Cansino Jr is just the tip of the iceberg. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 03:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
I am having a serious issue with the closing of the AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hattie B's Hot Chicken. I don't understand exactly the rationale of the closing, supposed sock puppets, and reversing the decision. This gives me a sour taste because the reasoning, "deletion cannot stand due to discussion being tainted by sockpuppetry. Overturning to keep", was so flimsy. I looked and some editors were blocked, leaving a mean count of as 8 for "delete" and three for "keep". My main issue is that there will always be those that wish to disrupt. In my opinion, like as with any close, 1)- the "junk", 2)- not giving substantive policy and guideline reasoning or rationale, or just "keep" or "delete !votes with nothing else, or some other !vote deemed to be in some way inappropriate, and these would be discounted. This would be the same if there were votes from COI, those too close to the subject to be objective, or even meat or sock puppets. The bottom line is that after the trash is weeded out, a look at what is left would give a consensus one way or the other or no consensus. My problem is that I looked at the !votes again, discounting only those blocked, and there was still the above !votes of 8 for delete and three for keep. That is an enormous spread even if three of the delete !votes were discounted. The problem to me is that an issue with sock puppets, or any other reason I can imagine, would not be a good enough reason to summarily trash an entire AFD. I have not run into this before, and not canvassing some ---something (I couldn't even think of a scenario) but just needed to ask someone else if this was normal or something not entirely appropriate. Thank you for your time, Otr500 ( talk) 19:37, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2017_December_28#Peter_Hood_Ballantine_Cumming. Rusf10 ( talk) 00:42, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
I received a notification that I was mentioned in this discussion. However, I don't remember being involved in this or see anything relating to me here. Was this a mistake or am I missing something? – Noha307 ( talk) 21:13, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. The biography has encyclopedic relevance and numerous references (especially for his vocal technique and the incident that keeps him in a wheelchair). I see no reason for the article to be independent of the band's page. Adriel ricardo morales ( talk) 02:47, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mogilev Conference 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 Alex Shih -- Alex Shih ( talk) 14:02, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello K.e.coffman. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Elyson de Dios, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "Article has far more sources than it did when it was deleted. Needs to go back to AfD." Thank you. Ged UK 15:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I thought you might want to stop this article from being approved, considering it is a copy of the article that you have AFD twice in the past month. Draft:Milan_Mathew_Kordestani Antditto ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:17, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Take a look at the draft /info/en/?search=Draft:Milan_Mathew_Kordestani . Actually read it. Compare it to /info/en/?search=Mary_Gaylord_McClean . I agree, the first two pages were like an advertisement, but this draft is not, it clearly has references and is written unbiasedly. Don't contest it just because the articles were poorly written in the past. This one passes all of wikipedia's rules 2603:3024:1827:6E00:8D54:B1DE:D8C:B6EB ( talk) 00:14, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Best wishes for 2018 ... and congrats on the first CfD nomination of 2018. -- BrownHairedGirl (talk) • ( contribs) 10:54, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
GA Notice |
---|
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
Hitler's Generals on Trial that you recently 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. Spintendo ᔦᔭ 16:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC) |
· · · |
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Въ 109.252.84.173 ( talk) 13:00, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, K.e.coffman. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Ronald Smelser at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne ( talk) 01:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC) |
Hi K.e.coffman, thanks for all your input with the article so far. As we are going nowhere, I have put in a request for an outside mediator to look at it.If you would like to have your say in the mediation, go to the bottom and select agree to the mediation (I don't know if the system notified you automatically of this, so letting people know) The request for mediation is here: /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Panzer_Ace#Issues_to_be_mediated. Cheers Deathlibrarian ( talk) 02:24, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "Panzer Ace". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 19 January 2018.
Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page. Thank you.
Message delivered by
MediationBot (
talk) on
behalf of the Mediation Committee. 16:57, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
You had spoke about removing one image and setting up a link to the image gallery. I was hoping you might have a bit of time to do it so I can see how it is done as I don't want to mess of the article. Thanks for everything you done and if you can't, then I will give it a shot (in the dark). C. W. Gilmore ( talk) 19:26, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, K.e.coffman. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Helmut Krausnick at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! – Corinne ( talk) 23:38, 12 January 2018 (UTC) |
Hello, K.e.coffman – I need to mention a few things:
1) First, unusually, I could not figure out where on the article's talk page to place the Guild of Copy Editors template indicating that a copy-edit was completed, so I have left a question for an editor with technical expertise. So that will be added soon.
2) In the second paragraph in Helmut Krausnick#Education and career, I changed "multiple", in "multiple languages", to "many". "Multiple" is really not the best writing. If you think it should not be "many", you could change it to "several". It all depends upon the actual number of languages.
3) In the first paragraph in the Die Truppe des Weltanschauungskrieges section, I changed "bourgeois offsprings" to "sons of upper-middle class Germans". That was really just a guess on my part. I preferred not to leave a phrase that was both ungrammatical (the word "offspring" does not have a plural form) and non-colloquial ("bourgeois", though it is a word in English, is not used very often and may have little meaning to an average Wikipedia reader). Of course, it all depends upon what the sources say. If you think the phrase I used is not accurate, perhaps you could give this some thought and find a better phrase. You could just use "young, upper-middle class Germans".
4) The first sentence in the same section is:
According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles#Translations, the translation of the German title should be written with no special formatting, and in sentence case, unless the work is well known with an English title. So, I took away the quotation marks and put the English translation in sentence case. (I'm going to double-check this formatting issue.) But besides that, the phrase is missing a word to make it sound colloquial. It should be either "Troops of an ideological crusade" or "Troops of the ideological crusade". It would also sound good with "in" instead of "of": "Troops in an ideological crusade" or "Troops in the ideological crusade". Well, that's all. – Corinne ( talk) 00:05, 13 January 2018 (UTC) I think it would sound even more colloquial (i.e., more like English), if it read "The troops in/of an/the ideological crusade". – Corinne ( talk) 00:09, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb 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 Sigurd Hring -- Sigurd Hring ( talk) 21:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hitler's Generals on Trial 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 Spintendo -- Spintendo ( talk) 16:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I you could take a look at the article as it now currently stands and let me know if you're ok with how I worded the conclusion section, then that should be it. Thank you! Spintendo ᔦᔭ 22:08, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
...on this? Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:57, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Beyond My Ken: It was about this situation: "Meanwhile, over at Commons...". I find it a little shocking, frankly, that this type of contribution is considered "within scope", especially with the neo-Nazi dog whistle right in the name. From the response to an unsuccessful deletion request:
I have found the recolorings of User:Ruffneck88 to be very accurate, even in details. He colors in even minor parts of uniforms and vehicles, down to individual leaves on background trees.
SHM. I'm going to start decorating my user page with these images in protest :-). K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello K.e.coffman. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of List of Bellator Kickboxing events, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Neither the creator nor its sock account was blocked at the time of this article's creation, and this subject type (list of events) doesn't qualify for A7. Thank you. Mz7 ( talk) 03:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Hitler's Generals on Trial you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hitler's Generals on Trial 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 Spintendo -- Spintendo ( talk) 11:21, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Police Regiment Centre 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 Chetsford -- Chetsford ( talk) 07:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wilhelm Ritter von Leeb 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 Sigurd Hring -- Sigurd Hring ( talk) 07:41, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Ernst-Wilhelm_Modrow has been restored. It is unnecessary to redirect all articles to the list. This article was fine on its own. auntieruth (talk) 17:06, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
The request for formal mediation concerning Panzer Ace, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
For the Mediation Committee,
TransporterMan (
TALK) 16:40, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
(Delivered by
MediationBot,
on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)
Hello! An old dispute that you were involved in has been brought up again. Your opinion is greatly valued. Thank you! KevinNinja ( talk) 00:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
nationalist fanaticismwasn't quite nice. Best to keep it focused on content, not on the perceived motivations of editors. K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:11, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
I met with Keith Nellesen once last year for about 1/2 hour. I'm not an employee. Youngnoah ( talk) 23:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)Youngnoah.
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Thank you for your efforts in countering attempts to promote fringe historical revisionism and other problematic content on Wikipedia. Undomelin ( talk) 22:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC) |
The article Mogilev Conference you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mogilev Conference 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 Alex Shih -- Alex Shih ( talk) 17:01, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for this one by the way, appreciated it. I didn't get to respond at the time but.. better late than never? Hope your year started off well. Prinsgezinde ( talk) 01:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm aware that I shouldn't have to tell an experienced user like yourself this but unfortunately, taggings such as this one are needlessly incorrect and create unnecessary work for admins patrolling CAT:CSD. Please do remember that WP:G11 requires the text of the article has to be exclusively promotional and would need to be fundamentally rewritten and that promotional intent by the page creator is not sufficient to warrant speedy deletion. Also, be advised that receiving coverage in reliable sources is usually sufficient to pass A7, even if notability is not established. Last but not least, when another experienced editor decided to AFD an article instead of tagging it for speedy deletion, it usually means they have considered speedy deletion and decided against it. Tagging articles that are already at AFD thus might cause others to assume that you doubt their skills to correctly assess whether something meets G11/A7. Regards So Why 10:02, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
The article Police Regiment Centre 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:Police Regiment Centre for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chetsford -- Chetsford ( talk) 16:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Please carefully read this information:
The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Arab–Israeli conflict, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.
Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert C. Seacord 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert_C._Seacord until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Rogerthat94 ( talk) 23:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Precious six years |
---|
... for improving article quality in January 2018! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:10, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, just a courtesy message letting you know that I removed your refimprove tag on the Otto von Knobelsdorff article due to deleting the huge amount of guff that had been added by an IP back in December and which I figured prompted your addition of the tag in the first place. Googling a few phrases of guff, I found that all that material was entirely, or at least largely, a cut and paste from a webpage. I assume you are OK with the sources otherwise? Cheers, Zawed ( talk) 07:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)